Wladimir Klitschkos Legacy

You said the top 25 was a lock. I said I don't believe that to be the case. You actually agree with me. What's the problem?

Since simply agreeing with me is out of the question, you projected my words into a creation that is all your own "swing as wildly as you are inherently suggesting." and tell me I'm wrong for it. Nowhere did I suggest wild shake ups, you imposed that yourself.

Let's keep this simple. I acknowledge Vitali Klitschko has recognition on some recent publications as a top 20 Heavyweight, however I don't feel it's a secure position or a lock. If you feel he is a lock, we are in disagreement, and only time will tell who is right.

No. Nor do I understand what led you to that conclusion.

Ugh. So by "almost beat" you mean he ALMOST did better than anyone else. That's quite an abuse of words to end in an ambiguity.

Why put words into my mouth and insult me for your own creation? Nowhere did I make a distinction between heart and skills.

You have repeated the motif that Vitali was perceived to be the superior fighter after the fight. I dispute this, stating his reputation was destroyed and have provided evidence regarding his exile from television and ratings. You actually agree that his image was damaged.....

BUT you want to still claim he was perceived as the superior fighter. Not true, and I would present three years of RING ratings to show that. His lack of heart after that fight was considered to be such a hindrance that whatever fighting ability(you say skills but truth was he was thought to be a big strong guy with little skills than, that was wrong) he might had, he wasn't perceived to be a genuine top 10 guy.

It isn't until I believe the Larry Donald win, that Vitali sneaks back into most of the publication top 10 ratings at the time. It was the WBC eliminator as well. He was still thought of as being questionable and inferior to Wlad. The Lewis performance was of course remarkable and one of the greatest reputation boosts in defeat of all time.

 

Your just digging your hole deeper. Logic evades you, the only thing you're good at is acting like a condescending little ****. Answers above.

 

You know this moron thinks Byrd is a better fighter than Vitali, right? I think Cobra drank too much of his own venom.

 

Dude, seriously, you are a hypocritical *****. You are doing the same things you accused him of. I only access this forum from a cell phone, I wish I could see the number listings of your posts so I could refer to your posts. You are accusing him of things that are not pertinent to the point he was making, or outright lying about what he and or you said.

I'd rather argue with a Dino or a Herol, who don't really try to pretend to be anything they aren't.

 

No. It's called a fact. But, there's no surprise in you wanting to pass on facts, really. I'm sure you wouldn't want such things to impact your childlike ignorance, whilst you concern yourself with the colors of balloons.

No - I didn't. And, even if I had, it still would not be Selection Bias, you utter tool.

You have proven - once again - that you are somewhat backward and have no idea what you're writing about.

There will be no "From here on out". Moronism cannot be treated properly online.

Time to have your legal guardians put that parental lock back on your PC.

 

The outrageous thing is this loser is going to great and self righteous lengths to accuse you of the same things that he is using on a regular basis. I think I've counted three different examples of selection bias that hes made. Then he refuses to acknowledge them, again doing the "red balloon blue balloon" argument he's accused you of

 

I know. But I elected not to raise it. Why bother?

To be fair to the boy, I did imply that he knew how to "polish a turd"; him having reeled off a list of recognizable names, beaten by some of Wlad's opponents.

And, whilst it did appear he was defending Wlad's opposition from a 'tomato can' slander, I do find there is a tendency to overreach with some of the defence of Wlad, without the context I have tried to put a view on.

Nonetheless, all things considered, the debate gets very treacle-like when the boy's responses become only about the initial umbrage he took, many posts ago, at the suggestion he might be doing more than merely defending the honor of the boxers in question. And, when a discussion cannot move beyond that, continuing the conversation becomes rather pointless.

 

Given he's not a top 10-15 lock, he could end up on any number of lists at a number of different placings if at all.

There really isn't a set top 30 or 50 everyone agrees on is there? Arguing placements beyond the top 10-15 locks is kind of just for kicks. I would place Vitali, Byrd, and Sasha historically with say HW Archie Moore, Sharkey, and Jimmy Bivins, really consistent guys in contrast to their contemporaries but not quite all time great locks. At least at press, Povetkin still might have a few left in him.

I expected this type of answer because quite frankly you don't know what is hypocritical about what I said, you just can't think of any other way to counter my point regarding Chambers.

No, i didn't say that. If you want to argue what I said, address what I actually said.

I'm getting rather bored with this. What exactly is so hard about addressing the things I actually said? Why make up your own arguments and expect me to counter them?

Here is what I said.

"Are you saying Sanders nearly beat Vitali? I can't see any argument for that. He nearly beat Rahman. Meanwhile, Byrd actually beat Vitail."

