Is Wlad the best all-time-heavyweight? NO OPINION, just PURE RECORD ANALYSIS

This a completely made up example that never happened in any record known in heavyweight boxing. It's a completely THEORETICAL ACADEMIC objection that has no relevance to my calculations.

EVEN IF something like this happened this will be taken care of (as I wrote in my description of what my calculation software will do).

1) The stats are not twisted, but consist of 3 simple rules.
2) "no intelligence" is an insult you must use to feel better obviously, since you have no hard arguments
3) "laughable claim" is an insult AND wrong since I didn't claim anything in my first post
4) "most pathetic and contrived spin-jobs" is again an attempt to ridicule my calculations by insults.

You complain about "laughable claims without intelligence" and the best counter-proof you deliver is an example of a boxer

• fighting the same opponent 50 times
• WINNING 45 times
• and LOSING 15 times

So much for pathetic math.

 

Do they pay you for swearing? Is swearing a proof of something where you come from? Doesn't convince me. The opposite is true: Basically all of Ali's opponents crumble under light.

And let me restate again: Ali's opponents are EVEN WORSE than what I wrote so far. Because so far I mercifully converted their cruiser records to heavyweight records. So expect a further downgrade (= an upgrade of nowadays fighters).

 

In all these fights Dempsey has not been a heavyweight but was below-200.

BUT EVEN IF we count all these fights (by assuming that Dempsey was 200+ and that none of his opponents was bummish) then Dempsey cannot make it to the toplist because he fought just 6 times. Nobody can be in a heavyweight toplist without at least 10 heavyweight fights. I mean, COME ON: T-E-N, fights against 200+ opponents. Is that too much to ask?

COMPARE DEMPSEY WITH CRUISERWEIGHTS not with heavyweights. Who cares how his fights were called once? Oh, the nostalgic old-time-fans care. I see.

 

It counts for something BUT IS NOT ENOUGH.

Ron Lyle is nothing special. So a win against Ron Lyle doesn't mean too much. Against Muhammad HE LOST. Get over it.
Foreman obviously had problems with Young's style and lost. SO WHAT? Do you want me to make Ross Puritty a non-bum because he beat Wladimir Klitschko? That's just 1 fight.

Moreover I already stated in many posts, that deleting so called "bums" is a flaw in my calculation BUT BASED ON THE REALITY, that I have to count the stuff by hand so far. I will not delete any fighter off the record once my software is finished. Instead you will be credited LESS for a win against bummish fighter.

BUT you are wrong: JIMMY YOUNG DID NOT BEAT HIS OPPONENTS in a convincing fashion. His non-bum 200+ record is 10-8.

Good one!