What does Anthony Joshua need to do to be named greatest heavyweight of all time?

You openly said that you reported me you ****ing moron. Does your idiocy know any boundaries?

Young is far more skilled than Jennings. But even if you think that he isn't, that's an opinion, not a fact. I already broke it down, meanwhile all you have is trolling and repeating the same **** over and over again like the ****** you are.

Show me where I said in this thread that Joshua is overrated you lying spastic. I've been saying for a while that he was the next big thing, well before he beat Wlad. You imbecile were the one who brough up Young. Yeah, Wlad is better than him, whatever the hell that's supposed to show here.

A moron like you needs to learn the diffrence between your/you're and between an opinion and a fact before talking about intelligence levels.

 

No moron i said it would against your best interest to stop editing my post which you did. And i will warn you again dont do it.

Again on boxing your argument that young is better than Jennings is weak and we know this bc we know guys like wlad or ortiz among others wouldnt have an issue with young. Go ahead i DARE you to make that match thread in the main section with far realistic posters than the history section???? LMAO

you stated Joshua is not an ATG bc he has not yet defeatted the likes of a young ? ..Etc....you cant even decipher ones skills in the effect you NEED proof Joshua has defeatted the youngs ...its in your posts...

I mentioned young to your Wlad vs Jennings fight ,you discredited Wlad win over him you simpleton..you were to stupid to avoid it so you compared Young to Jennings...which again only a fool would. Clearly Jennings is stronger and the better athlete and skilled fighter.

 

Yes moron you did say that you reported me you lying spastic. And **** your warning.

%90 of the main section have never seen Young fight, It'd hold no water here. That thread belongs in the cassic section where most posters have seen both fighters fight.

Show me where I said "Joshua isn't an ATG because he hasn't defeated the likes of Young" you lying scumbag. Don't you have an ounce of dignity to lie your ass off like that? Of course you don't. You're a piece of **** who'd resort to troling and lying once he got owned.

 

'%90 of the main section have never seen Young fight, It'd hold no water here. " Man you are dumb as rocks...lol


you insinuated in the entire thread that joshua is not all that bc he hasnt defeatted young..you idiot....so you really want me to quote YOUR OWN words? lol You are the one arguing hes not arent you...simpleton? lol

"You do realize a 39 year old Wlad couldn't walk through a 6'3, 225 lbs, featherfisted, inexpreienced Jennings, right? What's next, you're gonna tell us that Jennings would beat anyone from 70s also?'

that was your first post or so i think?who cares ...READ it you simpleton! lmao

ANYONE ..lol...Jennings is better than young who was atop 5 HW at least in the 70's....you wouldnt know this...you live in Bizarro world.

 

I specifically said that Joshua can reach ATG status in this very thread you ****ing moron, never said "he's not all that". You brought up Young first. You're truly a lying, idiotic scumbag.

 

"You do realize a 39 year old Wlad couldn't walk through a 6'3, 225 lbs, featherfisted, inexpreienced Jennings, right? What's next, you're gonna tell us that Jennings would beat anyone from 70s also?'..

^^^^^^^^^^^
you conviently forgot this one. above YOU posted that and thats what you were arguing as your first post simpleton.Did you get that joshuas win over Wlad superseeds many if not all ATG fighters yet? .lmao

you did nothing but mock the thread but dont worry im here to educate you!

'When you're forced to name a 41 year old man who hasn't won a fight in 2.5 years, a 400 lbs crackhead, a 37 year old part time boxer who hasn't beaten a top 50 opponent in over 5 years and 2 of the weakest and most flawed titlists the division has ever seen to make a case for the division being strong, It means the era is far, far, far, far, far, far, far from being the strongest ever.'

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Another winner YOU posted...lmao

 

And what part of it did I mention Young you ****ing moron? You were the one that brought him up first. Your boyfriend claimed that 41 year old Wlad would easily walk through the smaller HWs from 70s, I stated that he wouldn't because a younger and active version of him couldn't walk through a smaller HW in Jennings. I can't believe you were moronic enough for me to be forced to explain it to you.

 

Do you ever get tired of making yourself look like a complete and utter buffoon? SMH.

 

you were telling me how better young was too jennings ,dont run away now please enlighten all us? It doesnt matter who thinks what the fact you talk like a 15 yr old tells us all doesnt it? Yes wlad at 41 would be a nightmare in the 70's for obvious reasons.

Again watch the fights and read what actually goes on during them ..i already gave the forum that info on Wlad vs Jennings your just to stupid to comprehend that...

still waiting on the reason why Usyk is top 5 Hw though thats intersesting isnt it ? lol

 

Well your a top hidden idiot on here that hides through thinking he knows about combat sport...WE both know this right? i always like when you run off when i called you on something ..so keep hiding or say something relevant for once...deal/?

 

"you were wlling me how better young was too jennings" What the **** does this mean you spastic? I spanked you so bad that you even forgot how to spell and form a sentence?

Yeah, 41 year old Wlad would beat some and lose to some of the best at 70s, Young is probably one of them who he'd beat. But he wouldn't walk through them.

And learn how to spell, and learn the difference between your/yo're and to/too ifyou don't want people to fully realize how ******ed you are.

 

And Usyk isn't a top5 HW yet, in case you are too idiotic to know this, he'd need to move up to become one first.

I think he would be a top5 HW because I'd favour him over guys like Parker, Pulev and Whyte.

 

Again you got owned and rejected ...go look at what you were arguing you dolt in the first place..i posted it didnt i?

this was your opening argument sentance...

"When you're forced to name a 41 year old man who hasn't won a fight in 2.5 years, '

so tell me how weak is the 70;s era if they fought 41 Wlad?...who beats him???? lol...Of course you will say everyone which then makes Joshua's win less credible.

So 41 year old Wlad vs your guy Young? Who wins and how? Joshua win over Wlad ?how is this era a weak era???See how this works you simpleton?

 

^

This is what happens when you're poorly educated and have a suffered from long term drinking and/or drug abuse.

 

Who would win jimmy Young or 41 Wlad Klitchko?dont go running now ,im one of the few that know you are a coward in here...so answer if you DARE? Its yes or no even a simpleton like you could do it right ?....lmao