POLL: Wladimir Klitschko's resume....

Funny,

Of all the names you provided on both of our lists, I counted somewhere around over 120. Yet, after going through the entire thread, only found that about 30 had actually posted their feelings on the issue. The number of posters who commented on one side or the other are pretty close, while a number have posted responses that seem somewhat neutral. I'd say I'm not doing too badly considering your shady and untruthful campaign tactics.

By the way, how do you know exactly who placed a vote, if they did not post a response? How can this be checked?

 

Having an opinion about a fighter's credentials and the willingness to discuss them onjectively is not hating. If you can't debate on chat forums without getting hot under the collar everytime something doesn't go your way, then maybe you should try something else. It's been nearly 24 hours since this whole thing started, and you haven't refuted anything since I critiqued your list of fighters yesterday. The only thing you've done, is created a pole using a heated introduction, calling me a hater, then proceded to start a campaign using biased propaganda " Don't forget to vote ". While the numbers of your precious pole seem to be in your favor, most of the people who took the time to actually discuss the issue ( the main purpose of a chatforum) Seem to agree that Wlad's resume is filled with older fighters, many of whom were washed up. Simply using the cop out explanation that " Most people don't bother posting a response to an obvious issue ", and that anyone who does is a hater or unknowledgable means nothing. Its the same sort of empty rhetoric that you've been using since yesterday, and will likely continue to use.

Hell, given that responses are so low and disproportionate to the number of votes, I'm almost wondering if you've gone around PM'g people secretly asking them to vote. I wouldn't be surprised.

 

It's filled with a lot of plumbers, I don't know about old

 

Just my couple cents on Brewster's eye.

I'm not Lamon or anyone who knows him so I only know what I've read.

From what I've seen Brewster was totally good to go, from the eye perspective.

He's said before and after the fight that the eye was good.

Brewster, himself, states the eye was not a problem, I don't know why we'd second guess him, w/o some sort of contradictory evidence.

On the flip side, Brewster is nearing the end of his boxing rope.

I don't know if I'd call him shot, I think that may be too strong for his condition.

But you take his age, style, inactivity and his recent fights with Wlad, Lyakhovich, Meehan, and Krasniqi then I think its safe to say Brewster was not the same man at all for the rematch.

Eye not a factor, overall physical and mental condition was.

 

Look at some of the responses that your boys gave " Magoo listed their current ages, and not what they were when they fought Wlad " Some of the idiots who took your side, didn't even know what the hell they were talking about.
As for being paranoid, if I were so unsure of myself, then why am I not the one who felt the need to start a pole, crying out for help from others, and in so doing, used opinionated headings and titles to mislead people? I think the insecurity is yours and yours alone.
What's more, some of the people who voted no, also said things like, " well I don't know if he fought shells, but a lot of the guys he fought were old, or not very good." There were quite a few responses that sounded similar to this, implying that while they may not have agreed with the term " shells", they weren't decisively on your side either. Afterall, it wasn't like you gave them many options to chose from.

Using onesided political propaganda isn't debating nor is it analysis. Its cheerleading. I am comfortable with the way I have stated my opinion, and have refuted your arguments quite effectively without having to resort to gaining a blinded view from a cencus.

Your dishonesty, imaturity, and biased opinions on this matter have exposed you as someone who clearly can't hold his own in a debate.

I'll bow out of this thread now...

 

No. You started a political campaign, because you were incapable of creating a convincing argument yourself, so you embarked on a mission to sway other's opinions using misinformation and onesided sensationalism. In the end, your distorted PERCEPTION of victory comes down to shear numbers without truth or substance.

It's a padded record if you will, much like Klitschko's....

 

Correct you are. Brewster fought in the same style as he always has.

Wlad didn't melt down and did what he should have done the first time.

I also think the Wald that won the rematch would have won the first fight as well.

But, we gots to be honest here, Brewster had been through grueling fights right before the rematch.

Take that and his inactivity and I think its safe to say Brewster from the rematch had seen better days.

Again, I don't think it changes anything, Wlad from the rematch was on form and beats any version of Brewster.

But when we look over Wlad's opponents and evaluate their worth we have to take Brewster's conditon into account.

To me,atleast, Brewster was a past it fighter when they fought.