everything you say is true but also irrelevant. Sullivan was " a ghost" of himself when Corbett beat him. Louis was " a ghost" of himself when Charles beat him. Holmes was a "ghost" of himself when Michael Spinks beat him. It doesn't change the fact that those men deserve credit for winning the lineal title. And Ali selecting Leon as an opponent, deserving or not, isn't something Leon should be punished for in hindsight. That said I agree that Ali was a shot champion and Leon was no ATG.. But like it or not he DID win the title.
nope those examples are not the same. ali had parkinsonians. its really not the same at all. any semi decent would have beaten that ali, but not the same for holmes and co.
not punishing is not the same as not acknowledging. I am simply withholding a positive, not applying a negative.
Okay so by your proclamation Leon Spinks was never heavyweight champion of the world, despite officially being declared such and having gone down in the history books as winning the title.. Thanks for your input. Have a nice day.
Spinks legitimately beat Ali who was the legitimate lineal champion However it was all downhill from there for Leon. He has to be rated very low all time in terms of his overall career.
why'd you thank me twice lol are you one of these people who says hello to the bus driver not only on boarding but also on getting off?
I didn't unless you're posting under two accounts. A rule that is generally considered a banable offense.
the only person displaying confusion pertaining to 2 possible accounts is you, though its interesting the way that you try to make your fault out to be mine. Odd that you've forgotten already that you thanked me twice - 1. 2. but don't sound so worried, thanking someone twice isn't a bannable offence.
These were the two posts that I originally responded to. So unless you're posting under two accounts, totally confused or just an imbecile, I really don't see why I should be credited for thanking you on more than one occasion.