Controversial Fantasy Fight Picks

by Scottrf Wed 07 Dec 2011, 12:07 pm

First topic message reminder :

Saw this elsewhere and seemed like a good idea.

Basically you pick someone who you think would be able to upset a superior boxer. The idea is you can justify it based on styles/precedents and you should try and be as controversial as possible.

Good idea if we stick to roughly similar eras I think.

I'll start. I think Forrest gives Mayweather nightmares with his reach, jab and power.

by Imperial Ghosty Sat 17 Dec 2011, 2:23 pm

We all know Moore didn't mean the things he said Oxy, he was just saying it because it's what 'white america' wanted to hear, not as if he'd ever been in the ring with the greatest fighters of all time.

by **oxring** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 3:57 pm

Yep. He probably took a dive as well against the Rock as well.

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:03 pm

oxring wrote:Yep. He probably took a dive as well against the Rock as well.

He didn't need to, oxy.

Archie made his pro debut in 1935, so he would have been blighted by ' flawed fundamentals,' doncha know?

by Imperial Ghosty Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:12 pm

Archie Moores flawed fundamentals, you're a funny guy Windy.

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:16 pm

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Archie Moores flawed fundamentals, you're a funny guy Windy.

It's true, Ghosty, though I had no idea until I went to Azworld a couple of days ago.

by **oxring** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:16 pm

HumanWindmill wrote:
oxring wrote:Yep. He probably took a dive as well against the Rock as well.

He didn't need to, oxy.

Archie made his pro debut in 1935, so he would have been blighted by ' flawed fundamentals,' doncha know?

Good point. If only he'd been a rounded technician. Like Pascal (a man who has heard of a jab, in passing, but distrusts the idea too much to try to use one).

by trottb Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:17 pm

HumanWindmill wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:Archie Moores flawed fundamentals, you're a funny guy Windy.

It's true, Ghosty, though I had no idea until I went to Azworld a couple of days ago.

An experience that will leave a lasting impression.

by Imperial Ghosty Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:19 pm

HumanWindmill wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:Archie Moores flawed fundamentals, you're a funny guy Windy.

It's true, Ghosty, though I had no idea until I went to Azworld a couple of days ago.

You learn something new every day.

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:20 pm

trottb wrote:
HumanWindmill wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:Archie Moores flawed fundamentals, you're a funny guy Windy.

It's true, Ghosty, though I had no idea until I went to Azworld a couple of days ago.

An experience that will leave a lasting impression.

You're not kidding, mate.

There are rides at Azworld which make the Alton Towers stuff seem as lame as a roundabout in a kiddies' playground.

by Gameshow Heist Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:21 pm

I reckon Calzaghe would have beaten Fitsimmon if they couldve faught. Good chin, great workrate, great stamina and good movement. He'd maybe be caught a time or twice but I think he'd win.

by **oxring** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:22 pm

Imperial Ghosty wrote:
HumanWindmill wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:Archie Moores flawed fundamentals, you're a funny guy Windy.

It's true, Ghosty, though I had no idea until I went to Azworld a couple of days ago.

You learn something new every day.

Like Orlin Norris (that rubbish Cruiserweight, the one that lost all his big fights, and was a hopeless heavy, outboxed by Akinwande ffs - yeah him) beats Rocky Marciano.

That was the summation of my trip to azworld this week. Has left me a gibbering wreckage.

by Imperial Ghosty Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:23 pm

Calzaghe could beat Fitzsimmons but don't think he survives being caught by him cleanly, would have to keep the work rate up (although Ruby Rob never had stamina issues), fight at distance and don't get caught by any body shots.

by **ShahenshahG** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:25 pm

oxring wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:
HumanWindmill wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:Archie Moores flawed fundamentals, you're a funny guy Windy.

It's true, Ghosty, though I had no idea until I went to Azworld a couple of days ago.

You learn something new every day.

Like Orlin Norris (that rubbish Cruiserweight, the one that lost all his big fights, and was a hopeless heavy, outboxed by Akinwande ffs - yeah him) beats Rocky Marciano.

That was the summation of my trip to azworld this week. Has left me a gibbering wreckage.

Like Gordon Brown - oxring takes the opportunity to stick the boot in. Unfortunately we knew you beforehand so you cant fob it off as his fault.

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:26 pm

Gameshow Heist wrote:I reckon Calzaghe would have beaten Fitsimmon if they couldve faught. Good chin, great workrate, great stamina and good movement. He'd maybe be caught a time or twice but I think he'd win.

