The American Anti-Klitschko campaign.. AS STRONG AS EVER.

Can you please name names and re-phrase that in English so I can respond?

 

...............and Dude, I lived my whole life in America. I know what the average American likes to watch is a tough man competition where a ghetto thug gangsta wannabe fights a midwestern bouncer who's a former bodybuilder or weightlifter ie: Ty Fields and the like.

 

Perfectly put. Easy to slate on Holmes due to his relatively weak era I know, but put the 38 year old version in with WALDO or VITLAY and we'd have a snooze-fest. Put a younger version in there and it'd be a talent contest with both brothers losing badly.

Larry never got KO'd by bums, fact. Weak era yes, just like the Klits but at least he truly dominated unlike these guys.

 

atsch

Of course Lennox was the favorite in all those fights, you completely missed the point.


Adversity was the point. When Lennox was down on the cards or scrambling he showed the true champion in him. He became more aggressive. That was the point.

Holmes was completely shot when he lost to Tyson and even then it wasn't a serious "knocked the **** out" moment for Tyson's resumé.

 

Nope. Larrys era was no better or worse than the current one, difference was as I keep saying, he never got KO'd or quit against bums.


You can posture about the Soviet HW's all you like from back then but you know as well as I do that there weren't any out there that could have beaten Larry, if there were then they'd have defected and taken the dollars.

 

That has nothing to do with this discussion. Stay on topic Skull for ****s sake.

 

It actually was a serious "knocked the **** out" moment on Tysons resume, Holmes is still the biggest name on Tysons CV, considering what Holmes managed to achiever after he got brutally KO'd by Tyson.

We're back to Mercer again, which is where your entire argument just kind of falls over

 

I'm an American and i support the Klitschko brothers. :good

 

Yeah, I've made that point before. It's simply stupid to criticize a guy because of the competition they beat, as long as they fight the best. You can't click your fingers and immediately have 10 Joe Louis', 10 Joe Frazier's, 10 George Foreman's or whatever. A fighter can only beat who is out there.

However, if a fighter is around in a weak era, it's incredibly important that they dominate. Holmes did, Louis did, Marciano did, Tyson did...Wlad hasn't.

 

atsch

Let me guess, you think Wlad has a superior resume than Holmes too?

 

I glanced at the avatar and location. Then moved on.

 

Speaking of Mercer, the supposedly "shot" Holmes that Tyson DEMOLISHED, went on to beat the hell out of a PRIME MERCER.

Remember, an old as HELL Mercer is Wlad's, BEST WIN.

What happened when like Tyson, Vitali fought his aging great? He wo...

Oh, that's right...

He got the **** beat outta him, his eyeball almost popped out, and he was hanging on like a homosexual.

Compared to Tyson's DEMOLITION of Holmes or even Marciano's DEMOLITION of Louis, there is NO COMPARISON.

 

Did or DID NOT, WLAD get the **** BEAT OUTTA him by Sanders?

Answer the QUESTION.

YES OR NO.

 

Joe Frazier + 37 Fights + down 11 times + Black = Great champion.

Waldimir Klitschko + 58 fights + down 11 times + White = Bum.

Can anyone "Spot the Difference???

 

Put their resume's next to each other then ask the same question:hi: