Biggest "forums darlings"

There's nothing implicit about it. I explained to you what I meant after you somehow misinterpreted the meaning as "didn't beat anyone". It means he didn't beat the best fighter in the world excepting himself. If you've genuinely managed to misunderstand it again: that's not what it means. It means he didn't fight the best in the world excepting himself. That is the meaning.

Didn't beat the best in the world excepting himself=didn't beat the best fighter in the world excepting himself.

I won't address any attempts to strawman this argument again.

I've corrected this once already, and won't address it again:

This is the language of a forum poster who is oppositional. I'm not trying to devalue anything. You said that Man-Machine was racist against Eastern European fighters. I said, you're wrong about that, think about this instead. That's not an attempt to devalue any fighter. It's expressing a truth that you were unaware of.

I've dealt with this already, and will not address it again:

"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 ****."

Well, here's the context. You claimed on 3, 4 maybe 5 occasions that my opinion that Wlad could be ranked one of the greatest was "completley invalidated" by claim that he never defeated the best fighter in the world excepting himself until he defeated Povetkin. I'm interested in knowing if you really believe that.

I do understand that you won't provide a proper answer, despite having claimed it as true over and over again, but it seems a shame.[/QUOTE]

 

Very well, I'll do my best to address your factual points, but I have to say, I feel you're the one who is guilty of exactly what you are accusing me of, and that you are constantly shifting the subject depending upon what it is that's been said. I've had everything from ranking fighters on arbitrary whims, to believing an impossible fallacy in allowing Wlad to be potentially ranked highly based upon his resume rather than a fight that didn't happen. An awful lot of what you seem to want to accuse me of seems made up.

Who ranked Wladimir and Byrd, Peter and Ibragimov at number one and two at the time of their fights?

And myself in fact, and RING. But i'll take any authority when you make claims on behalf of these fighters, Fightnews, Boxing Monthly, Boxing News, whatever, but please provide it. I'm not about to go looking for potential sources to back your points myself.

I've dealt with this already, and will not address it again:

"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 ****."

It is factually incorrect to say that I have ignored Povetkin as being the best fighter in the world excepting Wlad. I have mentioned it numerous times. It is factually correct that i've ignored Puvlev but he fought Puvlev after Povetkin, and i've never said anything about that period in time. That is, i've ignored it, but it's not relevant. I don't have any problem acknowledging it, if that's what you mean, it's a fact.

I disagree. I've been as factually correct as I can be based upon the dearth of information you provided, and feel that I've addressed all your factual points as fairly as it is possible to do so given the repetitious nature of some of what you've said. My point is: Wladamir's career was dissatisfying up to a point and on some level because he was unable to establish unarguable lineage versus his nearest rival until Povetkin. That's hard on him, because part of the problem was his brother, but by rankings I followed, produced, worked on or edited, I say that at no time before Povetkin did the number 1 and 2 in the world meet when one of them was Wladimir Klitschko. People instinctively gravitate towards fighters who beat their nearest rival, and tend to reject, on some level, those who don't. That is factually correct and can be witnessed on the forum every day. However, impossibly, (apparently!) I don't think that this precludes his achieving greatness because a) he did eventually defeat the 2 when he was 1 and b) he built an excellent resume even in the years he was unable to match the very best.

You claimed racism for a motivator, I'm pointing out to you that the information in the above paragraph feels more likely as a motivator. I've said that if you continue to cling to the notion that people who oppose Wladimir do so because of racism rather than this valid argument, you won't get anywhere. Nothing you have said has had any impact on this argument or position so far as I can see: in fact, it's rather underlined my position.

I would argue that you haven't produced many meaningful facts. A relevant fact would be something like "on this date, when Wladimir fought Byrd, Fightnews ranked Byrd number 1 and Wladimir number 2, therefore you are incorrect about Wladimir never beating the best fighter in the world excepting himself." Then I could check the date, check the Fightnews rankings, agree or disagree with you that this happened, explore Fightnews as a reasoned source, and etc. But the above doesn't contain that type of information.

 

The first link shows Wladimir at number eight.
The second link shows Wladimir at number one, but Peter at number 3, Byrd and Ibragimov are unranked.
The third link does show Wladimir at number one and Peter at number 2, but Wlad didn't fight Peter that year.

None of these links represent Wladimir facing the best in the world excepting himself.

 

Number one is Byrd. Byrd is an important cornerstone of Wlad's resume and one of the reasons I think ranking his resume so highly is reasonable.

You now understand what beating the best in the world excepting yourself means though, and you know this isn't that. I'm not sure why you're showing it to me.

Despite all of this, you, yourself, you know and understand what 1 vs 2 means, and you know you find it important. You know it is very satisfying when the actual best fighter in the world fights the second best fighter in the world. You know what that is.

As I told you, Wlad was never involved in such a fight until he met Povetkin by any standard i'd recognise.

None of this changes that.

Now if you want to pretend, or even if you really feel, that it doesn't matter at all, that's ok. But most people love when it happens for a very good reason, and it mattered - whether you like it or not - that Wlad went so long without doing it.

This is a better explanation for resistance to a high ranking than the racism you claimed.

That is it. That is all. If the "factual evidence" you are presenting doesn't contradict any of this, it doesn't matter.

Nothing you've presented does that.

If you want to prove to me that Wlad was a very good fighter with a very good resume, we've already established that I think it's reasonable to rank him as high as number three on an ATG list.