Corbett had all of those plus an extra 25lb. of muscle. Fitz caught up with him, eventually.

by **oxring** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:26 pm

ShahenshahG wrote:
oxring wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:
HumanWindmill wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:Archie Moores flawed fundamentals, you're a funny guy Windy.

It's true, Ghosty, though I had no idea until I went to Azworld a couple of days ago.

You learn something new every day.

Like Orlin Norris (that rubbish Cruiserweight, the one that lost all his big fights, and was a hopeless heavy, outboxed by Akinwande ffs - yeah him) beats Rocky Marciano.

That was the summation of my trip to azworld this week. Has left me a gibbering wreckage.

Like Gordon Brown - oxring takes the opportunity to stick the boot in. Unfortunately we knew you beforehand so you cant fob it off as his fault.

Dammit! Rumbled again!

by **ShahenshahG** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:27 pm

HumanWindmill wrote:
Gameshow Heist wrote:I reckon Calzaghe would have beaten Fitsimmon if they couldve faught. Good chin, great workrate, great stamina and good movement. He'd maybe be caught a time or twice but I think he'd win.

Corbett had all of those plus an extra 25lb. of muscle. Fitz caught up with him, eventually.

Also Calzaghe liked to trade when he got hurt. Game over there and then I should think.

by **oxring** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:31 pm

HumanWindmill wrote:
Gameshow Heist wrote:I reckon Calzaghe would have beaten Fitsimmon if they couldve faught. Good chin, great workrate, great stamina and good movement. He'd maybe be caught a time or twice but I think he'd win.

Corbett had all of those plus an extra 25lb. of muscle. Fitz caught up with him, eventually.

Frankly - if Calzaghe struggled with Hopkins' ring smarts - I'd see Fitz giving him much the same trouble. Fitz wasn't easy to hit, nor was he a skinny ginger alcoholic - (before anyone suggests to the contrary). Fitz was a fabulous straight puncher and this should give Joe some problems.

I am a massive Joe fan - and his chin+workrate will cause problems - however, if I had to pick a fighter, I'd back Fitzsimmons over the longer distance. He had a punch that could stop a particularly well chinned elephant - and would probably connect at some point.

However - if they're fighting over 10/12 rounds - there's an argument to say that chin (good enough to last the fight) and high workrate could carry the day. If they're fighting 15 or 25 - you'd say that over the distance Bob is going to connect and wear Joe down - a la Fitzsimmons.

Lest we forget - Bob would have lost his HW title tilt if it had been over 12 rounds.

by Gameshow Heist Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:37 pm

oxring wrote:
HumanWindmill wrote:
Gameshow Heist wrote:I reckon Calzaghe would have beaten Fitsimmon if they couldve faught. Good chin, great workrate, great stamina and good movement. He'd maybe be caught a time or twice but I think he'd win.

Corbett had all of those plus an extra 25lb. of muscle. Fitz caught up with him, eventually.

Frankly - if Calzaghe struggled with Hopkins' ring smarts - I'd see Fitz giving him much the same trouble. Fitz wasn't easy to hit, nor was he a skinny ginger alcoholic - (before anyone suggests to the contrary). Fitz was a fabulous straight puncher and this should give Joe some problems.

I am a massive Joe fan - and his chin+workrate will cause problems - however, if I had to pick a fighter, I'd back Fitzsimmons over the longer distance. He had a punch that could stop a particularly well chinned elephant - and would probably connect at some point.

However - if they're fighting over 10/12 rounds - there's an argument to say that chin (good enough to last the fight) and high workrate could carry the day. If they're fighting 15 or 25 - you'd say that over the distance Bob is going to connect and wear Joe down - a la Fitzsimmons.

Lest we forget - Bob would have lost his HW title tilt if it had been over 12 rounds.

How many Fitsimmons fights has anyone here seen?

by Imperial Ghosty Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:37 pm

Whats to say he doesn't up the ante in the 8/9th round Oxy and stops Corbett while you could also say that Jeffries would most probably be stopped in a modern ring during their second fight ala Lewis and Vitali.

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:39 pm

Gameshow Heist wrote:
oxring wrote:
HumanWindmill wrote:
Gameshow Heist wrote:I reckon Calzaghe would have beaten Fitsimmon if they couldve faught. Good chin, great workrate, great stamina and good movement. He'd maybe be caught a time or twice but I think he'd win.

Corbett had all of those plus an extra 25lb. of muscle. Fitz caught up with him, eventually.

