These is easily one of the worst takes I've seen on this forum. Judging by your logic, there has never been anyone undisputed in history
It was biggest during the 20's when Dempsey was king, but even then it was second to baseball. Dempsey and Ruth were the two first sports superstars
Except that he didn't, and refused to pay step aside money twice for undisputed. Sounds like he only cares about money.
This thread took an interesting twist than what I expected.
You're videos are the best on boxing on YouTube
Cooney vs Holmes. Cooney had a line in the locker room for the President to call him
With everyone constantly talking about how Canelo and Joshua are protected, I cannot help but think that Ottke still has them beat. He only fought...
I love how anyone Joshua beats is a has-been or never-was despite being Top 10 while anyone Fury beats is a world beater despite their ranking
If this is unbiased, I'd hate to see biased
Who should he have fought then? He beat the best available to him.
Gatti and ward for their first fight. Frazier in the thrilla in manilla
Kambosos isn't undisputed.
Will we ever see an undisputed cruiserweight again now that bridgerweight has caused the WBC to lower the limit?
I get it for a long reigning champ, but not for Whyte
When did this become the standard?
