i am not arguing otherwise, all those names you mentioned, nothing stands out besides some nobodies who beat aj when he was a kid. which one of those names do you think will be recognized in 10 years? you ask why im arguing as if im being unreasonable with my argument, you may not agree with it, but it is not an unreasonable view to have. you having the opinion you have is perfectly reasonable, questioning why i would see it different, is not. there are legitimate reasons for me to see it the way i do.
You've already stated that you're unfamiliar with many of the fighters at CW, so to a degree your argument is an unbalanced one. Is that fair enough to say? As for who will be recognised in ten years, I have no idea. No one does. That doesn't invalidate them as wins though.
How many HOFers are on Wlad's resume? Resumes aren't rated on how many HOFers you've beaten; that's a lazy and inaccurate measure of quality that doesn't take take into account a number of more important factors like current relevance, run of form etc. The HOF is also, to a large degree, a popularity contest and not an unbiased gauge of boxing quality. Is Gatti truly a HOF fighter for instance? No, is the correct answer to that. As for long running champions, does Huck count?
Just to turn the tables a moment, you state that Kovalev is a known quantity, but who has he beaten that stood out of the crowd? Cleverly looked promising but was still untested at the time, Sillak had decent skills but couldn't take a punch, Campillo was a handy journeyman type but hardly set the world on fire, Hopkins was ancient, Pascal was decent but crude, and Chilemba was a tricky spoiler. Who among them is going to be remembered in ten years barring Hopkins?
What has Wlad got to do with this unless you are implementing that he like Uysk should be considered his weight divisions greatest fighter?
Implementing? Do you mean implying? I'm saying that greatness in a weight division doesn't rely on how many HOFers you've beaten.
ok, lets put briedis on the p4p lists also. and that would make him what, #2 all time cruiser? after all, usyk barely slid by him... i think i want to rest my case at this point.
Yeah, was too lazy to check the auto check spelling. Anyway I agree that HOFers shouldn't be the be all and end all of deciding someone's historical status in a division but it's shouldn't be simply dismissed out of hand as being a totally inaccurate and lazy method of helping to come to making that decision, either. It all helps.
or, grown men could honestly analyse the data free of any personal bias, applying equal standards across the whole board. if this cw division is so talent rich, we should see a future migration to hw, where the checks are large and the competition weak. that would be the logical future for that narrative. if the division is average, none will have real success at hw. you suggested i look at the division to understand, i believe i saw enough of the king to gauge the level of his 3 closest contenders. again, he is skilled, but i dont think he belongs in a top 5 p4p. time could prove me wrong, and i will readily admit i was wrong.
I agree, although it should be noted that the amount of money being invested in CW has begun to significantly increase of late. Usyk's earned at least $10-million for winning the tournament alone, and bagged around $4- or $5-million for the Bellew fight. That's not a bad incentive to stay at Cruiser compared to earning, what, $350K as a Wilder opponent? You claimed earlier that you've only seen one of Usyk's fights, so no, I don't think you've seen enough of him to form an educated opinion. Invest the time to watch him. It won't be wasted.
Well,maybe not to some true fight fans, but Usxk is far better known globally than someone like Wilder who is totally unknown outside the states