No..Im saying with their current achievements..even though they are not yet retired..IMO they should be considered as one of the greatest in aussie boxing history in there selected weight classes.
This is what you actually said and what is puzzling people including myself >>> "A fighter who has a world title on their resume is higher rated then a fighter with national honors..weather you like it or not.past present or future".
and Troy Waters and Tony Mundine and Hector Thompson and Dave Sands. Is that what he is saying? That Anthony Mundine, Danny Green and Daniel Geale are superior to all those guys??
"No..Im saying with their current achievements..even though they are not yet retired..IMO they should be considered as one of the greatest in aussie boxing history in there selected weight classes." Which part does it say anyone is better then anyone champion?
Troy Waters?...even though he is not Australian born..he had a good career,fought some good champions and fought on the highest stage...but with all respect who did he beat?
Let's simplify things a little. This is what you said >>> "A fighter who has a world title on their resume is higher rated then a fighter with national honors..weather you like it or not.past present or future". Now let's test your statement by putting some names in >>> "A fighter who has a world title on their resume This content is protected is higher rated then a fighter with national honors This content is protected ..weather you like it or not.past present or future". If that's what you were trying to say. You are very wrong as pointed out earlier by someone else.
Anyone who thinks mandy & green are 3 time world champions are ****ing delusional for starters. Then if they honestly think they are greater than the likes of Darcy, Sands, Mundine Snr, Rose, Famechon, Fenech...........well your so far wrong its amusing to say the least. Each to their own but come on.........go do some research for starters. With the amount of titles floating around these days I'm not surprised they haven't put another dollar in the machine & picked out a couple of more. Funny stuff.
ok Iv explained numerous times nicely but **** it now lol i give up...my point... WBC,WBA OR IBF WORLD TITLE holder has a better resume then a aussie champ and common champ..FULL STOP..take it how u will..over it ...Cheers
I can understand your line of thought mate, in fact i think it's a common one to an extent and i can certainly see in a marketing sense the importance of the term "world champion". But if we take away all the titles, all the belts, all the medals and all the hype, it basically comes down to who they fought and how they performed. Even in defeat boxers can stand tall, if someone put an opinion to me that Katsidis' effort against Marquez was as impressive as Danny's KO of RJJ, then you know what? i probobly wouldnt argue against that. Some guys never get their chance, some are avoided like the plague, some had short primes and some were just never going to make it. It's easy to look at a label and take it on face value, but if you dig a little deeper im sure you'll see that there are plenty of boxers internationally that have achieved more than others that have gone on to the title of world champion.