Frankly - if Calzaghe struggled with Hopkins' ring smarts - I'd see Fitz giving him much the same trouble. Fitz wasn't easy to hit, nor was he a skinny ginger alcoholic - (before anyone suggests to the contrary). Fitz was a fabulous straight puncher and this should give Joe some problems.

I am a massive Joe fan - and his chin+workrate will cause problems - however, if I had to pick a fighter, I'd back Fitzsimmons over the longer distance. He had a punch that could stop a particularly well chinned elephant - and would probably connect at some point.

However - if they're fighting over 10/12 rounds - there's an argument to say that chin (good enough to last the fight) and high workrate could carry the day. If they're fighting 15 or 25 - you'd say that over the distance Bob is going to connect and wear Joe down - a la Fitzsimmons.

Lest we forget - Bob would have lost his HW title tilt if it had been over 12 rounds.
How many Fitsimmons fights has anyone here seen?

Four.

How many have you seen in arriving at your opinion that Calzaghe beats him?

by **oxring** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:44 pm

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Whats to say he doesn't up the ante in the 8/9th round Oxy and stops Corbett while you could also say that Jeffries would most probably be stopped in a modern ring during their second fight ala Lewis and Vitali.

Its a very good point you make Ghosty.

I was trying to be reasonable, as gameshow is a new member and all - but in honesty I'd back Fitz by some way here. Chin+workrate+awkwardness gives Calzaghe a chance - the same chance someone like Tarver would have had - they're both awkward fighters with decent beards - and so we shouldn't predict 1 round blow-outs.

The body attack of Fitz, to me would be quite important - as that would slow the workrate down. Once the workrate is slowed, there's just chin+awkwardness; both men possessing fantastic will to win. And over a championship distance - there's no way I see Joe taking it.

Re: how many fights gameshow:

I've seen Corbett and Lang gameshow - have you come across any more?

by Gameshow Heist Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:45 pm

HumanWindmill wrote:
Gameshow Heist wrote:
oxring wrote:
HumanWindmill wrote:
Gameshow Heist wrote:I reckon Calzaghe would have beaten Fitsimmon if they couldve faught. Good chin, great workrate, great stamina and good movement. He'd maybe be caught a time or twice but I think he'd win.

Corbett had all of those plus an extra 25lb. of muscle. Fitz caught up with him, eventually.

Frankly - if Calzaghe struggled with Hopkins' ring smarts - I'd see Fitz giving him much the same trouble. Fitz wasn't easy to hit, nor was he a skinny ginger alcoholic - (before anyone suggests to the contrary). Fitz was a fabulous straight puncher and this should give Joe some problems.

I am a massive Joe fan - and his chin+workrate will cause problems - however, if I had to pick a fighter, I'd back Fitzsimmons over the longer distance. He had a punch that could stop a particularly well chinned elephant - and would probably connect at some point.

However - if they're fighting over 10/12 rounds - there's an argument to say that chin (good enough to last the fight) and high workrate could carry the day. If they're fighting 15 or 25 - you'd say that over the distance Bob is going to connect and wear Joe down - a la Fitzsimmons.

Lest we forget - Bob would have lost his HW title tilt if it had been over 12 rounds.
How many Fitsimmons fights has anyone here seen?

Four.

How many have you seen in arriving at your opinion that Calzaghe beats him?

The films I saw of Fitsimmon he looked average tbh. He mightve had a big punch but I think Joes workrate and stamina would beat him.

by Imperial Ghosty Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:46 pm

Oh good god no.

by **oxring** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:47 pm

If you were watching the Lang fight gameshow - in fairness he was a very old man by then.

by **ShahenshahG** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:48 pm

Gameshow Heist wrote:
HumanWindmill wrote:
Gameshow Heist wrote:
oxring wrote:
HumanWindmill wrote:
Gameshow Heist wrote:I reckon Calzaghe would have beaten Fitsimmon if they couldve faught. Good chin, great workrate, great stamina and good movement. He'd maybe be caught a time or twice but I think he'd win.

Corbett had all of those plus an extra 25lb. of muscle. Fitz caught up with him, eventually.

Frankly - if Calzaghe struggled with Hopkins' ring smarts - I'd see Fitz giving him much the same trouble. Fitz wasn't easy to hit, nor was he a skinny ginger alcoholic - (before anyone suggests to the contrary). Fitz was a fabulous straight puncher and this should give Joe some problems.

