POLL: Wladimir Klitschko's resume....

I don't consider myself a hater. Simply critiquing a fighter's career should not be labeled as hating. Calling someone a hater, because they disagree with a certain view, is only a vein attempt at trying to discredit the otherside, suggesting a personal agenda driven by bias. I'm not the one who felt it necessary to start a whole poll, based on only part of a conversation. I think its quite clear that I have no agenda.

 

Agreed, yesterday's session was a real classic.

 

I took the time to highlight the names of those posters, such as yourself, who seem to turn up in every thread regarding either Klitschko, even though they obviously aren't fans of either brother.

 

I really have only posted in two Klit threads as of late. Yesterday, I partook on the thread regarding Vitali, and my main argument was against some ( including Widow ), who tried to justify Vitali's loss against Lewis, some of whom even tried to claim that Lewis wasn't past his prime. That wasn't what I call hating either.

In one of my posts, I listed a rather extensive list of names of prime fighters, who Lewis beat. I also acknowledeged that he defeated some past prime fightes like Holyfield and Tyson, but that his legacy didn't ride on it. I finished by saying, that both Wlad and Vitali feasted off the shells of old fighters, but did not specifically state that their whole resume or legacy was built on it either, nor did I use the term ( feasting ), but rather ( feasted ). Some of what Widow claimed I said was true, but only a small protion of it, and it was part of a whole different argument of which, he never disclosed in the cover page of this thread. He only cited a single quote that was then played out of context, and followed up with " Mr. Magoo a resident hater, ".

I am not a hater, and nor am I using selective methods to back my argument. This whole thread is constructed of biased propaganda, combined with incomplete and misleading information.

If you disagree with me fine. If you don't like my perspectives, then fine. But, don't accuse me of being a hater, or a biased untruthful poster, just because Widow says so. He's been very dishonest and misleading from the very begining, and feels the need to resort to such tactics because he was on the short end of an argument yesterday.

 

If your idea of reality is telling lies, then I guess we are at differences with what defines truth.

Let's discuss another issue here, and this time I expect to hear a real response and not empty wise cracks.

Did you or did you not misquote me in the title page of this thread? And what exactly was your basis for calling me " a resident hater " ?

 

I didn't realize you could see the results without voting, I never noticed that before. I don't really care whether you believe that or not.

Like I said, it was clear from the posts that the poll was a landslide so I knew no matter what I did wouldn't change the results. Surely my post counts for more than one vote amongst over 100 others?

Meh, whatever.

I don't dislike Wlad. Not even a little bit. He's great. He's the only thing giving the HW division any credibility at the moment.

I never said he "is building his legacy by feasting off the shells of old fighters". I said he had padded his record with a few in the past (as do most fighters), and overall his resume is very good.

Jeez, you fanatics are so touchy! :yep

 

I'm actually a huge WK fan. I just voted this way to **** off Widow and other posters who are just way over the top..

Put it this way, I'm way more of a WK fan than I'm a fan of his supports, who come across as a bunch of kids, quite frankly, which is perfectly illustrated by your post.

 

You very well could be right, but I think I am in this case.

Yeah, I'm making an assumption about Brewster being on the slide in the rematch.

But I think with his age, style, and tough fights right before the rematch that Brewster has lost something.

I still think the win deserves credit,maybe just not as much as you do.

If Brewster resumes his career we very well could get a definitive answer.

Hell if Brewster picks up and makes another impressive run like he did post Wlad than you were right.

If he gets smoked against some second tier fighter his first fight back than I was right.

Maybe we'll pick this back up if ole Lamon fights again.

 

----

"Wlad has built his resume by beating old men"


In today's heavyweight division, I would classify "old men" as boxers above 34 years old, unless they are exceptional cases that were past their prime at young ages (ie. Mike Tyson, Wilfredo Benitez, Fernando Vargas).


Wlad Klitschko's legassy is built by the following wins:

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

This content is protected

*Green = Boxers below 34 years old. "Not old".

*Red = Boxers above 34 years old. "Old".


(Lamon Brewster had been inactive, so you could argue that he was past his best. Chris Byrd had been IBF Champ for a long time and was also The Ring's #1 Heavyweight. You could argue that he was still in or near his prime. They cancel each other.)




How many of Wlad's best wins are against "old fighters"?

This content is protected

So, clearly, the phrase "Wlad has built his legassy by beating old men" is incorrect. Any reasonable person who has some logic can understand it.