Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-18-2013, 01:06 PM   #886
edward morbius
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,111
vCash: 500
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus View Post
So you made conclusions on this match-up by not thinking about it?

And odds are that I am older than you.
You are in your seventies?

I wouldn't have guessed that.

*I am just not interested in head-to-head matchups because they have become meaningless not only in boxing but in most sports because of the clearly observable explosion is size.

Why should I value a criteria which elevates the 2012 Jets over the 1950's Browns or the 1960's Packers?

That sort of fantasy strikes me now as worthless.

It made some sense up to the sixties or so and perhaps a bit longer, as you were comparing apples to apples in a sense. A tournament between Tom Cribb, John L Sullivan, Jack Dempsey, and Rocky Marciano, while covering 150 years, was still between men of similar size. We could consider them in the same weight class.

Now the whole argument boils down to size differentials dependent on outside the ring factors which are changing the very physical nature of men.

**on the more interesting point of the shift in top fighters from the US to the eastern bloc countries. There are two ways of looking at this--is something gone that was there before--sort of like the leopard becoming the top predator because the tiger was exterminated (eastern bloc fighters taking over because America is abandoning boxing)

or is it something being added--the leopard was the top predator but has been replaced by tigers expanding range (American heavyweights have lost their dominance because of new breed of super-fighter from eastern Europe)

It can be argued either way, or that both are partially true.
edward morbius is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 01-18-2013, 01:11 PM   #887
Synthetic Decay
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 287
vCash: 500
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Quote:
Originally Posted by edward morbius View Post
You are in your seventies?

I wouldn't have guessed that.

*I am just not interested in head-to-head matchups because they have become meaningless not only in boxing but in most sports because of the clearly observable explosion is size.

Why should I value a criteria which elevates the 2012 Jets over the 1950's Browns or the 1960's Packers?

That sort of fantasy strikes me now as worthless.

It made some sense up to the sixties or so and perhaps a bit longer, as you were comparing apples to apples in a sense. A tournament between Tom Cribb, John L Sullivan, Jack Dempsey, and Rocky Marciano, while covering 150 years, was still between men of similar size. We could consider them in the same weight class.

Now the whole argument boils down to size differentials dependent on outside the ring factors which are changing the very physical nature of men.

**on the more interesting point of the shift in top fighters from the US to the eastern bloc countries. There are two ways of looking at this--is something gone that was there before--sort of like the leopard becoming the top predator because the tiger was exterminated (eastern bloc fighters taking over because America is abandoning boxing)

or is it something being added--the leopard was the top predator but has been replaced by tigers expanding range (American heavyweights have lost their dominance because of new breed of super-fighter from eastern Europe)

It can be argued either way, or that both are partially true.


Very valid points in regards to comparisons.

As for where the talent is coming from, as is the case with most sports, i just think that there is more interest and a better structure in place for boxing in certain countries at this moment in time.
Synthetic Decay is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2013, 01:25 PM   #888
Absolutely!
Fabulous, darling!
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: A cut above my left nose
Posts: 3,225
vCash: 500
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Quote:
Originally Posted by Synthetic Decay View Post
Very valid points in regards to comparisons.

As for where the talent is coming from, as is the case with most sports, i just think that there is more interest and a better structure in place for boxing in certain countries at this moment in time.
That's more or less it. No need for NFL Cold War conspiracy theories. Countries with a better infrastructure for boxing and who put more of a focus on the sport are going to produce more top fighters than those which do not.

High levels of poverty also help at the grass roots level by providing a large number of willing participants.
Absolutely! is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-18-2013, 01:42 PM   #889
edward morbius
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,111
vCash: 500
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

"Heavyweights are more widely recruited"

Here is a list from the 1952 Ring rankings of rated and Class A & B fighters--top 100--from outside the USA

Cesar Brion--Argentina
Hein Ten Hoff--Germany
Johnny Williams--UK
Jack Gardner--UK
Omelio Agramonte--Cuba
Karel Sys--Belgium
-----------------
class A (top 50)

Ansell Adams--Trinidad
Reg Andrews--UK
Johnny Arthur--South Africa
Frank Bell--UK
Abel Cestac--Argentina
Arturo Godoy--Chile
Don Scott--UK
Paddy Slavin--Ireland
Piet Wilde--Belgium
Jo Weidin--Austria

Class B (50-100)

Uber Bacilieri--Italy
Gino Buonvino--Italy
Paco Bueno--Spain
Jimmy Carroll--UK
Allan Cooke--UK
Robert Eugene--Belgium
Tommy Farr--UK
Jan Klein--Holland
Wilson Kohlbrecher--Germany
Jack Marr--Australia
Stephane Olek--France
Heinz Neuhaus--Germany
Kurt Schiegl--Austria
Eddie Vann--UK
Werner Wiegand--Luxemburg

Clearly it is a little more than the USA or UK (I will give you credit for meaning the British Empire thus including Canada and Australia)

Top heavyweights were coming from Western Europe and Latin America, and it is certainly possible that both areas were more active boxing centers then than they are now. Not only possible but likely.