I am a massive Joe fan - and his chin+workrate will cause problems - however, if I had to pick a fighter, I'd back Fitzsimmons over the longer distance. He had a punch that could stop a particularly well chinned elephant - and would probably connect at some point.

However - if they're fighting over 10/12 rounds - there's an argument to say that chin (good enough to last the fight) and high workrate could carry the day. If they're fighting 15 or 25 - you'd say that over the distance Bob is going to connect and wear Joe down - a la Fitzsimmons.

Lest we forget - Bob would have lost his HW title tilt if it had been over 12 rounds.
How many Fitsimmons fights has anyone here seen?

Four.

How many have you seen in arriving at your opinion that Calzaghe beats him?
The films I saw of Fitsimmon he looked average tbh. He mightve had a big punch but I think Joes workrate and stamina would beat him.

Azanias lovechild?

by Gameshow Heist Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:53 pm

I ndon't know who Anzania is so i dont think I'm his love child. I gave my opinion like the title asks.

by Imperial Ghosty Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:54 pm

Based on which footage of Fitzsimmons did you come to that conclusion?

by **ShahenshahG** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 4:55 pm

Scottrf wrote:Saw this elsewhere and seemed like a good idea.

Basically you pick someone who you think would be able to upset a superior boxer. The idea is you can justify it based on styles/precedents and you should try and be as controversial as possible.

Good idea if we stick to roughly similar eras I think.

I'll start. I think Forrest gives Mayweather nightmares with his reach, jab and power.

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:14 pm

Gameshow Heist wrote:I ndon't know who Anzania is so i dont think I'm his love child. I gave my opinion like the title asks.

Great Scott! So you did!

by Steffan Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:27 pm

HumanWindmill wrote:Great Scott!

Now I have an image of what Windy looks and sounds like Laugh

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ACTIVntAKg

by **ShahenshahG** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:29 pm

Steffan wrote:
HumanWindmill wrote:Great Scott!

Now I have an image of what Windy looks and sounds like

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ACTIVntAKg

Explains his intimate knowledge of all boxing scenes Laugh

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:36 pm

Believe me chaps, you just paid me a compliment. Very Happy

by Steffan Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:40 pm

Windy goes onto 606 v2 Boxing. Its another quiet day. Suddenly he sees an article from Steffan promoting national hostility...first thing he does is jump up..."GREAT SCOTT"

Laugh

by **oxring** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:41 pm

Steffan wrote:Windy goes onto 606 v2 Boxing. Its another quiet day. Suddenly he sees an article from Steffan promoting national hostility...first thing he does is jump up..."GREAT SCOTT"

And then hits the ban button Wink

Did you watch the 'spreys last night Steff?

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:46 pm

Steffan wrote:Windy goes onto 606 v2 Boxing. Its another quiet day. Suddenly he sees an article from Steffan promoting national hostility...first thing he does is jump up..."GREAT SCOTT"

Couldn't possibly imagine your ever doing such a thing, Steffan.

by Steffan Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:46 pm

oxring wrote:And then hits the ban button

Dont be nasty

oxring wrote:Did you watch the 'spreys last night Steff?

Nah I aint got Sky and dont really follow the regions anyway

Ponty are on S4C in about half hour though v Leeds so il watch that

by **oxring** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:50 pm

Steffan wrote:Nah I aint got Sky and dont really follow the regions anyway

People like you steff - losing the regions money Smile

Ymlaen Ponty!

Anyway back on topic - who do you pick Steff - Calzaghe v Fitzsimmons

by Steffan Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:52 pm

oxring wrote:
Steffan wrote:Nah I aint got Sky and dont really follow the regions anyway

People like you steff - losing the regions money

Ymlaen Ponty!

Anyway back on topic - who do you pick Steff - Calzaghe v Fitzsimmons

Always been a Ponty fan

Gutted Cardiff City lost today as well

Back on topic...well you know me I always back my boy Calzaghe

46 tried...and 46 failed

Fitzsimmons no different

by **oxring** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:57 pm

I should have guessed that answer really, shouldn't I?

Different question:

Welsh or Driscoll - who was better?

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 5:59 pm

Driscoll for me but, when it comes to Peerless Jim, I'm hopelessly biased. Have been fascinated by both the man and the fighter since I was a very young fan.

by **oxring** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 6:12 pm

I must admit, that whilst I fully admire Welsh's clean living - and the relationship between the 2 men is fascinating, I've always had a dramatic soft spot for Driscoll.

