That's handy for you, and i'm sure you're very happy with it, but you're supposed to prove your point. That's everyone. That's every single fight fan there is. You, for example, rate Foreman's defeat of Moorer over all the other fighters Foreman defeated on his comeback. This statement has no meaning because it is absolutely universal. We've already seen, and this you better believe, that there is nothing objective about "defenses" as criteria. For hundreds of years there have been disputes about who the "real" champion is. As I said above, Wlad's own slate of defenses at least deserves discussion. You ignored those factual points though
Just like your clique comes to every thread to disparage modern fighters? Don't throw stones when your house is made of glass friend.
My previous post summarized my position and the reasons for disengaging. Your response, which again avoids the core factual points that were raised, only confirms that this is an unproductive discussion. I've made my case, and I'm choosing to leave it there.
Some people for sure but more so than other fighters who are considered great? That's the crux here. Part the reason why the majority of boxing fans probably wouldn't have Wladimir top 10 is actually because of those losses.
He did blow out Patterson in the 1st round twice bit Patterson always had a so-so chin and was the smaller man after there's not really a lot.
I don't usually find one sided schoolings all that entertaining, but after reading the one delivered by McGrain in this thread, I have sudden urge to watch Hopkins vs Pavlik tonight.
Show me a single post of mine where I attempt to disparage all modern fighters or say they all suck. Within this very thread itself I said I have Wladmir in my top 10.