Jennings Wilder/Fury winner Povetkin II Do you think a last fight against Shannon Briggs would be acceptable? Or do you think that fighting Briggs is just flat out unacceptable? That's assuming that Povetkin goes unbeaten until then etc.
Why even fight Povetkin again? He took the most safety first, risk free approach in their fight but honestly even if he fought him differently the result would be the same.
Doesn't matter if Wlad fights King Kong followed by Godzilla Briggs is simply not a top 50 fighter and it doesn't matter how you dress it or spin it he has done nothing in 8 years that warrants him earning a title shot. It doesn't matter what Wlad does it's what Briggs does. If Briggs actually beat a half decent fighter or a fringe contender to show he isn't the completely shot fighter we all know he is then you could at least argue he's no worse than Leapai but at this moment in time he would be the worst challenger Wlad would have faced in a title defence and by a big margin.
I actually take it a bit further than you, to me if a fighter takes on his #1 contender he can fight pretty much who he wants after that. Like a one-for-me one-for-you thing. Normally the one-for-me would be a money fight but i'm ok whatever. That's if you fight the #1 contender of course.
Pianeta prior to the fight with Wlad has beaten 2 old but former title holders in McCall and Botha which makes him better than current version of Briggs. Briggs drew with Botha when they fought so in reality Pianeta beat a fighter as good as Briggs now to earn a title shot. So while clearly terrible and not worthy of a title shot it's more than Briggs has done. So clearly Briggs now is worse than Pianeta when he fought Wlad.
neither pantieta nor briggs should be used as an example of comparison as to who should get a title shot, since NEITHER should get one. that's like saying you are happy to drink piiss because its better than eating pooop.
If Floyd fights and beats Pacman , do you think a 50th fight against Vivian Harris would be acceptable?
You don't believe that and you know it would be downright unacceptable and outrageous if it happened. You took the easy way out of that question.
If he put together a run like the one you suggested, it would be very impressive - so much so that it would make a Briggs fight even less legit. And Briggs would've had to do some serious groundwork in that time to make himself even close to being an option, in my opinion.
Briggs has done nothing since losing every second to Vitali 5 years ago , unless you count a bunch of bouncers he fought in half empty amateur gyms filmed only on an Iphone.
No, i answered it honestly and consistently - before you asked it, actually: "I actually take it a bit further than you, to me if a fighter takes on his #1 contender he can fight pretty much who he wants after that. Like a one-for-me one-for-you thing. Normally the one-for-me would be a money fight but i'm ok whatever. That's if you fight the #1 contender of course." Like, two posts before the post you made. Fight your #1 contender; then fight anyone you like. Then you need another serious one. And if you can get your #1 contender again, you can fight whoever you like again.
I assumed you meant anybody within the top 10. There has to be some standards. Foyld would not be allowed fight Harris and if he tried , he'd be ran out of the sport. Would it have been acceptable for Lewis to defend his title against Michael Dokes after he beat Vitali?