You agreed it was wrong to say Sanders nearly beat Vitali. So what's the problem?

One fighter was declared the victor. One fighter's stock went up, the other fighter's career got temporarily derailed. That's the factual aspects of what occurred, so yes, no controversy. It's not like Vitali/Lewis where his stock went up in defeat, far from it.

I disagree with your conclusion that the contest makes it clear who the better fighter was. Byrd was a very frustrating opponent for Vitali, he was missing in bunches. Vitali was winning rounds via his work rate and the fact Byrd was firing very little back. The shoulder injury occurred during the fight, likely caused by Vitali loading up and missing so much. By the end, Byrd was clowning him and backing him up. It's a fair win.

If you say so.

 

Let's review:

My quote:

You are aware that ankle and leg injuries resulting from legal knockdowns are quite common and don't get special treatment. One of the most famous instances of this was Max Baer's title win over Primo Carnera.

Your quote:

Incidentally, Carnera was not stopped due to his alleged broken ankle, which held up fairly well, given the fight was stopped in the 11th round. The fight was stopped because Baer was Battering Carnera from pillar to post.

So....you just elaborated on something I already said but in a way that it seems like you want to dispute something, but you aren't really sure. You used the phrase "alleged", you want to argue the legitimacy of the injury? Help me out.

His injury is specified in Joseph S.Page biography. X Rays at Columbus Hospital discovered that his "right ankle was broken, a clean chip off the ankle bone, and torn ligaments" I see no reason to doubt this diagnosis. There are pictures of him in the hospital with Baer visiting him.

If you want to argue the injury didn't effect his performance that is a hard sale. He's falling over the ring in the footage and clearly can't put weight on the leg. It was a brave performance.

It's just a fancy way of saying "cherry picking"

Choosing to make selective choices among competing evidence, so as to emphasize those results that support a given position, while ignoring or dismissing any findings that do not support it, is a practice known as "cherry picking"

And that's all I will say on that.

So I'm not only a kid, I'm adopted now?

 

No you haven't.

 

I've remained very civil with you and not called you a single name. There's no need to make this ugly and degrade yourself.

 

You just can't own up to being owned, can you. Answers above.

 

No, you condescending little putz, you are the one to degrade yourself. You are the most patronizing poster I've ever come across. I prefer arguing with people thatA. Are fully respectful, in which case I will be too, or B. are genuine and open in their emotions and positions. II don't mind dealing with people like Dino who wear their feelings on their sleeves. If they call me an *******, I'll call it to them back and accept it as part of the forum. I do mind it when some idiot takes pains to try to appear intelligent and above the fray, when he has such an agenda and such a lack of actual rational ability. You're the least worthy poster on this forum. You are not respectful, you are a condescending twat without the intelligence to back it up. Unlike you, I'll respond to you in an open and honest manner.

 

Yes, I have. Refer to earlier posts for multiple examples of selection bias and "red balloon blue balloon" tools of obfuscation.

 

How? It's not like you proved my opinion on Vitali to be factually incorrect or rooted inconsistent logic.

Bold=Men not listed in 2017
Italic=Men added in 2017

1998 RING Heavyweights

1.Muhammad Ali
2.Joe Louis
3.Evander Holyfield
4.George Foreman
5.Larry Holmes
6.Rocky Marciano
7.Sonny Liston
8.Joe Frazier
9.Jack Johnson
10.Jack Dempsey
11.Ezzard Charles
12.Jim Jeffries
13.Jersey Joe Walcott
14.Mike Tyson
15.Gene Tunney
16.Harry Wills
17.Sam Langford
18.John L. Sullivan
19.Max Schmeling
20.Max Baer

2017 RING Heavyweights

1.Muhammad Ali
2. Joe Louis
3. Jack Johnson
4. Rocky Marciano
5. Larry Holmes
6. Jack Dempsey
7. George Foreman
8. Joe Frazier
9. Mike Tyson
10. Sonny Liston
11. Lennox Lewis
12. Evander Holyfield
13. Gene Tunney
14. John L Sulivan
15. James Jeffries
16. Wladimir Klitschko
17. Vitali Klitschko
18. James Corbett
19. Riddick Bowe
20. Bob Fitzsimmons

Like I said, there are maybe 10-15 safe locks that will show up in almost every list from every publication in any era. Beyond that. Opinions trend with each generation of fans.

Well, the burden of proof is on you. If you can get everyone to agree on the same top 30 heavyweights forever and ever, I'll eat my hat.

You can say you did lots of things but you really haven't demonstrated anything.