The only thing is, with Armstrong and Napoles they were both truly great fighters who would undoubtedly come off on the shitty end of this one...
Maybe I like chess matches.
You are idiot. You stupido. Ever hear of wear and tear from weight lifting? Much worse. It is one of the worst things to do because of repair...
135lbs - Armstrong-B. Leonard 147lbs - Gavilan-Walker 160lbs - Tiger-Valdez 175lbs - Foster-Moore
Have you got a top ten pound-for-pound? If so, could I see it? Just curious, thanks.
Yeah, I think the same. For every time you watch Valdez smashing Briscoe you could turn it over to Tiger dominating Fernandez to put you back at...
Whatever the rules were in the '60s, maybe?
One of my all-time most wanted. Edited out Cerdan for Toney. Quite a mix of styles in that bunch (especially as Hagler would probably box n' move...
If you could construct an era in a certain division, who would you choose? Let's stick to four boxers. Mine is, under a 1960s rule set: 160lbs:...
Weights are useless. Completely useless! The only training needed is sparring. And some speed bag sessions to increase maximum shoulder and grip...
Foster-Quarry, Foster-Tiger and Frazier-Foster. All three were very nasty. Outside choice: Foster-Kendall, bad corner beating. Foster-Rondon...
Anyone have a definitive top three? 1. Charles 2. Moore 3. Langford That's what I was thinking anyway.
In my opinion Leonard was about as good as any boxer can be. Slightly different rules and gloves and crusty, silent footage, disguises his...
Monzon-Briscoe II - there aren't many fights I like more than that one.
Benvenuti, Valdez, Briscoe and Griffith, in the condition they were when Monzon faced them, were all extremely good middleweights. If Hearns was...
