You have just laid out Reznik's entire character and personality traits .Disagree with him and he immediately gets abusive. He just cannot take any kind of dissent and sees it as a personal attack.In his own mind he is always innocent and the one being attacked.Something is missing .
You can ignore the evidence. Just don’t believe the evidence is on your side of the debate as it’s not. A fighter can be knocked unconscious ala Walcott in round 13 vs Marciano. Not a common occurrence in hwt championship bouts through the years. Normally the fighter struggles to get to their feet ala Foreman when he fought Ali. Clearly hurt but unable to rise before the count of ten. And REACH is the last thing to look at. The ability to land blows is all skill, timing, speed and style. If reach was that important why did Mike Tyson outjab nearly everyone he ever fought? SPEED. TIMING. SKILL.
True, plus Mike had an uncanny way of moving into an opponent, negating the reach even more. Not sure if that would have worked against a Foreman or Bowe uppercut, but the way he did it (in his prime) was untouchable.
The point is that just looking at reach and using that comparative number to decide an “advantage” is ridiculous logic. Much much more to it that must be considered.
So if I get insulted, and defend myself, I have a huge ego. If I let it go, I’m playing all innocent? No matter what I say or do you will find a way to vilify me. And yes, I shouldn’t even have responded to your first reply to me after sensing the underlying vitriol.
You mean a classic case of someone else insulting me, me responding, and then people like you acting like I started it?
If he was female we could say he had a," Joan Of Arc ,"complex. "Now the flames they followed Joan Of Arc ,as she came riding through the dark. No moon to keep her armour bright. No man to get her through this dark and smoky night" Leonard Cohen.