The most unbeatable fighter ever..............

He beat ted kid lewis, prove it.
Lewis won the newspaper decision. (Washington Post & Calgary Herald (wire))
Papers as Bridgeport Telegram and Middletown Times Press reported a close win for Leonard
New York Times called it a draw

Seems like everyone was split as to who won, yet you make it seem like Leonard won? You never saw the fight.

 

My fave 135er is Duran, Duran from the third Esteban fight should have a shout for this thread. But i do feel Whitaker at 135 in general is one of the best picks for the weight. Although im taking that Duran over him in a classic.

Stylistically, Williams might be a good pick against Whitaker, i dont know for sure, so hard to analyse a Pea fight because he did look realy great most of the time. However, Williams was a patient fighter, he wont be chasing Pea like a fool, he will be waiting in mid-ring and circling patiently just prodding out the jab, which is an accurate 1, and not showing too many openings for Pea to exploit. Then he could explode and burst into combos and get in hooks and uppercuts when he has Pea thinking.

This could also go the way of Pea just simply using movement and sidestepping, using head-movement in the pocket and outworking Ike.

I do tend to think that if Pea stays in the pocket this will be very difficult forhim though

 

I said he would beat both, when did i talk about resumes, god you're an idiot.

 

I said that?

This is what I laughed at.

Ricardo Lopez was a better textbook boxer than Oscar De La Hoya. I had Ike Quartey outboxing him as well. He was not the best. Guys like Winky, Norris, etc were right on his level in that regard as well.

False.

I don't take your head to head contributions with the same weight as I do your historical knowledge. You've proven with your rating of a guy like Pavlik that you miss some things in a fighter's arsenal and potential.

 

And you did?

 

I showed three different sources that had split opinions, how old are you by the way, you seriously talk like a 12 year old.

 

OK, so is that why you rank him above both? And why does he rate above them despite having a lesser resume? Why does the same not apply of clearly lesser fighters in head to head terms like Canzoneri?

 

clearly lesser based on? what your opinion.

 

You can't even type properly aside from on certain occasions, so please don't hit me with that nonsense. You're now trying to turn this into a personal debate because you have nothing to back up your case of ranking Whitaker higher than Duran/Leonard, but ranking guys like Canzoneri above him. That makes no sense whatsoever, and you know it. The fact that you try to twist **** around constantly doesn't help your case.

 

I do rank Canzoneri higher at lightweight, his lightweight resume blows whitaker's out of the water.

 

And once again, he refuses to answer the argument. Are you honestly making a case that Canzoneri was better in a head to head sense than Duran?

Just answer the goddamn question. You're trying to get one over on me yet you continue to procrastinate because you know understand what you've gotten yourself into with your ill-advised statements.

 

Yeah I do, Duran lost to the only half-decent fighter he faced at lightweight, esteban de jesus. Just cuz Duran beat the b level and c level fighters, I am supposed to say hes a better lightweight than the guy that fought stronger opposition?

 

That didn't answer my question at all!

I said why do you rate Canzoneri higher than Whitaker but not guys like Duran and Leonard? Both had better resumes(regardless of you thinking Leonard's resume was overrated, it was still better than Pea's by a long shot) and both were more dominant LW's than Canzoneri. Duran was clearly better head to head as well.

So, answer this question: Why do you rate Canzoneri above Whitaker but not guys like Duran and Leonard?

 

Boxing isnt a+b=c ok, just because you have one fighter beating another, it doesnt mean he automatically beats the other guy. There isnt some chronological order as to who is superior to everyone else.

 

Thank you. This debate ends here.

I'd just like everyone to take a look at these statements and see why I've chosen to call it off. If you can't prove your point, just say something ******ed to act like you actually believe what you say. That seems to be brownchump's point of view. Don't take into account Canzoneri's losses at LW to McLarnin, Ambers, CHUCK WOODS, HARRY DUBLINSKY, WESLEY RAMEY, JOHNNY JADICK, etc., but talk down Duran's lone loss to Dejesus which he avenged twice by stoppage. Makes sense.

It would've been better for you just to concede.