Selective resume bashing

When your best wins are over Chris "Middleweight" Bryd and Sam Peter, then you certainly have alot more work to do before proclaiming yourself a Heavyweight great.

 

Sure do. :thumbsup

 

who was talking about HW great? They said overrated. Wlad is NOT overrated

 

Some do overrate him on ESB, as far as the media and boxing historians, they probably underrate him.

 

Vitali has a great "virtual reality" resume.

 

How infantile. Any boxing fan who makes an objective criticism about the resumes of Mayweather (very good resume IMO, but not 'great') and Calzaghe (weak resume rescued by 2 or 3 excellent wins) is automatically a "hater". Uppercut, don't you have any criticisms of any great fighters? Does looking at boxing critically mean you are a hater??

 

People pick apart any resume they can Jones,Oscar,Calzaghe,Hopkins but you can do it with anyone. Ill take Ray Leonards right now and dont get me wrong I see the world of Ray and hes a great great fighter with a wonderful resume but it can be picked apart like anyones.

Thomas Hearns 1 - Hearns was weight drained,bad stoppage
Thomas Hearns 2 - Hearns was screwed
Marvin Hagler - Hagler was robbed
Roberto Duran 2 - Duran had cramps
Roberto Duran 3 - Duran was shot
Dave Green - Never defeated any big names
Ayub Kalule - Untested
Donny Lalonde - Paper Champion
Wilfred Bentiez - His lone good win

I believe everything I said aside from the Hearns rematch is bull**** but thats just what some people do and its able to be done with any resume. Ali never won clear over Norton,Moore and Patterson where shot,Fraizer was done after Foreman,Foreman wasnt underprepared ETC.

 

For Wilfred Benitez, you could say that he was undertrained for Leonard.

He trained for one week instead of his usual two weeks.

 

It's simple really.....those who are "ON TOP" are under the microscope. With the two top guys..Joe and Floyd, they actaully are supremely talented but in much of their careers, they've jumped over or skipped past some very hard challenges which will always be in question. Actually Floyd has a solid resume although given his talent, age and style he should have a resume that rivals DLH or SSM. JOe just has a shitty resume. What else can you say....he's undefeated.:roll:

 

He was also dating Ray's sister from what I understand. Just throwing it out there.

Kalule was not untested though(or rather, he proved himself afterwards as well).

 

Oh yeah, I forgot about that.

Ray pimped out his sister to "weaken the legs" of an opponent.

 

We could bash the resumes of every important fighter.
Than it's even and nobody needs to talk about it any further.
Nobody would take it serious anymore

 

:yep :yep :yep :happy :happy :happy

 

The problem with Joe and Floyd, whome both are some of the best talents of the last 20 years, is the "what could have been" crowd. People like to focus on who they didn't fight, and most ignore the fact that boxing politics, timing, weight, and money all had a lot to do with who in fact they did fight.

Both could have fought quite a few more career defining fights, but it didn't happen.. oh well.. I can enjoy them for what they did give us.

Vitali on the other hand, his resume isn't great, and it'd be hard to argue that it was any thing better than just "good".. the problem with Vitali is that he DID show a lot of promise, and the injuries hurt what could have been a great career. He was peaking at the time of the injury leading up to Rahman, and I have no doubts that he would have sparked the then-ULTRA-hyped up chump Rahman, and that would have led to bigger fights.

All 3 of those guys take more **** on this site than ANYONE barring probably Amir Khan, Audley Harrison, and Wlad. I'd say those 6 names take the most ****.

Sad thing is, other than Audley, all of them are pretty darn good fighters.