Take it as you will.
We'd look like fighters from another world, it wouldn't be even close to fair.
Then prime for you isn't prime for me. Prime is a fighter at their upmost best, or else you wouldn't have to clarify when someone was at their...
We still count the losses, we still count the wins, but they should be taken into consideration as much as the context behind them is, I never...
Not a lot of Welters that had a better hook than Cuevas.
I never said to simply judge men based off of their best performances and best performances alone, in the post above replying to Saintpat I...
He certainly improved with time (Drew with Ocasio before stopping him in 1 in the next, and went on to knock out nigh everybody else they put in...
We still will take it into account, but we must consider both the cause and the effect. You can't just stop the story at "He won" or "He lost". We...
Men can have off days and win, but it doesn't get mentioned, because it doesn't count- But when they lose because of something similar, it also...
If a win comes by any circumstances other than two men being at or near their best, then we must take it into account.
Then I'm wrong about Page, good catch. I'd have to check the timing for every fight to see if 1 is necessarily true, but I feel like off the top...
Witherspoon was just the better fighter in my eyes, better quality wins, more showcased talent in those wins, and the lack of an Eddie Futch in...
Botha was better than Galento, not that they fought anything alike.
That's how I see it.
Surely, you must be joking. Men like Witherspoon were better than Norton prime for prime, much less than one that's starting to slip.