"I never break a promise" is one of the great acts of character our sport has seen.

by Imperial Ghosty Sat 17 Dec 2011, 6:18 pm

Has to be Welsh for me Windy, harsh to use there match ups against Driscoll too much as he was clearly the smaller man but on top of that Freddie has the more eye catching wins.

Driscoll- Attell and Dixon
Welsh- Driscoll, Nelson, Wolgast, Leonard, Attell, Moore and Dundee

Of course the majorityl of these were newspaper decisions rather than official victories but does go some way to showing the class of opponent Welsh was mixing it with on a consistently high basis. Both great great boxers though.

by Steffan Sat 17 Dec 2011, 6:19 pm

oxring wrote:Welsh or Driscoll - who was better?

I did an assignent once on Freddie Welsh so know a lot more about his career. Driscoll was a legend as well mind I know someone related to Jim. Will go with Welsh though

by Rowley Sat 17 Dec 2011, 6:41 pm

Imperial Ghosty wrote:

Of course the majorityl of these were newspaper decisions rather than official victories but does go some way to showing the class of opponent Welsh was mixing it with on a consistently high basis. Both great great boxers though.

Ghosty tend to agree, think Welsh gets overlooked on occasion, would be naughty to suggest he did not benefit from the no decision era but no more than many a fighter back then, and what is often forgotten is whilst Freddie used the rule to ensure his title would not change hands it is often forgotten he was often considered to have had much the better of those no decision fights according to his biography. Think I am right in saying Welsh holds more wins over Hall of Fame fighters than any other brit, particularly if you don't include McLarnin and Fitz and possibly even if you do.

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 6:57 pm

You may well be right, fellas.

As I say, I was very young when I first read about Driscoll and I was able to dig out quite a bit about him once I set about the task. In those halcyon days there were even boxing books in school libraries and on those shelves I found a surprisingly thin, purplish volume called ' Boxing History ' ( real leap of the imagination, that one, ) with a picture of Jersey Joe dropping Marciano for the front cover. I found quite a chunk devoted to Driscoll in that one alone, and it really fuelled my imagination. Thereafter, I scurried here, there and everywhere to gather up any snippet I could find concerning the great man.

I was like a kid at Christmas when some kind soul pointed me to a youtube link a couple of years ago and I was able to see Driscoll for the first time. Wasn't disappointed in the slightest, and I saw the sublime skills about which I had first read all those years ago.

Too many happy memories and a metric tonne or two of nostalgia on my back make it impossible for me to be objective here. Driscoll was one of my first heroes, and he's still one of my biggest today.

by azania Sat 17 Dec 2011, 7:25 pm

oxring wrote:So you base much of your opinion on 4 people with racially charged opinions and you wonder why I discount your views? Your beliefs on Patterson do a great man a deal of discredit. You peddle lies and falsehoods about great fighters and greater men.

I would like to say that the lies and falsehoods are of your own creation, but it appears that you don't have the creativity for that - and instead deal in contradictory stories from the likes of Nack and Hauser.

Frankly, Az, I don't care how you twist it - your opinions are racially charged.

I prefer to accept Moore's perspective and leave it there.

“A lot of colored guys think Marciano couldn’t fight,” Moore told Donald Turner several years later. “But that’s not a fact. It’s a prejudice.”

Ha. Nice one Oxy. You made a very serious accusation without even so much as backing it up. Where I come from we say (hard to translate from Xosha to English but I'll do my best) "Abelungu looks but does not see". Abelungu is a bantu term for settler.

You accuse me of telling lies yet dont say what those lies are. Nice one mate. Ditto with falsehoods. What I am saying is not new either way. The alledged racially motivated charges in the Rocky issue is not of my doing but what has been done. His opponents who prior to fighting him were more or less washed up suddenly become as good (or very slightly past) as they have ever been. Its not me making stuff up. The issue is why has that happened. Or if indeed it has happened. These issues have been raised by African American commentators. I suppose they are all racists (except Archie Moore the ex boxer who lost to Rocky)

I believe his rep has been hyped up to be better than he actually was. Why? Because America wanted a hero. Hauser said that Rocky symbolised the restoration of white boxing supremacy after Louis, Charles and JJW. I suppose as you say Hauser deals in contradictory stories so that is BS. All was fine then in America.

Of course you would prefer to accept Moore's perspective. It answers a complex issue in a simple manner which leaves no thought but blames the "coloured" folk. A get out clause.

Abelungu looks but does not see indeed.

ps - can you explain my criticism of Johnson and my admiration of Dempsey who by all accounts drew the colour line? I asked twice for an answer to that but for some reason it wasn't forcoming.

