Joe Louis vs. Vitali Klitschko

Presumably Walcott would have been DQd had he not adopted a more agresive stance (unless the reff was bluffing).

If you want an example of a fight from that era where the fight was stopped because the fighters were not fighting hard enough, and their purses given to charity, then you will find many.

 

It is possibly his job to entertain ,would you not agree?
How many Klitschko fights have you found entertaining?

 

Are you on drugs? I think so. What does "PRESUMABLY" mean for your TRY of argument? There is NO argument anymore in that case. Period.

 

I do not have clue where you are with this BRUVA

 

If you cannot understand my point then forgett it.

Vitally undoubtedly wishes that he fought in an era where he could be threatened with DQ for not forcing the fight agresivley enough.

 

I was a little excited the first time Sam Peter knocked down Little Klit.

 

Why is this thread still going ? Klit lovers will say Vitali, and all the sane people will say Louis.

 

I really respect and value your input on this forum, but you are embarrassing yourself.

 

There simply is no point to understand.:conf



It's like asking if the pope is catholic.

 

And insane Louis nuthuggers would claim Vit would lose due to non-action.:nut

 

Or Willie Pep vs Jackie Graves. :finger

 

After living through that period and and following boxing closely, I understood janitor's point perfectly! You evidently did not live during that time and did not understand. That's okay. :good