They didn’t. Nobody had Mike winning the first 4 straight. Neither Lederman or Merchant. It was a tough fight for Roy. Mike was a genius. Roy was very cautious. That’s all you needed to say. You always exaggerate. Montell Griffin also caused Roy a lot of issues. It was very surprising at the time. But again, nobody but you thinks that it was a schooling. You say the most ridiculous things.
The thing is that you can pick a lot of fighters and their best 3 years would look unbeatable. It's way too small sample of size to conclude that you're the best ever.
That's a lot of fights and fighters to be missing out on. I'm no expert (at all) on the lower weight classes but ignoring bantamweight alone is such a shame not to mention the incredible number of great fights in the super bantam/junior featherweight class - and a lot of those are pretty recent too. Really worth your time checking some of those out.
Awful pick. Kalambay was sparked out by Nunn, who was a tier below B-Hop, Toney and certainly RJJ. I'm not sure how you could make any compelling argument to rank him above Monzon and Hagler.
It's not about picking his best 3 years, it's about picking the version of him that was still commited/focused on boxing and trained properly, while having Rooney at his side. If Tyson had kept focus and Rooney, I would have picked a longer time frame as his prime, regardless of whether he would losses or not in this time frame.
