Well Vitali seemingly found every excuse not to fight Rahman and like I said he could have taken that fight instead of the **** he took with McCline McClein or who ever the **** that bum is, Vitali vs Rahman would have made much more money anyways, and if you think not your an idiot.
People seem to forget that Rahman "earned" his title shot against Vitali by fighting a bunch of low-level tomato cans, and I believe he almost LOST to an ancient Al Cole! It was a joke he was getting a title shot against Vitali, and he would have been KTFO early - far earlier than Danny Williams, btw. :nod At least Danny Williams - and McCline - have chins. Rahman is, and always has been, a glass-jawed JOKE. Vitali would have annihilated him then, and he would today.
Go back to your VB77 confrontation, he's the only one who you have any hope of winning an arguement. I think Bazooka trolls more than Sweet Pea Zelelnoff
Rahman might have a glass chin true, hell he might even be a joke in the sport but he has accomplished more in the sport than Vitali Williams and McCline all combined, and one thing about this joke he has never quit a fight NEVER. True champions never quit.
From your own words yourself son!!! so what the **** are you doing talking **** since you yourself said you dont know squat about analyzing and picking out comes of fights. this is boxing you cant just predict em all correct, you can voice your opinion but that isnt always the truth sometimes.
Rahman has accomplished more in the sport than Vitali, Williams and McCline combined??? You've gotta be joking. The ONE thing he did worth mentioning was to knock out Lewis, who was exactly ironed-chinned himself, and who then disposed of the china-chinned Rahman quickly like he should have the first time. That's it. Otherwise he's basically lost against any decent fighter he's ever faced - and some not so decent - often getting knocked into "bolivian." Hardly much to crow about.
he is a two time Heavyweight Champion Vitali isnt, McCline isnt Williams isnt. so yes when you combine the three you still dont get that out come.
:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl:rofl You can't be serious! You're counting Rahman as a "two-time champion" because he was GIVEN a belt he didn't fight for in the ring when Vitali retired. Those fractional belts are about as legitimate as something you'd get out of a Crakker Jack box! Quit grasping at straws.
Well by that criteria, Rahman could be more accomplished than Langford, Shavers, Burley, and Willis put together. But Rahman was/is more accomplished than Vitali. Sure Vitali probably would have been a favorite over Rahman and probably would have beaten him. But that's speculation, and Rahman achieved more. At least when he had an underprepared Lewis in front of him, he WON the fight.
he fought for it, he beat Monte Barrett for it, let me put it to you this way, Had you fought in a WBC ordered box off for a vacant title, and won would you consider yourself not a champion? I didnt think so, So why should Rahman not consider that a title, its not his fault Vitali retired, Rahman won that belt by following the rules of the WBC no different than the way Lennox Lewis won his second title, and the first title Lewis got was straight out of the trash can, isnt he to recogonized as a three time Heavyweight champion?