Which is more important: Who a boxer beats or imaginary skill sets?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by JonOli, Sep 13, 2008.


  1. JonOli

    JonOli Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    16,352
    2
    Nov 4, 2007
    To make a sporting point: Powell racing the other day... how amazing does he look...

    This content is protected


    Now remember the 100m Olympics final!

    Opponents mean everything imo - your are only as good as your opponent lets you look - and that is even more the case in boxing, imo.

    Do you agree or disagree?

    Which is more important when assessing a boxers career: Who a boxer beats, and how they beat them or subjective Skill sets?
     
    JonOli, Sep 13, 2008
    JonOli, Sep 13, 2008
    #1
  2. TFFP

    TFFP Guest

    Skillsets aren't imaginary. A guy isn't pretending to have good footwork.

    They are subjective.
     
    TFFP, Sep 13, 2008
    TFFP, Sep 13, 2008
    #2
  3. Thread Stealer

    Thread Stealer Loyal Member Full Member

    41,958
    3,432
    Jun 30, 2005
    Imaginary, or "virtual reality" resumes, like Vitali Klitschko

    I mean, Vitali's best wins were over Golf Sanders, Whale Johnson, and Herbie Hide.

    But he has "virtual reality" wins over Chris Byrd, Lennox Lewis, Hasim Rahman, Jameel McCline, the 1996 Olympic Drug Testing Committee, etc.
     
    Thread Stealer, Sep 13, 2008
    Thread Stealer, Sep 13, 2008
    #3