The Myth that to be a Great Fighter you have to beat a Great Fighter...

The thing is, you can keep going back and back and back.

What great fighters did Julio Cesar Chavez beat? Meldrick Taylor and Edwin Rosario? Well who did Taylor and Rosario beat to be great? Buddy McGirt, Livingstone Bramble, and Jose Luis Ramirez? Whom did McGirt, Bramble, and Ramirez beat that were great? And so on and so on.

And no one with half a brain would question Chavez's greatness.

 

You can only fight the ones available to you.

Tyson did that.

 

I think that is his point.

 

I always wondered why Ali was considered the greatest .Must have been the way he just cherry picked opponents ..

 

Yep.

And I agree with it. You can't necessarily go down as the greatest by beating the ones in your era, that part draws down to luck of competition aswell.

 

Ali fought against the best fighters (Frazier, Foreman, Norton, Liston, Bugner) What is all this cherry picking BS, Ali fought them all.

Prime Ali has 2 losses which he avenged, the other 3 losses were when he was completely shot.

 

Typical Wladimir K fanyboy apologist thread.

You only had to look at Tyson in the late 80s to know that he was something special. Exceptional skills and defenisve mastery that have not been replicated since. He was an incredible boxer and anybody who says different doesn't know what they are talking about.

Wlad is a limited one dimensional boxer with a very simplistc formula. He contuniue's his winning streak because his opponents are walking meatsacks who are happy to walk onto his right hands. Any fighter with speed and aggression will take him out everytime.

 

This definitely applies to K2

 

I know you must be kidding.

 

The thing about Klitschko bros is,this is a very weak division and so they make sure to fight the weakest and the least deserving (Mormeck,Wach,Sosnowski,Charr)

 

I was being sarcastic

 

They do their mandatories and guys like Charr are the only ones who want to fight the k2 brothers.

Also Holmes never unified and even dropped a belt to not face a fighte.

 

Look at Holmes' record post Tyson ... and Spinks just beat Holmes twice in a row and stopped Gerry Cooney. Holmes was more in shape and a better opponent than Lewis when he ripped half of Vitalis face off.

Tyson gets **** for not fighting "great fighters" when he beat guys that Lewis who has an "excellent" resume fought later on, and Mike beat them at their best. Even after prison he fought guys like Golota, Botha, Bruno, Holyfield etc.

Tyson consistently annihilated guys from the top 10 and was the first to unify all of the belts and capture the lineal title. You can't do that if you don't fight the best you ***gots ... Tony Tucker would be the undisputed heavyweight champion in this era but could only become a belt holder in the Tyson era ... Tyson fighting Ruddock should dispel any myth about him not fighting the best ...

He would shatter Wlad's glass jaw with a titanic left hook sending him airborne and out of the ring convulsing on the floor like a ****** in a grand mal seizure with Vitali watching in horror.

 

Wlad his done his part and beaten most of the contenders/belt-holders and other top HWs around.

Vitali has not.