Carl "The Truth" Williams

So according to your logic Jack Johnson,Jack Dempsey,Joe Louis,Mike Tyson, Evander Holyfield and Lennox Lewis are all bums? They all suffered stoppage losses to inferior opposition.

 

Sanders was a cherry picked non-contender and Wlad had to re-build his career after he got destroyed by him in the middle of his prime years:rofl

Douglas chose to retire rather than rematch Tyson. Wlad the bum ran the other direction while his brother stepped in.

 

Sanders was a good, dangerous fighter and Wlad was clearly not in his prime yet. Stop distorting history to fit your agenda. As I've stated many greats have had stoppage losses to inferior opposition.

 

Im not distorting any history. Sanders R.I.P- was not very good and was not a contender. He had no defence, terrible conditioning and never beat anybody.
The fact he blew out Wlad says more about Wlad than it does about Sanders and thats backed up by Wlad loses to Brewster , Purrity, Williamson and struggles with nothing men like Peter.

Schmeling was a great fighter.
Holyfield, Tyson and Lewis all beat other great and HOF fighters.

Wlad did not and thats the difference.

He never proved he was better than a Sanders or a Brewster.

 

Pretty weak trolling effort. Schemling was ok but had 7 losses, Douglas was considering in the same esteem as sanders(a talented guy who wasn't that committed) Sanders was a bigger power threat than Douglas. McCall and Rahman were about on the same level as Sanders.

I'm guessing you didn't see Wlad-Brewster 2.

 

Childish bickering (see above) that is not even 'on topic' spoils this forum .Same culprits over and over.

 

:crybaby:crybaby

Complains about childish bickering by having a little childish cryatsch

 

Dino usually starts these things off with his trolling but I'm also at fault for responding to it.

Now to stay on topic, Carl was a decent fighter with a pretty good set of skills.

 

Schemling is in the HOF and is regarded as a great fighter. Louis decimated him later on in the opening round.

Absolutely not. Douglas was a high ranked contender who had just beaten Oliver MaCall before he beat Tyson. MaCall later knocked out ATG Lennox Lewis.
The only reason Douglas was such an underdog was because of Tyson's aura of invincibility.
MaCall warned him not to take him lightly.
Sanders was not regarded as anything because he was irrelevant.

Where did you think up that one? Sanders was cherry picked because he was seen as a non-treat. Douglas worked his way into the Tyson fight by beating other ranked contenders.

Meaningless victory. Brewster was done-in by the same injury that retired Margo.

Type- brewster reflects on klitschko win into google. Watch the video and you will hear Brewster talk about his eye injury to Liakhovich a year and a half before Wlad dragged him out of retirement for a shameful title defence.

They fought prime for prime and Wlad was destroyed.

Brewster threw the same shots at Shufford that he did at Wlad and he walked away with a UD loss.
For the 3rd time Wlad was blown out by an ordinary level fighter.
Not a HOF or a great fighter, a C-level ordinary man. In Purrity's case - a journeyman.

 

What H.O.F. fighter did Tyson beat in their prime ? i don't know any...

 

This I can't see. Vitali yes! Vlad, no !

 

Not to be mean, but I had to stifle a laugh when in your initial post you called her Ninja. That would be one crappy moniker.

 

i don't want to get into competitive stuff but id love to spar, anyone, anywhere!
i do eat right and go to the gym every other day but that's mainly for a bit of posing.

the stamina and footwork has long gone and the fact that its hard to put more than two punches together.

 

Spinks.

Spinks is a great fighter. Larry Homles couldn't put him away in 30 rounds. tyson put him away in 90 seconds.

Mike doesn't get credit for that win because of how easily he beat him. Same with Holmes.
Holmes of '88 was still Larry Holmes and he proved that by what he achieved after wards.
Mike doesn't get credit because he demolished both men.

Wlad vs Haye was no different to Tyson vs Spinks , only on a lesser skill level.

Wlad held more advantages over Haye than Mike over Spinks.

That fight was one of the biggest HW fights of this era and Wlads biggest win.
Wlad should of blown Haye out in the first round but he didn't/couldn't.

If he did , people would be saying Haye wantn't **** and so on. Wlad gets full credit for that win and Mike gets none for Spinks.
And these people who prop Haye up as one of Wlads best wins are around here saying he is a top 5 ATG and Tyson doesn't even krack the top 10.

Spinks blows Haye away on any mans record while Haye himself would also not of seen the second round against Tyson.

 

And on and on...