One thing to consider is that the world population was much different then than now, with a far higher % of the population in Europe and North America than today.

The 1950's had champions from central Africa (Hogan Bassey) and Asia (Yoshio Sharai) but these areas did not impact heavyweight boxing back then.

**The Soviets and other eastern bloc countries did compete in the Olympics in the 1950's but did not do that well. There is no reason to suspect that there was some great fighter out there but unknown. This argument is the flip side of arguing that the Klitschkos would not be champions if the best American big men were not in the NFL or NBA.
edward morbius is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2013, 12:07 PM   #890
edward morbius
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,111
vCash: 500
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus View Post
But look at what was available. A shot Louis who was only in the ring to pay off the tax man. A bona fide lighheavy in Charles. A Walcott on his last two fights after a long, damaging career. Marciano snuck in for a second at a transitional, vulnerable time in the division's history. He gets an A+ for timing.



Did anyone really want to see Wlad against Holy at any time since 2006? Really? Lennox Claudius Lewis, who I hold in higher esteem, retired in 2004. Vitali is an exceptional case in that they are brothers which I half understand/half think it is very convenient for Waldo.



Heavyweight are much more widely recruited in the geographic sense today than they were in 1950. Kazahkstan, Ukraine, Nigeria, US, UK, Belarus and Russia are all putting out top notch talent that is permitted and encouraged to participate in the pro ranks. In the 50's you could really only say that about the UK and US.




If my memory serves correct, Marciano traveled ONCE to fight outside the eastern US seaboard, and that was against Butterball ****ell in San Francisco, a fight in which many thought he should have been disqualified and a pretty wretched effort by his standards. He fought something like 33 of his 49 fights in Rhode Island, mostly in the same auditorium. So, home crowd, home ref's, comfortable surroundings and largely low-rate, third string, circuit fighters. How would he have done in other's backyards, traveling internationally with ref's who didn't look the other way on his rough stuff? I'm not convinced his career would have been radically different, but I think there would be a good chance for an L or two to be on his record.
"Marciano traveled ONCE to fight outside the eastern US seaboard"

Marciano also traveled to Chicago, and fought twice in Philadelphia, but ten times in NYC.

Of course, remember that the disposition of the population of the US (and also the world was different then). New York City was not only the largest city in the world then, but probably the undisputed boxing capital. Chicago was the second biggest US city. Philadelphia fourth. Actually, as NYC was the world's largest city then, Chicago 8th, and Philly 15th, Marciano fought more fights in the world's 15 or so largest urban centers than the two Klitschko's have together.

And Providence was located directly between NYC and Boston on the heavily populated east coast. I don't think there is any reason to expect Marciano to have a lot of fights somewhere else in the USA, actually. He was fighting where the population and interest in boxing were.

I guess not having a foreign fight is valid enough, but most didn't. I don't think Dempsey or Louis did either, and the few champs who did fought either before or after they were champions. Two reasons--the money was better in the US. And as you pointed out, DQ's were the order of the day in Britain and Europe. Marcel Thil winning fight after fight on questionable fouls probably gave any champion pause about risking a defense for a small potatos purse in Europe.

If Marcel Cerdan did not defend his title in Europe, I don't know if I would score Marciano for the same. Kid Gavilan also fought mainly in the US rather than Cuba, although he did defend once in Havana.

Reason--money, I presume.

and television (and closed circuit) money in Marciano's time was probably restricted mainly to the US.

Last edited by edward morbius; 01-19-2013 at 02:28 PM.
edward morbius is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2013, 12:38 PM   #891
edward morbius
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,111
vCash: 500
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

"a bona fide lightheavy in Charles"

So what. This is just the old size thing through the back door. Charles was the heavyweight champion, was taller and had a longer reach than Marciano, and outweighed him in their second bout. Size is not my criteria when going back in history. Charles was as big as many champions, including Cribb, Dempsey, Tunney, etc.

