breaking down this heavyweight era and others: Why today stinks!!

No I'm not using them incorrectly. I'm using then fairly. If you want to use year before rankings be my guest. I'll bet cash this era still comes out stinking and you have the same problems as this way. But....I agree it will be fair. You seem to miss the fact a fighter can come into the ratings the year before and be out of it before that years end. The ONLY perfect way to do this is if you have every issue of the ring for every fighter evaluated. I don't have access to that. Do you?

 

So you should have no problem giving me links for the April 1936, June 1962, and December 1968, right? Get ready to hear crickets everyone because this won't be answered.

 

bremen, you got those links yet? :think

 

I have no problem with you disagreeing with me. I have no problem with using this alternative method. My only problems are of the presumption of this being anything other than fair all the way around whether it works best or not, and being called a liar for simple mistakes. I've in no way tried to make any era look better than another.

 

You've provided nothing. You said the Ring updates their rankings regularly throughout the year. So it shouldn't be difficult for you to link the dates asked for. If you can't the method is unfair, and its obvious you can't.

 

Exactly..there's not a huge difference. Historically some fighters may come out a little higher, others a little lower....but like I said, I'd bet money this era comes out as one of if not the lowest overall for the reasons I've outlined several times in this thread. Again I'll repeat this is not about the Klits...they're the only thing from even arguing its the worst ever without a doubt. Its more about the contenders not fighting each other. I'd bet money if we choose say this era and ten others, picked the top ten contenders from those eras that this era would lag towards or at the very bottom. In my OPINION that shows a very weak era.

 

The proof is they weren't ranked by the Ring. You seem to want to use multiple sources, why not just one that is fair to everyone? Oh, I know, because it spent suit your agenda.

As far as your Holmes question....you should be able to answer that if the Ring does what you said it did. Of course I'm still waiting on the links for those dates. What's the hold up? :yep

And if my method is ****, you must think the same of Mongooses to than since we'll reach very similar conclusions.

 

I agree Klitards are the epitome of idiotic, but there are some solid klit fans I enjoy debating with. Any response to guys like Bremen is for shits and giggles...everyone know he/then are not to be taken seriously and never back up their claims.