Billy Miske deserved a title shot

Those classic fighters sure were lucky to have the benefit that back then you could receive a title shot based on what you were gonna do after that titleshot, so that your current losing streak doesn't really matter.

 

Didn't he have just one single win in five previous fights? That being over a guy that averaged one win to 5 losses or draws! How in the hell does that earn a shot.

 

Again you are failing to look through the fog and see what was hapening on the ground at the time.

While Dempsey had already beaten Miske twice both the fights had been close with Dempsey narrowly taking a newspaper decision. In the eyes of the public he owed Miske a title shot more than he owed Harry Wills one.

Now in a hundred years time people will look at wlad Klitschkos recent win over Lamon Brewster and say-

"What was the point"?

On the ground at the time we knew exactly what the point was.

In a hundred years time people might look at boxrec and ask why Lennox Lewis fought Michael Grant when there were more deserving contenders out there like Chris Byrd and John Ruiz. They will not see the climate that lead to those fights taking place or not taking place.

 

Brewster had lost just one of his previous ten, in a title defense where he forced the challenger to take the canvas. It's hardly akin to having just one win in your previous five over a guy walked over as often as a doormat.

When Grant fought Lewis he was 31-0 with more ko's than one can poke a stick at. He'd also beat Goltoa the fight before and was very hyped. Again, massive differences.

 

In addition to that, Brewster knocked out Klitschko while being dominated. Those are the kind of fights you want to see rematches to.

I do think Janitor has a point, but avenging a win when the fighter in question at that time has a mediocre record is not the best thing you can do. I don't think it's unforgiveable at all, for instance Ali had some soft touches on his record as well as Joe Louis, but at least they were active and fighting the best. Dempsey was neither of those. That is when these kind of fights start making you look bad.

 

No, he's the George Godfrey of his era, but then, Dempsey avoided him as well.

No, it is a legit win over a top guy who had only lost to an all time great (Lennox Lewis) and beat the living **** out of Bowe twice, who at that point was among the best heavyweights in the world.

And apart from that he beat a lot of nobodies. That didn't stop you from ranking Fulton or Gibbons high.

 

I can only assume that this thread was started so you could try and gain some support for the despute on the other thread. It doesn't seem to be working.