Are the past Eras overrated or the new generation just not that good?

Admit what you clown?

NOBODY could beat everyone in history, because EVERYBODY has a stylistic nemesis.

I am Tyson’s biggest fan.

He’s a genius.

However, he barely beat Wlad, Cunningham gave him hell with his movement, and Wilder nearly knocked him out.

Now with his size and his unique style, he’d be a nightmare for most.

But to class him as being able to beat any HW in history, is absolutely absurd.

 

So let’s wait and see then.

As of yet, he’s beaten no great fighters.

It’s pretty ridiculous to assume that he’d have beaten any HW in history.

Just look at all of the different stylistic match ups that he’d have been faced with.

Every fighter in history has a stylistic nemesis.

You know that.

 

When is a current fighter ever considered a consensus ‘best ever’? Granted most people aren’t as stubbornly stupid as you are, but there’s always a tendency to not give fighters credit or put them in perspective until they’re retired.

The rest of that I skimmed over, you’re rambling assertions again. Have you leaned what an argument is yet and produced one? Shut up until then lol

 

So you think your rambling assertions are ‘logical arguments’? Oh well, if you refuse to understand how dumb you are and learn then there’s no hope for you. Have fun stewing in your stupidity.

 

I understand completely, as you would understand if you could read and think. I’ve already said no, and pointed out how you’ve moved the goalposts, ignored the argument. Then I gave you a basic analogy to help you understand and you thought I was talking about hair lolololol You are really dumb for real, you are so dumb.

 

Wahwah. Give it up you dunce.

 

How many 6’9 fighters who are slick boxers? You are so dumb lolol

 

Everyone except for the Gypsy King.

 

Do you have 47 chromosomes?
You have a flawed premise where progression and improvement are the same thing they're not you drooling anus.
I explained very clearly in my first post why...
I know reading comprehension is hard but let's see if we can give it a try.
1) The sport has fractured both with more than twice as many divisions and a multitude of belts per division. that's irrefutable fact.
2) I clearly explained that true evolution and advancement only occurs when all the top competition consistently compete against each other like in football or F1. So we can observe this improvement over time. Boxing is not like that with both fracturing explained above. less activity and top competition rarely facing each other. So they're exceptions in the modern game like Usyk or Loma who will fight anybody but they are a small minority and therefore not the norm.
3) Your assertion that knowledge and diet are applied is simply ridiculous as well as demented. It depends on the individual and how they apply themselves. Boxers aren't the brightest and I could list many today that don't conform to your fallacy and have very poor diet and yo-yo weight between fights.
4) Asserting that someone relatively untested like Fury wrecks everyone in history is also false. I mentioned to you before about context and that the only way to measure is in who somebody beat. For Fury that's just Vlad (who was tested against most in his era) and Wilder (who also never fought any of the top guys) So there's no context as they haven't fought any of the top guys in their era.
5) Boxing is about styles and there isn't anyone who if they fought everyone available wouldn't eventually get beaten. "Yeah but Fury's unbeaten though" Yes but mostly fighting bums his whole career.

I know your trolling as your posting is asinine and baseless and all you've done is just demonstrate what a dimwitted clueless daft twat you are. The reason for instance SSR is held in such regard was because he fought everybody and had over 200 fights those stats are unlikely to be bettered at any point because the sport has changed. SSR faced every style on multiple occasions with no cherry picking or ducking.
Fury nearly got wrecked by a half decent Cruiser and lost to McDermott in the first fight. The insanity on this Mythical Fury is hilarious.
Fury showed great movement against Vlad but his punch output was terrible and the fight was poor from an entertainment perspective.
So we're left with the 2nd Wilder fight where he actually showed some offensive talent and that's it. He looked terrible in the 3rd fight and I suspect would have been soundly beaten by the likes of Usyk and Joshua that night. You can't operate at the elite level in sport and just not train you nay beat the unskilled like Wilder who can't take advantage but the top guys will beat you as it always catches up.

So no Fury would get beaten by a few of the ATG's the ones who present a style clash. nobody is perfect and to assume somebody is means you have the brain function of a 10 Yr old who's been in a car crash and received brain trauma....

 

We’re in the presence of a genius.

How lucky must we be to have you with us.

I’m not talking about what others are thinking, I’m talking about your own thoughts on the subject, if you believe that there is continuous progression.

If you really believe that the sport keeps progressing, then you must believe that all of today’s guys are the best guys ever.

If you don’t think that, then you can’t believe that there’s continuous progression.

Yes, of course you skimmed past the rest of my post.

Every single time I ask you to do a divisional comparison with another era, you say that you didn’t read it.

The reason for that is obvious:

You know that what you’re saying is complete horse manure.

Today’s best MW’s are nowhere near as good as the best MW’s of THIRTY YEARS ago.

And I can also do this for SEVEN other divisions.

When that has been done, your ignorant theory just melts away like your brain cells did a long time ago.

You’d have to be the world’s biggest clown to believe that the greats of the past couldn’t compete today.

Imagine being that dumb, that you think that GGG, Ryota Morata, Sergyi Derevchenko Chris Eubank Jr and Jermall Charlo etc, were better fighters than Roy Jones, James Toney, Bernard Hopkins, Mike McCallum and Michael Nunn etc.

A special kind of stupid.

 

Why do you even bother typing this absolute garbage.

It doesn’t even constitute as a reply.

 

You don’t understand a damn thing.

You’ve asked me 3 times why I mentioned Floyd.

I kept explaining it, but it still didn’t register.

A goldfish would give me a better debate.

YOU are the one who has moved the goal posts.

You made a ridiculous comment what you were challenged on. You then started crying because I’d chosen a fighter from your list to discuss.

Yes, I understand that hair keeps growing.

However, boxing simply doesn’t do the same.

How can it, if I can name you MANY DIVISIONS which are now WEAKER today, than what they were 20-40 years ago?

I’m so dumb?

You are the guy who thinks that no great fighter of the past could even compete today, when guys like Wilder has struggled with C level guys, and AJ has been slapped around by an obese B level HW with man boobs.

You probably think that Amir Khan would have beaten Leonard and Hearns. Ha!

 

It’s now got to the stage where you can’t even offer anything as a response.

Delete your account

You’ve been absolutely humiliated.

 

I’ve already said that I’m his biggest fan you absolute simpleton.

However, everybody has a stylistic nemesis.

Tyson would tell you that himself.

You’d have to be a moron to be absolutely certain that he would be able to beat EVERY HW in history.

You’re too dumb to even realise that his huge frame would actually be of a disadvantage against certain fighters.

Like I said earlier, we are truly blessed to have you here.