prime Haggler would stalk and KO prime Roy Jones

Yeah i neither think that you would have the culture or the level to understand my language

 

No problemo mi amigo.

 

Ali didn't have great fundamentals, anyone who knows boxing knows that. Everyone who knew anything said it before he won the title.

Fitz boxed terribly, honestly he wouldn't make it as an amateur let alone a pro in the better eras.

If you can't see that you're clueless and have never boxed to any decent level.

 

I think, on some level, I have to believe that the raw talent of Fitz, if transported into a newborn baby in 1980 would result in a great boxer during the new millenia.

I'm a pure time machine fight he looks horrific.

Giving him the advantage of a modern training camp does nothing for him because of how rudimentary his style was.

That being said he did what it tool to be king for a very long time so clearly has something about him. But the differences between his era and ours are too far apart.

It's not like bulking Rocky up to even a weight disadvantage, we'd be making a wholly new fighter and it's impossible to say how he'd do.

Like I say, you can't watch footage of him and Hagler and conclude anything other than they are world's apart.

 

Being realistic, the Hearns that outpointed a prime unbeaten Hill at LHW, that is a better fighter than anyone Fitz faced probably up until Jack Johnson.

 

Infinite stamina based on no film footage and him being a fat out of shape midget?

 

Well maybe but it depends, if the amount of competitive boxers in 1890 when it was a largely illegal sport was 10,000 and the amount in 1980 was 1,000,000 you have a far more greater depth of talent.

 

You could make a similar argument in the modern era with UFC.

I agree it's not a guarantee that Fitz ever succeeds. But my main point is he clearly had an x factor to succeed in his own era and couldn't have done any more than he did. So if anyone is to succeed you would imagine it being him.

Then you have to consider that the defensive maters of yesteryear still look incredible on film to me. Mike Gibbons is one of the best MW fighters I've ever seen for instance.

 

If he fought more than 20 rounds being a fat drunk past his prime it says a lot of positive things about his stamina.( by the way i would love to see and learn of your great physical of athlete)

 

I don't think you'd be much wiser about boxing in any language.

 

In any language i know worlds more than you about boxing it for sure.your answers are the answers of a vague, very short ,or a text full of nonsenses with no lógic type " Robinson was a natural welter nobody considered him great at middleweight". even with my obvious english limitation my answers are much longer explaining the coherent motives of my pick.
In your own idiom you are the picture of the mediocrity, so a different language would not help you. However i have to sum a lot cause my limilations with the language

 

You should have been world champ after all fitzsimmons an all time great fought terribly according powerpuncher .... The champ of the keyboard lmao

 

Robinson weighed between 150 and 154 at his peak when he fought middleweights and wasn't one of the top 3 160lbers of all time in my opinion
Now you counter Hagler with a fighter who was competing a 120 years ago with 2oz gloves and you think he was a banger??
Have you ever worn horse hair gloves, even at 16oz the padding can be pushed from the knuckles?? Do you not think that boxing like other sports has evolved in a 100+ years
Obviously you've never boxed and gained your knowledge (limited) from Google, YouTube and boxrec

 

It is exactly your case. Not mine