"Walcott--a long, damaging career" "a shot Louis"

Interesting double standard. The 37 yr old Louis and 38 yr old Walcott (and I presume the 38 yr old Moore) supposedly prove Marciano fought in a weak era.

Currently the champions are the soon to be 37 yr old Wlad and the nearly 42 yr old Vitali, and they are not even facing severe challenges from younger men. And, the contenders themselves tend to be old more often than not. Plus when younger Vitali failed in a challenge against the 38 yr old Lewis.

"Wlad and Holy"

Holyfield was the top heavy in the late 1990's and one of the top heavies of the early 2000's. Wlad did not fight him. The excuse can't be that he was too green. He had a pro as long as Marciano when he faced Louis, and had a much better amateur background.

As I posted, for whatever reasons, Wlad did not the face the three best heavies active during his career--Holyfield, Lewis, and Vitali. The reasons for this might be valid, but it is still a fact.

Marciano did face the best of his era and ko'd them.
edward morbius is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2013, 01:04 PM   #892
Synthetic Decay
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 287
vCash: 500
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Holy has been shot for most of Wlad's career. It would be a nothing win. It is strange though, Lewis used to get all types of shit, he proceeds to beat shot Holy and Tyson and everyone develops some type of unrequited love for his reign. Lewis was not interested in Wlad at all. So we are left with Vitali, in a sport where you can inflict brain damage on your opponent, i can understand the reticence.
Synthetic Decay is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-19-2013, 02:28 PM   #893
Seamus
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Lisboa, Portugal
Posts: 12,186
vCash: 1000
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Quote:
Originally Posted by edward morbius View Post
"a bona fide lightheavy in Charles"

So what. This is just the old size thing through the back door. Charles was the heavyweight champion, was taller and had a longer reach than Marciano, and outweighed him in their second bout. Size is not my criteria when going back in history. Charles was as big as many champions, including Cribb, Dempsey, Tunney, etc.
Are we talking head to head here? Because size (coupled with skill) is very important if we are. I'll concede your point if we are talking legacy. He fought the best around. I just think the best around at that point were better in name than substance, which brings us to...


Quote:
Originally Posted by edward morbius View Post
"Walcott--a long, damaging career" "a shot Louis"

Interesting double standard. The 37 yr old Louis and 38 yr old Walcott (and I presume the 38 yr old Moore) supposedly prove Marciano fought in a weak era.

Currently the champions are the soon to be 37 yr old Wlad and the nearly 42 yr old Vitali, and they are not even facing severe challenges from younger men. And, the contenders themselves tend to be old more often than not. Plus when younger Vitali failed in a challenge against the 38 yr old Lewis.
We are talking road miles versus highway miles here. Walcott was at the end of a 70 fight career fought under trying circumstances and in which he had been KO'd 6 times by its end. He was barely .500 over his 12 fights previous to Marciano. Charles was 95 fights into a career whose ledger was adorned with Hall of Famers and elite talent. He was on the precipice of a very steep decline after a remarkable run. Louis had no business being in the ring by the time Marciano got to him. He had no right hand and no legs. Marciano faced each of these fresh from hitting practice home runs on the New England circuit against ham and eggers.

As far as Waldo, he is still relatively fresh but near the end. Outside of two of the KO's he has suffered, he stays fairly intact. Still, the end is nearer than most suspect. Vitali should have retired a while ago. He looks like shit.


Quote:
Originally Posted by edward morbius View Post

Holyfield was the top heavy in the late 1990's and one of the top heavies of the early 2000's. Wlad did not fight him. The excuse can't be that he was too green. He had a pro as long as Marciano when he faced Louis, and had a much better amateur background.
I don't recall anyone, outside of an increasingly unintelligible Holyfield, calling for a Wlad-Holy fight. If I recall correctly, Lewis chose Vitali over Wlad for an opponent. And the Vitali thing, like I stated earlier, I am a bit on the fence about. I understand them not fighting but it is very convenient, also.
Seamus is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 12:59 PM   #894
edward morbius
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,111
vCash: 500
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Quote:
Originally Posted by Seamus View Post
Are we talking head to head here? Because size (coupled with skill) is very important if we are. I'll concede your point if we are talking legacy. He fought the best around. I just think the best around at that point were better in name than substance, which brings us to...