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 7:34 pm

azania wrote:I believe his rep has been hyped up to be better than he actually was. Why? Because America wanted a hero. Hauser said that Rocky symbolised the restoration of white boxing supremacy after Louis, Charles and JJW. I suppose as you say Hauser deals in contradictory stories so that is BS. All was fine then in America.

Odd, then, that nobody thought to do the same with Jess Willard.

by azania Sat 17 Dec 2011, 7:36 pm

coxy0001 wrote:
azania wrote:
coxy0001 wrote:Az, how many fighters in history have been as good as FMJ technically? Yes, he lacks other things such as aggression and power (at welter, he had serious pop at the lower weights) etc.

And Moore wasn't half bad, even if he was a few % below his absolute beast of a best.

Thanks Coxy. So now we have a LHW fighting for the HW title who was a few % below his best. It would be worth questioning a LHW who was below his best fighting for the title in his OWN weight class but we have a LHW below his best fighting for the title ABOVE his own weight class. That is considered a great win by the HW title holder. Boxing logic is turned upside down when it comes to Rocky.

I wonder how much credit Wlad would get for beating Hopkins. Or if Haye beat Hopkins for the WBA belt had they fought. What do you thing (assuming that you do think)?

Archie Moore was one of the greatest light heavies who ever lived. And can you read what i read - "beast of a best". He was STILL an massive threat, as his record at heavy wasn't one of a guy struggling to beat people now was he? Boxing logic isn't turned upside down, i acknowledge he wasn't at his absolute peak but maintain that he was still a big force to be reckoned with - you just take that statement and put your own pathetic spin on it by just dismissing him as "not at his best" i.e. you think he was basically shot.

And Marciano didn't just have one or two great wins, he beat everyone he faced and never ducked a challenge. He has a series of wins which is why he's ranked so highly. So to address your sweeping statement you don't get massive kudos for "one win" you get kudos for a series of wins.

Jimmy Wilde, a massively brilliant fighter, would regularly knock out guys he was giving masses of weight away to. The same goes for Armstrong. History, and yes this is history which is therefore fact, shows us that giving weight away doesn't automatically mean that the smaller guy loses. That is a factually based statement, you on the other hand like to make things up.

It is my opinion that you're monotonous and laughably biased.

So an old LHW who was superb, but on the slide lost to the world HW Champ and its a formidable win for the Champ. Does Frazier get the same credit for beating a live and very formidable LHW in Bob Foster and Tyson for dismissing a live, formidable ex LHW champ who had dethroned an ATG HW champ and was also undefeated.?

Should credit be given for beating washed up old fighters as much as credit is given to Rocky for doing that? If so, credit Holmes for beting Ali, Tyson fo rbeating Holmes and so on.

Its my opinion that you're a lad. thumbsup

by azania Sat 17 Dec 2011, 7:40 pm

HumanWindmill wrote:
azania wrote:I believe his rep has been hyped up to be better than he actually was. Why? Because America wanted a hero. Hauser said that Rocky symbolised the restoration of white boxing supremacy after Louis, Charles and JJW. I suppose as you say Hauser deals in contradictory stories so that is BS. All was fine then in America.

Odd, then, that nobody thought to do the same with Jess Willard.

Maybe because of the way he was dismissed by Dempsey. But Willard was a hero for dethroning JJ. His win led to the colour line and only because Louis was so damn good and could not be denied that it changed. But America still wants its very own hero. Thankfully the K bros are not yanks otherwise god help us all.

by **HumanWindmill** Sat 17 Dec 2011, 7:46 pm

azania wrote:
HumanWindmill wrote:
azania wrote:I believe his rep has been hyped up to be better than he actually was. Why? Because America wanted a hero. Hauser said that Rocky symbolised the restoration of white boxing supremacy after Louis, Charles and JJW. I suppose as you say Hauser deals in contradictory stories so that is BS. All was fine then in America.

Odd, then, that nobody thought to do the same with Jess Willard.

Maybe because of the way he was dismissed by Dempsey. But Willard was a hero for dethroning JJ. His win led to the colour line and only because Louis was so damn good and could not be denied that it changed. But America still wants its very own hero. Thankfully the K bros are not yanks otherwise god help us all.

It was four years before Dempsey came along, during which time Willard defended his title once.

Willard wasn't exalted, carried on shoulders or hoisted up as an all American boy. The public at large were pretty much disinterested in him, and he was pretty much disinterested in boxing.

by Sponsored content