Rocky Marciano vs Lennox Lewis

That's true, but as discussed, this is a style exemplified by one fighter. You are trying to superimpose that upon the entire division.

Are you talking now about fighters you enjoy or fighter that are excellent? You have very much crossed the streams on this one and it is impossible for me to understand you.

Right, but you are now crossing the streams between your projection of Wlad's style onto the entire division and Bowe's skill as an infighter. Bowe was one of a number examples that refuted your original point, a point which you are either accidentaly or intentionally trying to confuse.

My narrative is that a very weak division is producing very few excellent boxers; this narrative cannot be destroyed by the fact that emerging talents haven't yet fulfilled arbitrarily assigned criteria by you.

The bottom line is that you are taking a very short time-line and insisting that it is final while simultaneously taking a very long time line, the one that produced Ali and Louis, and insisting that the division's failure to produce a third such talent in the larger sizes, which is statistically unlikely for reasons that have already been explained to you and drawing a conclusion from these two very flawed premises. It's flawed.

This view is completely refuted by the fact that of the giants who are excellent, Bowe, Lewis and Vitali do not conform to this narrative. That is the majority of ATG type fighters in this weight range.

Simply put, what you are saying isn't true.

Again, this is presuming that a sport and division which is proven to be in a state of constant cultural flux has settled down to a routine culture. At the very least it is a conclusion bereft of supporting evidence, as we have seen. At worse it is reactionary nonsense.

Even this conclusion is highly questionable. The style embraced by emerging talents is also a part of boxing culture, and even without having "made the grade" they are valid and relevant in appraising styles used by larger fighters; in appraising the future (a guessing game, but one that we have to indulge in given the rather absurd parameters of your theory) they are of more value.

The study you are choosing to prefer has nothing to do with boxing. At all. You are CHOOSING to prefer a study which is ONLY about gloves, which is LITERALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO RECREATE IN THE RING UNDER THE RULES OF BOXING, over two that sets out to, as near as possible, recreate boxing precisely because it counteracts your claims is the very height of intellectual dishonesty, bad science and bad posting.

In short, it's bullsh!t. It's the biggest load of sh!t i've ever heard in my life.

 

You are asking one question - "when will we see a heavyweight with infighting ability of Bowe" - then changing it - "i mean when we will see heavyweights i enjoy watching agian" when i give my reply - then, posing a third question which seems to belong more to the first part than the second. It's very difficult to follow and makes it very difficult to talk to you.

There are very few very gifted technical boxers at straweight currently, also.

I'm repeating myself now, because you are, but:

At the very least you are drawing these conclusions based upon a tiny sample. Drawing similar conclusions regarding change in training techniques based on straweight depth would be no less valid, but equally unreasonable.

"No just the championship" what? Please try to post clearly what it is you want to say? Are you trying to say just the champion? The current champion/championship or all time? Or just in the 1986 period you selected earlier? Remember that I can't see what you are thinking, just what you are writing.

Who1?! Who are "they"? Fighters, any fighters? What are you talking about?

Well "the champions" got bigger for example? Post Louis there was champions who was consistently under 200lbs, before him there were numerous. Given your apparent obsession with the impact of size upon fighters, this seems rather a pertinent point?

However none of this makes any difference to the point at hand. Like so many of your replies, this answer appears to be non-sequential.

ME: Asking why an Ali/Louis level fighter hasn't emerged at super-heavyweight isn't reasonable given the statistical limitations.

YOU: But nothing really changed between Louis and Ali?

Makes no sense. At all.

Right above where I wrote "it's not true" is what I think is not true.

choklab: come on. Wtf are you doing? You are wasting my time.

Yes, and you are doing everything you can to make it seem longer and longer ago. The above is no less valid than saying, "Bowe retired less than ten years ago". Which he did, by the way.

1 - 228lbs is a totally arbitrary number you have plucked out of the air to suit your argument.

2 - Even so, as an argument it is almost worthless. This is because what Lewis "produced" above 228lbs is better than what he produced under it. You are actually, by accident, making a point FOR bigger heavyweights being more skilled because Lewis produced his best performances in

For god's sake choklab, I didn't say "it's nonsense to say that happened twenty-four years ago and that's a long time." Are you kidding me? I don't mention twenty-four years. Twenty-four years is not a point i am interested in debating. YOU keep mentioning it. And that very obviously wasn't the part of your post that i was attacking ffs.

Look what I wrote that brought forth from you the above post:

It's total non sequential. It is actually like posting with someone who is having a nervous breakdown DURING the discussion. You go to all the trouble of responding to what I write - and then don't really respond to it. In addition to this, I have already dealt with the points you make

1) Lewis, over 250lbs, is out of shape. I've dealt with this 250lbs BS.

2) Lewis and Wladimir BOTH look better when bigger. Wladimir was more affective at 245 than 235 indisputably. Lewis demonstrated more skill and was more affective at 245 than he was at 228. Indisputably.

So, again, for the fourth time, what you are writing isn't true.

You are talking about results. I am talking about culture in boxing. You know what a culture is? Imagine how that applies to boxing. If emerging talents are boxing in certain ways, then this is a part of the boxing culture. Yes, we do not know how affective that emerging culture - if it is one - will be yet, but it is absolutely a part of culture in boxing, and absolutely a part of this discussion for that fact.

I didn't say it was. Stop pretending i'm saying things i'm not, it's bizarre and ridiculous.

I'll try again: the test you produced had nothing to do with boxing. So its relevance to a discussion on boxing is absurdly limited.

No, the biggest load of BS i've heard is you pretending to believe that that test has any baring, at all, on the delivery of a power punch in the boxing ring.

Your inability to understand the things that are very clearly explained to you is astonishing. This is why I sometimes think you are a troll - could anybody be this stupid?

:dead

If the argument was about which material, when placed on top of a hammer and that hammer used to strike an anvil, would be most likely to wear through more quickly, then the tests i've revealed wouldn't prove me correct.

However, that isn't the case. So you're wrong, and i'm right, as far as an objective ****ysis of that evidence is concerned.

I mean Jesus Christ choklab. You are claiming that measuring punches and the force they land with isn't valid because the punch power of the human involved may vary per punch.

Meanwhile you are arguing that a hammer/anvil situation - which has no bearing at all on ring mechanics of any kind - is valid Can't you see how absurd and drunken that sounds?