I thought the post was ridiculous Burleys record shows him to be a great fighter and someone who was better than Jake
I would say Holman Williams prime was 1941 to 1945. During this period he was beating good fighters and was pretty consistent. I would say that...
I don't see the argument as circular at all, Burley had many good wins and overall had a better record than LaMotta. LaMotta lost to guys who...
If he were so much better than Graziano you would expect him to have less losses to guys like Dauthille
Joshua might well be the best puncher Holmes faced so him knocking Holmes out is far from implausible
Steele and Cerdan are from different eras there is no time at which a fight would have made sense.
Ali was 6'2 1/2 not 6'3
Foremans style seems to be heavily based on being the stronger man in the ring. He comes right at his opponents with little regard for defense....
I just find it odd that size stops being an issue when the fighter involved is from the 70s. How is Marciano beating Foreman any less ludicrous...
Foreman is giving away roughly 30 pounds and 5 inches in height and never faced a quality opponent of Tysons size. That seems like it could prove...
I doubt Moorer or Douglas or an old Foreman would be some champions in the 2010s. What's sucky about the division
How elusive was he though? Guys like Weaver and Witherspoon had no trouble landing on him. Why shouldn't Joshua do the same?
