surely janitor would find some stupid reason to favor the cavemen over Wlad; it just takes him more time then usual...that's why he's yet to post anything in this thread
You do not even have the excuse of being amusing ,you are a gnat that buzzes around ,not really noticed until it bites, a minor irritant. A pimply ,callow youth, who has neither knowledge,experience, or the saving grace of curiousity about the subject to make him acceptable. Janitor is one of the premier posters on this forum ,in contrast you are not one of the worst, simply because you cannot really be classified as a poster,you are merely a snotty kid, perpetually trying to attract the attention of his elders.
Boilermaker prety much said everything I would have said. There is a big difference between being favoured over all of sombodys opponents on paper, and beating them in the actual timeline. Jeffries was fighting the best contenders in the division from verry early in his profesional career, and that would spell disaster for most champions in any era.
I concur ,Jeffries was the most precocious of the heavyweight champions and was matched meaningfully at the start of his career.
This is one of those discussions where I have to say that sometimes you need to just appreciate what a certain group of fighters did in their OWN time and leave it at that. There are some head to head matches that simply should not be made and placing Early 20th century challengers in the ring with Wladimir Klitschko is among such comparisons.
You're full of hot air ... you try and make up for poor debating skills with endless regurgitation of surgically tailored, incomplete arguments and then add personal insults as your patience runs out ... your biggest asset is that your posts are so boring it becomes torturous to bother reading ..
I make a thread to run in conjunction with the thread, "who rates higher Jeffries or Wlad"? It seems entirely reasonable to switch their opponents around , to me. Poor debating skills? You do not have poor skills, yours are non existent. Personal insults ? What would your call you attacks on me? I read many of your posts directed at other posters, you have a quick temper and resort to insults readily . I wonder if you would be so ready with them if you were face to face with some of these posters ,in a pub debate say? "Big game hunter ,time of the month, pissed again" These are not even worthy of kindergarten. I respond to Mendoza,and get you.:huh Now you are replacing Mendoza, and actually answering on his behalf .atsch Take a look at yourself, and the company you keep, Mendoza and Cael. For the record the personal attacks from all three of you preceded my responses. If my posts bore you ,don't read them, simple really. ps It's not a good idea to try and bolster you perceived erudition by using words you are not familiar with ,especially if you cannot spell them ,the effect then becomes the reverse of what you intended. TORTUOUS.:good
Anyone who pays attention to your drivel knows your an unemployed old man. You have nothing better to do, which is why you can offer endless replies, often full of errors 24 x 7. Its funny to watch you bark at new posters, only to apologies later. Its funny to watch you change your social stories. You're a sad man, a liar, and a coward. I only reply to you for amusement related purposes.