Who'd Win Lennoxx Lewis or Sonny Liston ?

This is an astonishing claim given what is in this post.

atsch

You've misunderstood so completely that I now have to go back to the beginning of your first reply to me.

I said that in the Tyson fight Lewis showed a lack of flexibility. I told you why I thought this was the case. You now think that I was disagreeing with you about Lewis being able to win a fight he has already won based upon this claim...I mean...what the ****?

It is possible to learn about a fighter's flaws, tactical flexability or lack thereof being one of them, from watching a fight in which he wins. I think this is a good example of that. You agree. Where this confusion has come from where you think that I think that Lewis couldn't have won the fight which he won without changing strategy...i haven't a ****ing clue you crazy *******.

To what, though? I said your parallel was horrible because you were using Winky Wright as a foil for an ATG puncher, Lennox Lewis.

WOW HE WAS GOING FOR A POWER SHOT WOW. Listen. You might have proven why Lewis showed tactical inflexibility but you've failed to understand that this doesn't prove that his tactical inflexibilty doesn't exsist. I KNOW that Lewis is reticent in the ring if left to impact his own style on the fight because of his chin. The debate was not about why. It's about why the reticence exsists.

Which you have inadvertently conceeded here - Lewis is overly cautious because he can be bombed out. I've never disputed that, in fact it's my entire point. What is especially funny about this is that you thought I was making your point. Nice.

You are incredible in your one-mindedness and blindness. I am not trying to say that Rhaman was Liston. This is something you have made up in your own head. It is a non-issue and irrelevant at best, but more likely it is shutting the door before the ****ing horse has even been put in there, never mind bolted. None of this is relevant to the point, and none of this relates to your bizzare claim that "Lewis was in no danger whilst in the ring with Tyson".

Listen carefully, really try to take this in. That can be true AND Lewis can be tactically infexible. If you are unable to build a bridge with this, just believe it as if it were a truth, like "grass is green" because it is the case, and it is important.

But you don't even really know what we are talking about!

Again - this is correct but it proves my point. Over, and over again, because you've failed compeltely to understnd what is being said, you are explaining WHY Lewis is tactically cautios rather than understanding that I am saying tht he is, and that this can harm him. Really, really try to take it in.

I said Liston is the more adaptable fighter. I provided examples. You failed to refute them. You failed to provide examples of your fighter's tactical nous.

Now you deride these efforts as "minor tactical changes against lesser opponents". These examples are part of a wider pattern that describe the truth of the matter. How many do you need. Ten? Five? How many can you provide for Lewis? None? Becuse that is how many you have provided.

You didn't engage with any of those tactical adjustments on any level.

So, having accused me of putting words in your mouth at the start of this thread you have defended saying that i "make out that Liston is some sort of genius" by calling on "semantics". Nice.

 

What? I haven't said anywhere that the decision was good, it was a horrible travesty.

 

But, oh hell no!