Because Foreman is the last, right? I don't find anything impressive in Roy beating Ruiz for fake HW title.
Taking into account context and fighting display: 1. Schmeling over Louis 2. Ali over Foreman 3. Frazier over Ali 4. Douglas over Tyson 5....
But you approved these statements. Why would you like a post you disagree with?
Actually, he always says that anyone pre-1960 sucks, but in this case he has to defend his favorite SRR who also fought in that "shitty" era.
So you finally stopped believing that Langford fought in bareknuckle stance?
He does look like the one in footage we have as well.
Yeah, Greb and Langford were too big at their bests for SRR, Leonard and Armstrong. I think Fitzsimmons has a case against them, Greb in...
1. Louis 2. Foreman 3. Tyson 4. Marciano 5. Roy
Too much common sense, you have to have an agenda here!
That's your opinion, not a fact. We don't call your opinions facts without any strong evidences.
Are you aware that you'd have to prove the superiority of one era over the other at first? You'd also have to define the "goodness" of era and...
Nothing supports that
Sure thing, I can't wait for being old man being so emotionally attached to people that don't live for almost 100 years!
Well, Fitz didn't face someone as big as Willard but the way he destroyed Ruhlin was probably as impressive, if not more. It's fair to think...
So I can't assume Greb was better, but you can assume he's worse?
