So who is Fury going to fight?

but that's not what I asked you. I asked you if you accept that Vitali Klitschko is a cheat. OK, try this:

Do you agree that Vitali Klitschko is a cheat at sport? Not professional boxing - a sports cheat?

What on earth are you talking about now?? I haven't written any "articles" about Vitali Klitschko cheating?

Mendoza, you're an idiot, and everyone who interacts with you pretty much thinks you're an idiot. What you've written above - it doesn't even make sense? "I'm too well researched for 1 up me" is not a sentence...it's like something a child would write, or someone with learning difficulties.

 

2-3 by Ring, 3-4 by TBRB. Looking into it would require me to perform research, which i'm just not going to do at your behest. You've said two by ring I think? For the second time, I will agree with you that it is 2. You win. It's 2. OK?

Yeah, you still haven't answered the question as whether or not he's a steroids cheat in sports it's like you can't actually bring yourself to say it, I find it fascinating. From now on, I will just refer to him as "confirmed steroids cheat Vitali Klitschko."

Yeah, this is total fantasy Mendoza. I don't get sensitive. I've told you before but you I don't care how many fights he has had against black men in title defences. It doesn't interest me, even a little bit. Not at all, entirely disinterested.

I didn't say this. I'd pay you the compliment of naming you a liar but I really think you just get confused. What I said was that it was "reasonable to ask" why Ray didn't receive a title shot. And it is - which is what i've said from the beginning.

Why on earth are you talking about Joe Louis in your own thread about Tyson Fury??

Unfortunately for you, the opposite is true. The likes I receive for posts I make pillorying you are the easiest likes on the forum - I mean that, i'm always getting likes for posts that blade you. Now, I couldn't really care less about the whole "like" thing, but people generally seem to really enjoy me knocking you about.

It will never be the end Mendoza. It will never be the end because you're an adult male who posts in a wildly biased fashion about both the fighters you like and the fighters you don't like. You literally can't help it.

 

This content is protected

And this is the problem. You will move heaven and earth to protect your favourites. The story of Vitali and Fury are basically no different, except Fury - according to him - inadvertently took in drugs from food while he was a pro. Vitali "made a mistake" with medication as an amateur. For some reason you want to pretend that, morally, these two are different. You also want to accept Vital's excuse but not Fury's. It's the worst type of bias.

This content is protected

I'll say it to you again but I have little hope that it will go in.

The article says it's fair to ask why Ray didn't receive a title shot. I am saying here it is fair to ask why Ray didn't receive a title shot. I've always said it is fair to ask why Ray didn't receive a title shot. I've been entirely consistent and you've shown, literally, nothing.

Like always.

This content is protected

 

Yeah, Fury's story is he imbibed it by meat, Vitali's story is he imbibed it by way of his doctor. Your decision about who is lying and who is telling the truth is based entirely upon your personal bias.

But it doesn't matter - because if Vitali cheated as a pro you would accept his story and if Fury had cheated as an amateur you would not accept his. The issue is not who cheated and who didn't, it's your near total bias; it is your complete inability to see beyond the end of your own biased thinking.

Of course you believe Vitali's story. Seeing it any other way is impossible for you. Of course you don't believe Fury. You are bound by your inherent biases, like a child, or learning disabled.

It's not a matter of convenience. Your answers are non-sequential. It's reasonable to ask why Ray did not receive a title shot. This is my position, has been my position, and is consistently my position, not just for Joe Louis (who met more number one contenders than any heavyweight in history outside Ali) but for every fighter.

This was explained to you, in detail, last week. Your inability to retain information is incredible.

Here is is again: Joe Louis fought a single exhibition between March 1943 and September of 1946. He was inactive for the period that Bivins was rated duration champion; Bivins was beaten twice the year of Joe's next defence. Surely, even you can understand why Joe Louis wasn't fighting top contenders during World War 2? Surely even you can absorb this information.

Now, going forwards, I will ignore your mention of Bivins, who was not the number one contender during any Joe Louis defence unless you count the enforced exhibition.

Yeah, your point is understood. What i'm saying is it doesn't matter even a little bit.

Yeah, you will. You actually will laugh when the reigning heavyweight champion of the world announces his weak opponent between fights with the number one contender. You will laugh at that, like some sort of moose idiot. Meanwhile, you will continue defending Vitali runs like Ross Purity, Vaughn Bean, Larry Donald with a straight face. It's incredible, really.

you are literally as bad as McVey.