We are talking road miles versus highway miles here. Walcott was at the end of a 70 fight career fought under trying circumstances and in which he had been KO'd 6 times by its end. He was barely .500 over his 12 fights previous to Marciano. Charles was 95 fights into a career whose ledger was adorned with Hall of Famers and elite talent. He was on the precipice of a very steep decline after a remarkable run. Louis had no business being in the ring by the time Marciano got to him. He had no right hand and no legs. Marciano faced each of these fresh from hitting practice home runs on the New England circuit against ham and eggers.

As far as Waldo, he is still relatively fresh but near the end. Outside of two of the KO's he has suffered, he stays fairly intact. Still, the end is nearer than most suspect. Vitali should have retired a while ago. He looks like shit.




I don't recall anyone, outside of an increasingly unintelligible Holyfield, calling for a Wlad-Holy fight. If I recall correctly, Lewis chose Vitali over Wlad for an opponent. And the Vitali thing, like I stated earlier, I am a bit on the fence about. I understand them not fighting but it is very convenient, also.
"Louis had no business being in the ring"

He was coming off 8 straight wins, and looking at the end of the year ratings for 1951 from the Feb 1952 issue of The Ring, all 8 wins were over top 50 fighters, five over fighters rated at the end of the year (Brion, Agramonte, Bivins) and one over a man who was not only hightly rated, but actually a title claiment (Savold). By modern standards, Louis would have been considered one of the alphabet champions.

Louis never lost to anyone who arguably wasn't at that time the best in the world.

Compared to Louis, how many Klitschko opponents should not have been in the ring with a champion?

Louis had gone back, certainly, and a lot, but he had been the dominant heavyweight for close to 15 years, and was still by ordinary standards a formidable fighter.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Walcott

6 ko defeats--over his career, counting the two by Marciano. Three of those ko's came prior to WWII. Only Louis in their second fight had stopped him since 1940. I would think if he had lost it because of being ko'd, or a tough life, he would never have had his post WWII career.

As for taking all this punishment--Walcott was the sort who took a lot of punishment in fights?

As for his record--since 1947 he had lost to Louis (2), Charles (2), and Layne, but the majority thought Walcott deserved the first fight with Louis, and he split four fights with Charles. So he basically pretty much fought on even terms with Louis and Charles.

The only hard to explain loss since 1946 was the upset to Layne, for what it is worth.

Walcott was coming off two victories over Charles, was the incumbent champion, and looked good against Marciano in 1952.

Going into the Marciano fight Walcott had been stopped once in the previous 12 years (by Louis). Going back 12 years from today, Wlad has been stopped twice (by Sanders and Brewster)
--------------------------------------------------------------------

Charles had gone back, and it is a legitimate question how much, but he was still coming off two impressive ko's and was ranked the #1 contender.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

Last edited by edward morbius; 01-20-2013 at 02:10 PM.
edward morbius is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 01:12 PM   #895
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,623
vCash: 330
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Marciano just isn't proven against super heavyweight fighters. Had he fought and destroyed Valdes we might have a better idea as he was big with a solid jab.

Dempsey, Frazier, and Louis these guys did beat super heavyweights so I can understand those who favour them over Wlad but the same can't be said for Rocky. It's like comparing fighters from different weight classes and it's too much of a leap of faith.

I don't agree that Wlad is greater yet but I think history will remember him as the greater heavyweight. he'll probably stay champ until he's 40 racking up victories over ranked contenders.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 01:21 PM   #896
dinovelvet
Up Top To The Head
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 9,600
vCash: 93
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
Marciano just isn't proven against super heavyweight fighters. Had he fought and destroyed Valdes we might have a better idea as he was big with a solid jab.

Dempsey, Frazier, and Louis these guys did beat super heavyweights so I can understand those who favour them over Wlad but the same can't be said for Rocky. It's like comparing fighters from different weight classes and it's too much of a leap of faith.

