https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewforum.php?f=64 How do you define "dominance"? Yeah, I am aware of them. Some of them, like WS or PER are extremely crude tries at capturing impact via boxscore stats. +/- related stats are much better at capturing impact, but they are not perfect either. Chris Paul was much better than Iverson, so in this case they do it right. Because of lower PER or something? These stats don't measure defense and Russell is the best defender ever. 1967 Wilt is the best version of himself, no matter what PER or other crude stats try to tell you. I recommand researching for Ben Taylor work for beginners, he did a lot of things right: https://backpicks.com/
Just a poor excuse for they weren’t HOF fighters…they don’t necessarily have to be but you should have a few on your resume. AJ may be when it’s all said and done. But the others? Really gonna call Huck great? Good sure but not great not at all.
Actually thag fight might be the best case for Marciano posted. Thag Nistor guy isn’t a tenth of the fighter Marciano was and you could tell Usyk was uncomfortable. Nistor was nothing like Marciano style wise but I suppose swarmer fit his bill. Usyk was also not way better then anyone Marciano fought . That’s an absurd statement
Can you at least provide links to the sources that would support your claim that Russell outplayed Wilt in the 1960, 1966, and 1969 playoff series then? Is there nothing you can copy and paste from that forum? Anything that would help clarify what you meant? I at least dug up some statistics suggesting Wilt's superiority in those series...you're not giving us anything other than vague references to another web forum. Moore v. Usyk would be interesting but I think Usyk's height/reach/size advantages would serve him well.
I'd start with these: https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1055114 https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1049905 https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?f=64&t=1053278 Don't have much time now to bring much else.
Yep poor excuse alright. Usyk should have fought a bunch of geriatric puddings begging a last payday before retirement. He could have challenged the still-fresh-in-his-40's former heavyweight champ Roy Jones Jr or even legendary HOF'er Sylvester 'The other Rocky' Stallone. Would have also suggested the always game Shannon the Cannon but boxing politics may keep him out of the hall.
Who were these geriatric types? Let’s start Walcott. Was still the champion coming off two great wins against Charles. Charles- Was only 32 or 33. Coming off two excellent wins against ranked contenders. Moore who was literally on the best win streak of his career and had completely wiped out the HW and LHW division on his lonesome. That geriatric guy? Louis was old and past it. Can agree there despite that he was on a 9 fight win streak. For the sake of the argument we will discount that win despite it being a good one. I’m not of the mind that Usyk can’t get these wins. But let me see him against Fury, even old Povetkin, Wilder (don’t think he will make the Hall but who knows). Before we start proclaiming Usyk would wipe out the rest of the HW division before him no? Some of its not Usyks fault. He’s a man who will fight anyone (as AJ to his credit is) cowards in boxing do their best to avoid each other now adays where it was less so in the past. So maybe harder to find these HOF fighters.
Both Walcott and Charles last 4 fights had ended with 50% winning ratios Jersey Joe's losses losses coming against Charles and Layne. Walcott's 4 th fight with Charles was a pretty dull affair, nothing great about it,nor indeed were Charles 2 wins against Walcott any thing wonderful.Moore, according to his Mam was 41 years old no fighter is prime at 41 imo.I hope was can agree on that? Charles had 96 fights that' s a lot of mileage.As its not Usyk's fault neither can it be Marciano's fault that his best opponents were older men, past prime.Moore had certainly made his mark at heavy ,but completely cleared out? In 55. Jackson,Holman,Pastrano,SummerlinJohnson were top ten ranked Moore fought none of these .In 54 Cockell,Walls,Neuhaus,Layne Jackson were ranked Moore fought none of these. Archie thoroughly deserved his shot and he got it, but he was certainly no spring chicken when it arrived.
Moore was 38. This isn’t really debatable. His mom took no part in raising him. That’s beside the pointS. He used this to gain attention and was a ploy he knew how old he really was. Marciano also had fights with good prime opponents like Layne, Matthews, Lastarza but they weren’t HOF caliber . Usyks a great fighter I already give him that title and maybe one day I’ll say he’s better then Marciano or Foreman or Holmes or Lewis but he’s not there yet and needs to beat a few more guys. I don’t think that’s unreasonable no?
Its debateable but not something I'm going to labor on, eg CBZ gives two alternative dates fro his birth 1913 and 1916if it was indeed tha latter he would have been 39, not 38 if the former 41. Who raised Moore is irrelevant, who gave birth to him is not ,and one would imagine his Mam would be better placed to know his birth date than he was.When confronted with his Mam's statement Moore quipped ,"I must have been 3 years old when I was born."BTW there is also considerable speculation about Walcott's true age. Your stance on Usyk is definitely unreasonable as far as I'm concerned.
On Moore’s tomb stone is the correct date of birth. He also had the same dob on his passport according to his manager who knew the whole fake out scam. It’s in his biography. Your entitled to your opinion even if it’s wrong in regards to Usyk. The notion one can be “great” w out accomplishing great things seems silly to me. You do you
I don't have a definitive opinion on Usyk nor on any active fighter.Moore stated he was robbed against Marciano , do you also believe that? Whether Moore was 39 or 41, he certainly wasn't 38! Moore didn't have a manager when he fought Marciano ,after beating Maxim for the lhvy tilte he took Jack Kearns on board but not in the capacity of manager as we understand the term.Plenty of headstones have incorrect information on them including Bob Fitzsimmons and I've been informed Harry Wills.
Who cares if Moore was 38 or 39 in Marciano fight? He was clearly past his peak, but still a world level fighter.
The manager whom took Moore to Australia on that tour (his name slips my mind). You’re correct he wasn’t at the time of the fight but he was interviewed the day of the Marciano fight where he laughed at that scam. As he personally had to handle his passport. He knew how old his fighter was as Moore knew his own age. He was a master as selling himself and adding mystery to his person was all fun for him. He was born Dec 13 1916 which would have made him 38
You're spectacularly missing his point. In order for any active fighter to have any HOFers on his record he'd likely need to fight them early on at the tail end of their own careers, hope they retire, continue his career for another five years, then hope they get inducted. Boom, active fighter with a HOFer on their record. Forget fighting prime relevant fighters that may or may not make the arbitrary requirements for HOF induction (remember Gatti is in the HOF), it's all about getting those washed up once-great names on your record. That's the key to a quality resume. BTW, none of those fighters you listed were in the HOF when Rocky was fighting them. If some jackass from the 50s wanted to tear down his record that's no doubt the same argument they would have used.