breaking down this heavyweight era and others: Why today stinks!!

Holyfield lost to Ruiz and Byrd who Lewis ducked earlier. Holyfield, Tyson and Lewis were unable to successfully compete in what is now known as Klitschko era.

 

According to some, the heavyweight division stinks today only because a Klitschko is the champion. If Wilder were the champion, the same ones claiming the heavyweight division stinks would claim that the heavyweight division is the best it has ever been. The heavyweight divison stinks only because a Klitschko is the champion and not one of their heroes such as Wilder who is ranked #3 WBC without ever fighting anyone even nearly ranked period. Wilder got that ranking without having to fight for it, which the Klitschko haters approve of so very much. However, Vlad knocked Wilder down with a jab in sparring, beat Wilder from one side of the ring to the other. Wilder will have to cheat his way to the title without fighting anyone ranked. A rematch with Sconiers for the title? There is a video of Wilder getting his arse kicked by Haye, someone who Vlad easily beat, Haye ran, held Vlad by the legs, fell down on the canvas, etc. Wilder looked like a drunk while sparring with Haye.

The same ones claiming that the heavyweight division stinks are the same ones who are claiming that Wilder is the greatest heavyweight of all time. LOL!

 

You lost the argument. Take it like a man and stop unnecessary personal attacks.

 

Once the heavyweight champion defends his title against challengers with records like; 0-0-0, 3-3-0, 6-0-1 then the heavyweight division actually might be as bad as what some people think it is.

 

Vitali's resume is laughable. He could have fought David Haye and possibly got one great win, but he wanted no part of that haymaker.

 

We already established in the Vitali vs. Lewis thread that Lewis has a better resume than both Klits. Tyson and Holyfield alone are better than anyone either Klit has fought.

Both Klits have fought Lewis's leftovers. Wlad fought Rahman, and Vitali fought Briggs.

 

so none of Holmes wins were in the tyson era? :thumbsup

 

Your logic which seems very subjetive on whom you want to build up makes your numbers total **** and im sorry if that sounds harsh but when you put artificial limits based off of your subjectivity to bias the data to make a point the numbers really don't mean a lot after? by your own words Holmes should not count for tyson or definitely tyson to lewis.. so on and so on yet you did but discounted others who would of went against your " results " that you wanted.