Thanks for the salute. I guess I deserve it, coming from you, a known Tyson hater who agrees with some of the most absurd replies on this thread alone. Guys like Wass, Swag and Combat are the only ones agreeing with you on this thread. Great company to keep! :good
Most knowledgeable fans like who, you? Swag? Wass? Dig up some of the old polls regarding a Tyson-Frazier match and post away. They're littered with "knowledgeable" fans and the average fan alike. Collect the "knowledgeable" fans votes and add them up. Smokin Joe is one of the best in history, he's just not lasting against a man who has the tools to wipe him out within a few rounds. I guess you can call it a styles thing. :hi:
Sangria, your credibility disappears when you say that someone who picks Frazier over Tyson has no knowledge of the sport and is only capable of hating Tyson. Seriously grow up.
Interesting, you seem to discredit people who do not agree with you. Good points have been raised on both sides of the debate. It is all speculation in the end. Fortunately, boxing is not a democracy. So counting votes of those who you deem to be knowledgeable is of no consequence. It's decided in the ring and obviously this is one that we will never get to see.
You're not a bad poster at all. I'm responding and criticizing Unforgiven. People who pick Frazier are fine with me and I've never discredited anyone who disagrees with me. It's the trolls on these boards that stand out like a sore thumb and the posters who agree to their inept posts.
When have I ever said that? Show me the post where I stated whoever picked Frazier over Tyson has no knowledge of the sport.
McBride lasted 7 rounds against a disinterested and old Tyson. A prime Tyson might take him out earlier than he would Frazier. The post by Azzer was stating that Frazier wouldn't last as long as the Tyson-McBride fight, which lasted 7 rounds. Comprendes?
You're stock replies to me are boring. Same old thing. Interesting that you can't address what you hate about my posts directly without finding me "guilty by association" with guys you say are TROLLS. If what I say is so bad, you shouldn't need to do that. It's poor argumentation. Probably best to ignore my posts. You never make much sense when you respond.
Well I've been around this forum for a while and I've taken long breaks from posting here as well. This place will drive you nuts if you stick around without taking a break. I don't see how people can do this day in and day out.
Talk about self righteousness :roll:. I make you yawn with my boring, same old story? You make me wanna take a bowel movement after seeing your sad replies to EVERY Tyson thread. I've always addressed your posts directly, so the one time I don't do it you cry and try to spin things in your favor. Thanks for the 'argumentation' lesson. :dead
Yeah, he does. Apart from some hilarious banter on both sides and the usual stupid troll posts from a few posters here, this thread was fun and informative on all sides, and a good debate in this thread. Sangria seems to get a little upset whenever someone makes arguments that don't fit into his ideas about Tyson's absolute greatness. Pretending to be against "trolls" and "haters" what he really dislikes are good arguments that place Tyson a few notches below the true HW ATGs. So he smears them all with the "troll" and "hater" label. It's easy to do. Cheap smear tactics.
It looks like you do take a bowel movement. Your posts are utter sh!t. You're in EVERY Tyson thread stalking me, that's the sad thing. Yeah, okay, like that's the first time you've trotted out the old "only TROLLS agree with you, Unforgiven" bullsh!t. You repeated that same old cra*p before, and we've been over it before. Like I advised before, probably best to ignore me. :good
