Name lineal title opponents in ANY weight division worse than Alex Leapai

Ketchell may have been ranked at one time but when Burman beat him he was losing 2-3 fights for every one he won. A prior ranking doesn't mean much when you've slipped into that kind of streak. Same for someone like Risko.


I don't see how Burman beating up former contenders who were at the end of their carees and losing as often if not more than they were winning is somehow credible but Leapai beating a handful of fringe contenders doesn't matter. Again, I don't see much difference here and they are fighters at a similar level.

With Lewis, I'm not sure of the degree of his sight but go on and put him ahead of Leapai that still leaves a number of guys Louis defended his title against that were similar or below Leapai.

As for Ray, sure he went on to have a good career but Lewis beat him when he had about a dozen fights under his belt and lost over half of them. That wasn't the same Ray that would beat Charles and Walcott.

 

I mentioned that Louis fought a bunch of guys who didn't even weigh 200 f-cking pounds. He was fighting cruiserweights half the time FFS.

 

What does that say about boystov?

 

Weight is a major factor. That's why there are weight divisions. If weight doesn't matter, why doesn't Floyd fight some heavyweights?

 

Indeed, Conn weighed 167 lbs. Louis 204 lbs. for their 1941 fight
That would be light heavy not even cruiserweight.

 

No, it was impossible to be a cruiserweight when the division didn't exist. This is stupid logic on your part.

 

Ah yes, Louis fought Abe Simon twice. This is a guy who lost to guys with a 16 and 12 and a 18-11 record.

 

He fought guys who weighed less than 200 pounds. He fought guys who weighed less than 190 pounds.

 

I'm not punishing Wlad at all for how he looked. He did exactly what was expected of him...albeit a bit more slowly than perhaps was absolutely necessary. But I can certainly say that in terms of the eye test, Leapai performed below the standard set by many of the other fighters listed...if he was marginally more deserving than a couple of fighters that you listed.

Yeah, every long reigning champion has least one soft touch. But rarely has a soft touch underwhelmed to the extent that Leapai has, Rock. Most of the other guys listed appeared to know what they were doing once they stepped inside the ring...even when they were over matched and getting their heads handed to them. Leapai never gave that appearance, which is why this defence has received such criticism.

 

Do you really want to get into weight differentials? Bottom line line is Louis crushed guy both big and small, and he did it far more times against opponents who were legitimate top 10 contenders, not just appointed by some corrupt and phoney org the supplies a meaningless and paper title.

 

Yeah, I do.

He crushed a few guys who weighed more than Wlad and many who were less than 200 pounds.

Top ten contenders who didn't even weigh 200 pounds and already had ten or more losses. :rofl

They were f-cking BUMS that even Leapai would beat the sh!t out of.

 

Ketchell wasn't just losing a lot more than winning he was losing to guys who were journeymen to boot. The 1930's versions of Jason Gavern and Nicolai Firtha.

He had success against Jersey Joe but that was a green, and young Walcott, one who was still working other jobs besides boxing. That version of Walcott was far removed from the heavyweight champion version.

I don't have see a problem with Louis fighting Burman or some of the other lesser guys he fought. A lot of them were ranked and Louis fought often.

Being ranked doesn't automatically make you better than someone not ranked from a different era. Burman may have been ranked and Leapai not but that doesn't mean they can't be comparable and I don't see much to say they weren't

 

Burman was a light-heavy-probably 180 lbs. Leapai probably crushes him