Biggest "forums darlings"

He didn't beat the best in the world excepting himself until Povetkin.

This doesn't matter to you (apparently) - it matters to most people.

This has caused you to misinterpret racism for the reason people don't agree with you (I think).

It's never going to make sense to you; you're that sort of chap. But if you want to, you can overcome this last part at least.

 

Yeah, if you just make up what people have said to you to engender your own towering sorrow, the logic is never going to be strong, of course it isn't. Focus on what is actually being said.

Defences of straps "matter" in the essence of who they are against. So it doesn't matter to me that a corrupt organisation which is leeching money out of boxing has decided to take 2% from Wladimir but if he's fighting a good fighter for that belt, that's a good thing. Because belts help fighters get over with the public they tend to attract good fighters. For me, I just try to appraise the guy he is in with.

Wladimir did plenty - enough to be ranked as high as number three all time at heavy IMO, but that doesn't change the facts of the case.

What I'm saying to you is: you rush to accuse people of racism because the contrary opinion so disturbs you, but you may not be aware, or may not accept, that during Wlad's reign this mattered, and it matters now. He "reigned" in a very unsatisfying situation and cries of "but it was his brother!" they don't change that. It remains unsatisfying, whether it is fair or not. That is what happens, you know, in life. Being alive is unfair oftentimes. Tough ****.

No, I don't get into long-winded debates with trolls (or troll equivalent posters). You are upset, angry, make provocative posts, throw around strange accusations, only really talk about heavyweights and you strawman. These are all huge red flags to any forum veteran.

Your double standard is mostly made up in your head IMO. Disabusing people of passionately held (but wrong) beliefs is only an occasional pastime for me these days.

 

You should feel free to ignore it then.

I didn't say this. It is preposterous and dishonest of you to put it in quotation marks. It's what I mean when I say you are a troll/troll equivalent poster, and that you post angry. It's more strawman/fantasy.

"He didn't beat the best in the world excepting himself until Povetkin" can for you become "beat non one until Povetkin." It's genuinely an awful way to post.

It's not "sudden".

I've made three posts before this

It's not a "concession". I'm not arguing "against" Wladimir, nor for him. I don't live in this permanent state of binary opposition, as you seem to. It's how I feel. If you don't find it consistent or not, it is impossible for me to express to you how little I care about that - I can't do it.

This is more strawman, you're having an argument on your own, with yourself.

I quoted you because you accused another poster (needlessly) of racism; I hoped to help you understand why that's ridiculous but also why it's come about - what it is you'd missed, based upon your posts.

Now i'm just posting corrections of the false claims you make when you quote my posts.

Specifically this is why you're no fun to post with.

 

It's a huge difference. One delivers a technical summation of what happened: he didn't beat the best in the world excepting himself. The other is the parlance you tend to deal in (frankly) which is the language of the forum troll: "he didn't beat anyone." One is totally dismissive of Wlad's career up until Povetkin and I absolutely did not do that. What I did was tried to explain the gap in your understanding (as I saw it). As we can see, you still appear to be misinterpreting that when you say it "doesn't change the substance of the point" when it absolutely does.

This is because: a fighter can absolutely spend a huge chunk of his career doing good work while failing to fight the best in the world excepting himself and become the all time best fighter in his division, never mind number three; a fighter who literally spends most of his career "doing nothing", it is a struggle. This is the type of overexcitement/misunderstanding that leads to "doesn't change the substance of the point" and it's how you've found yourself arguing with yourself. I can absolutely believe that it matters enormously that Wlad didn't fight the best in the world excepting himself AND think it's reasonable to rank him at number three. I know because i do - i absolutely believe those two things. To me the first is concrete fact and the second is self evident. For you it's almost impossible to imagine (leading to more mistakes/misunderstandings).

This is also fantasy/carelessness. Like so many of these posts, it's just wrong.

 

OK, i'll give you the credit that you are so confounded that you are really operating (somehow) under that impression, that this isn't dishonesty: It's not true. A fighter can be enormously impressive while not fighting the best in the world excepting himself. He can build a hugely impressive resume while failing to meet his number one contender or fighting the champ, or whatever it is. So that is not true, and you should really look into it if you think it is. It's absolutely not what I believe. Really try to remember this part.

It isn't. It is something that is irrefutably true that you seemed unaware of that I pointed out to you and which you have been fiercely exaggerating the significance of ever since.

Really try to understand. I'm not trying to fight against Wlad. I dont' hate him. I'm not trying to undermine him. I'm just point out to you that he never faced the best in the world excepting himself until he met Povetkin and that that matters to people. That's it. That's all.

This level of intensity over someone saying something you don't like about a fighter that you do like is just straight up unnecessary.

I won't address this point again.

It's not a concession and it has been a part of my range for Wladimir for years and year before you even joined the forum.

If you can, answer this question: Do you REALLY believe that if a fighter doesn't meet the best in the world excepting himself for 17 years, then does, and beats him, then fight on for four more years, that it is IMPOSSIBLE for him to be one of the best fighters in the history of his division?

Do you REALLY believe that?

 

This is fantasy too.

It's not "arbitrary", "based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system." I worked for the TBRB throughout much of Wladimir's reign, and they didn't have him fighting the best in the world excepting himself before Povetkin at any time. I also kept my own lists for all of these weight divisions, and I didn't have him fighting the best in the world outside of himself until he met Povetkin.

So, no. Now I have no doubt at all you'll have a made up objection to this system, but for anyone else who is reading, this is my list versus a consensus list developed by 20-25 journalists who also kept lists. It's impossible to think of a more complete system of peer review anywhere on earth at that time. Not flawless but the closest you could get with the budget. Before that I only had the Ring rankings as a comparison.

If you can, answer this question: Do you REALLY believe that if a fighter doesn't meet the best in the world excepting himself for 17 years, then does, and beats him, then fight on for four more years, that it is IMPOSSIBLE for him to be one of the best fighters in the history of his division?