I don't agree that Wlad is greater yet but I think history will remember him as the greater heavyweight. he'll probably stay champ until he's 40 racking up victories over ranked contenders.
Nobody is talking about other HWs. This thread is about Wlad. No blueprint exsits on how he beats an elite level boxer let alone AN ATG. Its a matter of styles and Marciano was a stylelistic nightmare for Wlad and his extremely low level of punch resistance.
dinovelvet is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 01:27 PM   #897
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,623
vCash: 330
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinovelvet View Post
Nobody is talking about other HWs. This thread is about Wlad. No blueprint exsits on how he beats an elite level boxer let alone AN ATG. Its a matter of styles and Marciano was a stylelistic nightmare for Wlad and his extremely low level of punch resistance.
wlad and rocky are essentially from differing weight classes. Wlad is from a weight class Rocky is unproven in. I just don't see him beating the much bigger and much heavier man and I saw nothing in his career suggesting he would do so.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 01:29 PM   #898
Synthetic Decay
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 287
vCash: 500
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Quote:
Originally Posted by dinovelvet View Post
Nobody is talking about other HWs. This thread is about Wlad. No blueprint exsits on how he beats an elite level boxer let alone AN ATG. Its a matter of styles and Marciano was a stylelistic nightmare for Wlad and his extremely low level of punch resistance.


Bryd, Haye, Chambers were all elite level boxers.
Synthetic Decay is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 01:33 PM   #899
edward morbius
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,111
vCash: 500
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Quote:
Originally Posted by lufcrazy View Post
Marciano just isn't proven against super heavyweight fighters. Had he fought and destroyed Valdes we might have a better idea as he was big with a solid jab.

Dempsey, Frazier, and Louis these guys did beat super heavyweights so I can understand those who favour them over Wlad but the same can't be said for Rocky. It's like comparing fighters from different weight classes and it's too much of a leap of faith.

I don't agree that Wlad is greater yet but I think history will remember him as the greater heavyweight. he'll probably stay champ until he's 40 racking up victories over ranked contenders.
I disagree with you about Valdes.

He had four fights with Moore, Johnson, and Satterfield, all smaller than Marciano, and went 0-4.

I just don't think Valdes was all that good and so a victory by Marciano over him would hardly prove anything in comparision to Wlad or Vitali.

Valdes was big, but not bigger really than Louis and not as good a fighter, even the Louis of 1951.

----------------------------------------------------------------

As for Wlad's historical rating, I currently have him 9th, and he could move up a few notches if he continues, as you say, to win. I also think he might well be able to hold the title into his forties.

But I don't know if these sort of contenders he is fighting recently will really look all that good historically. Thompson? Two shots at the title?

I don't know how history will judge, and history is always contentious, but I think he will have a tough time pushing into the top five regardless of his eventual longevity because of not beating the other top guys out there, Lewis and Vitali, and the bad defeats when young.

But we shall see--not me, but the younger folks who will live enough to read an historical judgement.
edward morbius is online now  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 01-20-2013, 01:40 PM   #900
lufcrazy
requiescat in pace
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: England, Up North
Posts: 22,623
vCash: 330
Default Re: Wladimir Klitschko vs. Rocky Marciano

Quote:
Originally Posted by edward morbius View Post
I disagree with you about Valdes.

He had four fights with Moore, Johnson, and Satterfield, all smaller than Marciano, and went 0-4.

I just don't think Valdes was all that good and so a victory by Marciano over him would hardly prove anything in comparision to Wlad or Vitali.

Valdes was big, but not bigger really than Louis and not as good of a fighter, even the Louis of 1951.

----------------------------------------------------------------

As for Wlad's historical rating, I currently have him 9th, and he could move up a few notches if he continues, as you say, to win. I also think he might well be able to hold the title into his forties.

But I don't know if these sort of contenders he is fighting recently will really look all that good historically. Thompson? Two shots at the title?

I don't know how history will judge, and history is always contentious, but I think myself he will have a tough time pushing into the top five regardless of his eventual longevity because of not beating the other top guys out there, Lewis and Vitali, and the bad defeats when young.

But we shall see--not me, but the younger folks who will live enough to see an historical judgement.
Quite often I post from memory and not boxrec which means I make errors. I thought Valdes was big enough to consider a shw, if I'm wrong then fair enough. But my main point is Rocky has very little evidence of his effectiveness against the truly big men. Valdes was bigger and gives a bit more indication I feel.

I doubt Wlad will ever come near Louis, Ali nor Lewis. But Rocky, Johnson, Tyson, Foreman, Frazier, Holmes, these guys he can overtake in my opinion. I don't hold the Vitali situation against him and whilst he never fought Lewis when younger it was because he couldn't generate the money of Tyson, didn't become a mandatory with the WBC and perhaps most importantly got iced by Sanders. He'd have been iced by Lewis as well. However from 05 onwards he's begun to really clean house. Victories over Povetkin and Arreola would underline that status. As long as he continues to defend against the best available opposition his legacy will grow.
lufcrazy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:21 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013