Why are you laughing? Just in my opinion he beat McCall. And he dis give holy a decent fight, still lost by a landslide though. and seriously, those ARE some good names, no doubt about it. you dismiss mercer and weaver for whatever reason and call norton old. I don't really understand because all 3 of thee fighters were too notch. norton may have Been old but he still preformed well post holmes. he definitely has an equal resume with Tyson, and on top of this he reigned very long. Just IMO he has an excellent resume. had he fought page, Coetzee, abs dokes I would have him even higher.
Vitali. A bloodied Holmes exits on a stretcher. What kind of poll is this anyway. Holmes was the most one dimensional champ ever. Vitali outclasses him in every aspect INCLUDING JAB! And people who argue Holmes wins this are JUST Klitschko haters.
Ok sorry, I pressed the laugh emoticon when I saw Leon Spinks. Anyway yes, the Mercer fight was damn good. My problem with these old timers continuing fighting is that everytime they win, it adds to their greatness. But when they lose, it is not taken against them. I think it should swing both ways. Norton was really past prime when he fought Holmes and yet it turned out to be a life and death fight for Holmes. Still you have Cooney, Snipes, Mercer, Norton, Witherspoon. Tyson was criticized for fighting a weak opposition but if you start comparing his list with Holmes, for me it is evidently better.
To say that he has no great fighters in his resume is just fine with me, it's not a great resume by any means. But no good fighters? Seriously? Gomez doesn't qualify as a good fighter in your mind? Hide and Sanders aren't good? Get the **** out of here. He has completely schooled and beaten the hell out of good fighters.
Still that proves that Norton was a good fighter. Even past Holmes he had some good performances. What about Weaver?? weaver was certainly a good fighter. You also have Berbick and marvis frazier, both quality fighters. I would hardly say Gomez is any good seeing as he had been a professional for a long time and wasn't exactly prime. Hide is good too but still doesn't compare to his former self that fought Bowe. I'll give you sanders, but... Sanders is Sanders. To me, he was out of shape, and once again, not really comparable to his former self.
Holmes' losing to Spinks twice was a huge blow to his legacy. Vitali could be 60 and still not lose to Spinks.
****ing bull**** right there. Vitali's pawing jab certainly does not qualify for a better jab then Holmes. And I totally disagree that people who say holmes wins are klitschko haters. Vitali just hasn't really done enough for me imo.
It's not like prime Vitali fought a shot Gomez. They were both older fighters, yet Gomez was also a top HW of an albeit weak era and he had established a double-digit title defense legacy at cruiserweight. He was and still is a very talented fighter. To say he wasn't even good at the time is laughable. He had just schooled Virchis. Definitely not great, but very much good. Why does everybody go so overboard on Vitali? I swear, it's either "He's never beaten a good fighter." with you or it's MRBILL ranking him over ****ing Frazier. He's one of the most divisive fighters alive with fans. ...Gomez wasn't good because he "had been a professional for a long time"...What the hell.
Maybe I was a little hard on Gomez, but the point is he was not the same as he was before. MRBILL also ranks Vitali over Holyfield, Tyson, and Liston :-(
I've been an admirer of Gomez for a long time. Excellent fighter. He was a large cruiserweight with a lot of talent. Great body puncher. Right now he's outclassing C-level guys for a regular paycheck in Germany in eight-rounders. Complete waste of time. In my opinion if the guy trained harder he could still give a serious fight for any of the heavies ranked 4-10 right now. He's very crafty. He actually confused Vitali in the first round of their fight to the point where I thought he might make it interesting for a minute there. But to Vitali's credit, he adjusted and shut him out completely after that while pulverizing him. That is an underrated win. It's not often someone gets puzzled by a crafty southpaw and adjusts that quickly and decisively.
I totally disagree. A way past prime Ali beat a much younger Norton than Holmes did. For me that proves that Holmes is very vulnerable to certain styles and perhaps he would have lost to e.g. any 90s version of Holyfield had he primed in the 90s era. And Norton never had any good performances after Holmes. he had 5 fights, 2 of which he lost by KO1. Ok I have to laugh at this one What about Weaver? He lost 8 times leading to the Holmes fight. And the funny part is that it is not like he fought great fighters. He lost to a bunch of nobodies way too many. About Berbick and Frazier, Try to mention these guys to claim how great Tyson is and you will get laughed. These guys wil not even get a mention when talking about Tyson's resume and yet they are stars in Holmes'.
Maybe MRBILL has a point; do Holy, Tyson & Liston have such illustrious wins on their resumes as Kevin Johnson, Sosnowski, Arreola & Shot Briggs? This Vitali guy is rapidly closing on Ali for greatness... :rasta
On a good day even Zuri Lawrence doesn't beat the Sozinator, Kal...In your heart...you know that. thumbsup:hat TRUTH! Not even big Z gets the dragon! Or Timmy Spoon!:hi: