Question for 60s stans (LAZERUS, CAVSFTW) [Archive] - Message Board Basketball Forum

RoundMoundOfReb

07-10-2015, 02:31 PM

Its much weaker now. Google Mayweather vs Sugar Ray Leonard. Daddy Mayweather used the same defense Floyd does. Both were minimalist on offense. 70's/80's was the best boxing ever.

- Comparing Floyd h2h with a natural Welterweight is not fair..It would be like me saying Roy Jones beats Ray Leonard at MW (which he does). No one with considers Floyd a h2h all time great at WW. Below that though: he is.

- Daddy Mayweather is considerably worse than Floyd. He was fringe top 10 at his best.

- Floyd is only really a minimalist on offence since he's 38 ****ing years old in his 4th weight class. Go watch him from 130-140. And even beyond that up to the Cotto fight. Not a minimalist.

I agree though, 70s & 80s as an era were better.

I would take a prime Foreman over anyone else today.

So we've come to the conclusion that 70s/80s boxing was better than today, due to the fact that it was more popular back then and thus more people tried to become boxers?

Well the opposite is true for basketball....who the **** wanted to play basketball in the 60s when you could make more as an insurance salesman?...this is why 60s = weak era, 90s/00s (where everybody grows up wanting to make millions playing ball) = Strong era.

Jameerthefear

07-10-2015, 02:40 PM

I welcome anyone and everyone on ISH to go watch CuckFTW's videos of him playing ball and then come back here and tell me with a ****ing straight face that you still take him seriously.

LAZERUSS

07-10-2015, 02:53 PM

- Comparing Floyd h2h with a natural Welterweight is not fair..It would be like me saying Roy Jones beats Ray Leonard at MW (which he does). No one with considers Floyd a h2h all time great at WW. Below that though: he is.

- Daddy Mayweather is considerably worse than Floyd. He was fringe top 10 at his best.

- Floyd is only really a minimalist on offence since he's 38 ****ing years old in his 4th weight class. Go watch him from 130-140. And even beyond that up to the Cotto fight. Not a minimalist.

I agree though, 70s & 80s as an era were better.

So we've come to the conclusion that 70s/80s boxing was better than today, due to the fact that it was more popular back then and thus more people tried to become boxers?

Well the opposite is true for basketball....who the **** wanted to play basketball in the 60s when you could make more as an insurance salesman?...this is why 60s = weak era, 90s/00s (where everybody grows up wanting to make millions playing ball) = Strong era.

I don't see how me telling you that I would take Foreman over anyone else today makes either era any better. Foreman was a once-in-lifetime-boxer...like Wilt, Oscar, Pistol, Kareem, and others from the 60's and 70's were in basketball.

I have long maintained that there have been greats in EVERY era.

One more time...

My All-Time Top-10

Wilt
MJ
Magic
Kareem
Russell
Shaq
Duncan
Kobe
Lebron
Bird

Moses
Dr. J
Hakeem

RoundMoundOfReb

07-10-2015, 03:54 PM

I don't see how me telling you that I would take Foreman over anyone else today makes either era any better. Foreman was a once-in-lifetime-boxer...like Wilt, Oscar, Pistol, Kareem, and others from the 60's and 70's were in basketball.

I have long maintained that there have been greats in EVERY era.

One more time...

My All-Time Top-10

Wilt
MJ
Magic
Kareem
Russell
Shaq
Duncan
Kobe
Lebron
Bird

Moses
Dr. J
Hakeem
If we operate under the assumption that every era is equal: wladimir Klitschko > George foreman ainec

Carbine

07-10-2015, 04:36 PM

FKAri

07-10-2015, 04:41 PM

What's the argument for Wilt over MJ?

and Magic as the 3rd greatest basketball player ever is hard to justify as well.

Pointguard

07-10-2015, 05:00 PM

- Comparing Floyd h2h with a natural Welterweight is not fair..It would be like me saying Roy Jones beats Ray Leonard at MW (which he does). No one with considers Floyd a h2h all time great at WW. Below that though: he is.

- Daddy Mayweather is considerably worse than Floyd. He was fringe top 10 at his best.
It was a skill comparison which is fair. Mayweather Senior was the first to master that defense. Its impenetrable now because fighters don't take chances these days. Today Senior would be top three.

- Floyd is only really a minimalist on offence since he's 38 ****ing years old in his 4th weight class. Go watch him from 130-140. And even beyond that up to the Cotto fight. Not a minimalist.
He is a minimalist in comparison to Aaron Pryor, Argeullo, Mancini and Duran who were lighter than Sugar Ray. And the lighter divisions are usually more active.

I agree though, 70s & 80s as an era were better.

So we've come to the conclusion that 70s/80s boxing was better than today, due to the fact that it was more popular back then and thus more people tried to become boxers?

I think they were better fighters because Pride, taking chances and risk were more the order of the day. No way does a much bigger Canello not take risk against a guy like Mayweather who was rarely knocking out guys 20 lbs lighter than Canello. And he's destined to be the next pound for pound title. Could you imagine the job Hearns, Sugar Ray and Hagler would have done to Canello. He would be a Pineada for them.

Back to what you said earlier, while I think Roy Jones had one of the best offensive reperoires in boxing ever (head, body attacks, speed, quirkiness, jab, combinations, cross, hooks, uppercut, knockout power, etc.) He had trouble adapting to firm boxing styles that had good defense. Sugar Ray beats him in their prime at a catch weight. Hagler too in my opinion.

AirFederer

07-10-2015, 05:05 PM

http://ringtalk.com/wordpress/http://ringtalk.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2015/06/tumblr_ltbo75cwFa1qm9rypo1_1280.jpg

AirFederer

07-10-2015, 05:07 PM

:lol

[QUOTE]With a press conference set for the Astrodome, everybody, the parties involved and an orgy of international press were all in attendance. Ali couldn

Pointguard

07-10-2015, 05:24 PM

and Magic as the 3rd greatest basketball player ever is hard to justify as well.
Best team player, won five times in the hardest era ever, ran the best offense ever, was super efficient, could adapt better than any player, got more easy baskets than any player ever, controlled the game as good as anybody ever, the best in the modern era in making others better.

RoundMoundOfReb

07-10-2015, 05:44 PM

It was a skill comparison which is fair. Mayweather Senior was the first to master that defense. Its impenetrable now because fighters don't take chances these days. Today Senior would be top three.

If it's purely a skills comparison then Mayweather is very close to Leonard, he would lose to him due to size....but p4p skills? splitting hairs

And LMAO at Mayweather sr. being the first to master the defense...the philly shell/shoulder roll has been used since at least the ****ing 50s/60s...He absolutely was not the first to pioneer/master it...

Saying Leonard > Mayweather because "look what he did to Mayweather sr."...is like saying Kyrie > Kobe because he's better than JR Smith..Terrible logic

He is a minimalist in comparison to Aaron Pryor, Argeullo, Mancini and Duran who were lighter than Sugar Ray. And the lighter divisions are usually more active.

He raises his output when he needs to. He outthrew Pacquiao and Cotto, supposed "volume punchers". There is nothing wrong with his punch output...he's not Adrien Broner.

I think they were better fighters because Pride, taking chances and risk were more the order of the day. No way does a much bigger Canello not take risk against a guy like Mayweather who was rarely knocking out guys 20 lbs lighter than Canello. And he's destined to be the next pound for pound title. Could you imagine the job Hearns, Sugar Ray and Hagler would have done to Canello. He would be a Pineada for them.

I think you'll find that Floyd hits harder than most people give him credit for....also Canelo was never a pressure fighter he's more of a boxer puncher/counter-puncher.

Back to what you said earlier, while I think Roy Jones had one of the best offensive reperoires in boxing ever (head, body attacks, speed, quirkiness, jab, combinations, cross, hooks, uppercut, knockout power, etc.) He had trouble adapting to firm boxing styles that had good defense. Sugar Ray beats him in their prime at a catch weight. Hagler too in my opinion.

Clearly you've never watched Roy Jones fight, beyond highlights. Jones was every bit the pot-shotter Floyd is. He rarely jabbed or threw combinations, and was in fact a very good defensive fighter. He also did NOT struggle with good defenses...He obliterated Toney and Hopkins who were/are both better on defense than Ray Leonard.

And he beats Hagler too.

LAZERUSS

07-10-2015, 06:19 PM

Best team player, won five times in the hardest era ever, ran the best offense ever, was super efficient, could adapt better than any player, got more easy baskets than any player ever, controlled the game as good as anybody ever, the best in the modern era in making others better.

:applause: :applause: :applause:

I could expand on this...like a PEAK Magic...like this...

Now let's actually put in a PEAK Magic, and not some way-past-his-prime Magic that carried a shell of what had been a dynasty in the 80's, past a peak Blazer team in the WCF's, and then up against a peak Jordan (and with Pippen being the one to slow him down), with his stacked roster that wiped out Magic's rapidly declining, and injury-plagued roster in the '91 Finals.

How about Magic at HIS PEAK, in 86-87.

First, MJ vs. Magic...

MJ: 37.0 ppg, 6.0 rpg, 4.0 apg, .429 FG%, .875 FT%, .474 TS%
Magic: 29.0 ppg, 4.0 rpg, 12.5 apg, .500 FG%, .933 FT%, .563 TS%.
Oh, and 2-0 W-L

MJ vs. Boston in regular season, and Magic vs. Boston in regular season:

MJ: 29.7 ppg, 5.5 rpg, 4.8 apg, .428 FG%, .820 FT%
Magic: 35.0 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 9.0 rpg, .556 FG%, .864 FT%

How about MJ vs, Boston, and Magic vs. Boston in that same post-season:

MJ: 35.7 ppg, 7.0 rpg, 6.0 apg, .417 FG%, .817 FT%, .529 TS%
Magic: 26.2 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 13.0 apg, .541 FG%, .960 FT%, .590 TS%

Oh, and MJ's Bulls vs. Boston in the playoffs... 0-3
Magic's Lakers vs. Boston in the Finals... 4-2

BTW, MJ in his '87 season averaged a career high 37.1 ppg. And yet a PEAK Magic was FAR greater.

Another point.

Magic's Laker played teams like the Sixers from the first half of the 80's, the Bad Boys from the last half of the 80's, and the Celtics for the entire decade of the 80's. He took his team to EIGHT Finals, and won FIVE rings in that decade, and beat the peak Sixers twice, the peak Bad Boys once, and the peak Celtics, twice.

Compare that with MJ's 90's run.

He finally beat a washed-up Pistons team, and then a washed-up Lakers team in the '91 playoffs and Finals.

He beat a 57-25 Blazers team in the '92 Finals, with the same roster that somehow Magic beat the year before when they went 63-19.

He beat a defenseless Suns team in the '93 Finals.

Oh, and how good was his rosters in the 90's? His '94 team, with the legendary Pete Myers replacing him, went 55-27, which was deceptive, since Pippen missed 10 games, as well as other teammates missing games. They could easily have won 60+ games. And it was too bad, too, since they did not have HCA against a 56-26 Knicks team that they took to a close and controversial seven game series...the same Knicks team that lost a close game seven to the 58-24 Rockets in the Finals (and outscored them BTW.)

Then, they basically replaced Grant with Rodman, and Paxson with Kerr, and won three more titles.

MJ's '96 Bulls beat a Sonics team with Payton and Kemp, and not much else, in a series in which MJ averaged 27 ppg on a .415 FG%.

Then MJ's Bulls beat the Stockton-Malone Jazz in two straight Finals, in series in which MJ shot .455 and .427.

Think about this...

Was there ANY team that MJ faced in the 90's that was even remotely close to the Sixers, Pistons, Celtics, and Lakers in the 80's?

I can safely make this claim...MJ's 90's Bulls don't go 6-8 in the 80's. Hell, they might not have won a ring in that decade.

Or the fact that Magic took over a badly under-achieving Laker team, and immediately took them to the title, including a series-clinching blowout game, on the road, without Kareem, in which he hung a 42-15-7 stat-line.

Or the fact that he has the highest W-L% in NBA history at .740. BTW, without Kareem in his career... .742.

Or that when Kareem retired, he led LA to an even better record the next year, and then a Finals the year after that.

Or that when Magic retired, the Lakers immediately plunged back into mediocrity, where he found them.

I could go and on...but yes, Magic has a case for GOAT.

LAZERUSS

07-10-2015, 06:24 PM

What's the argument for Wilt over MJ?

I could post a link to the NBA Record Book, or post quotes from peers and other HOFers, or provide his pure domination over his era, and players who would dominate in the next era...etc.,

but let me ask you two questions...

1. Why did MJ not win a ring in the 80's, and in fact, had a losing record in the post-season?

2. How many rings would Chamberlain have had, had he and Russell swapped rosters?

RoundMoundOfReb

07-10-2015, 06:39 PM

Carbine

07-10-2015, 06:59 PM

I could post a link to the NBA Record Book, or post quotes from peers and other HOFers, or provide his pure domination over his era, and players who would dominate in the next era...etc.,

but let me ask you two questions...

1. Why did MJ not win a ring in the 80's, and in fact, had a losing record in the post-season?

2. How many rings would Chamberlain have had, had he and Russell swapped rosters?

MJ didn't win in the 80s because before Pippen and Grant arrived he was surrounded by possibly the worst cast of players in the league. Amongst the worst. Doesn't matter if you're the GOAT or not, you can't win by yourself.

Pippen didn't come in year 1 as "Scottie Pippen" that we think of. It took him
Time to develop. It wasn't until he was Scottie Pippen, and the Bulls put a championship caliber roster around MJ that he started winning. However once the roster around him was of that caliber they never failed to win a title with MJ except in 94.

It doesn't take away from a player to win with championship caliber help.

Your second question, nobody knows. What we do know if the Celtics won a hell of a lot with Russell. Wilt may have won that many, he may have won five. Or three. I have no idea just like you.

Wilt doesn't really have arguments that make him superior to Jordan.

Titles? No.

Playoff performance? No.

Accolades? Jordan has a hell of a lot.

Regular Season numbers? Yes.

colts19

07-10-2015, 07:20 PM

MJ didn't win in the 80s because before Pippen and Grant arrived he was surrounded by possibly the worst cast of players in the league. Amongst the worst. Doesn't matter if you're the GOAT or not, you can't win by yourself.

Pippen didn't come in year 1 as "Scottie Pippen" that we think of. It took him
Time to develop. It wasn't until he was Scottie Pippen, and the Bulls put a championship caliber roster around MJ that he started winning. However once the roster around him was of that caliber they never failed to win a title with MJ except in 94.

It doesn't take away from a player to win with championship caliber help.

Your second question, nobody knows. What we do know if the Celtics won a hell of a lot with Russell. Wilt may have won that many, he may have won five. Or three. I have no idea just like you.

Wilt doesn't really have arguments that make him superior to Jordan.

Titles? No.

Playoff performance? No.

Accolades? Jordan has a hell of a lot.

Regular Season numbers? Yes.

I certainly don't always agree with Laz, and have had some real disagreements with the way I think he unfairly attacks certain players. However, I will say this. Jordan won when he had the best team and lost when he didn't. But all the Jordan stans never use that against him. Well Wilt was the same, he won when he had the best team, and lost when he didn't.

The thing is when Wilt had the best team he also made them dominate.

Carbine

07-10-2015, 07:30 PM

I certainly don't always agree with Laz, and have had some real disagreements with the way I think he unfairly attacks certain players. However, I will say this. Jordan won when he had the best team and lost when he didn't. But all the Jordan stans never use that against him. Well Wilt was the same, he won when he had the best team, and lost when he didn't.

The thing is when Wilt had the best team he also made them dominate.

He won in philly that one year but they lost with the same core that they won with so how do you mean Wilt always won when he had a championship caliber roster around him?

LAZERUSS

07-10-2015, 08:23 PM

He won in philly that one year but they lost with the same core that they won with so how do you mean Wilt always won when he had a championship caliber roster around him?

:roll: :roll: :roll:

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9328011&postcount=14

http://www.insidehoops.com/forum/showpost.php?p=9328006&postcount=13

The team that steamrolled the league in the regular season was clearly not the same team, including Wilt himself, that lost to Boston in game seven by four points.

LAZERUSS

07-10-2015, 08:26 PM

MJ didn't win in the 80s because before Pippen and Grant arrived he was surrounded by possibly the worst cast of players in the league. Amongst the worst. Doesn't matter if you're the GOAT or not, you can't win by yourself.

Pippen didn't come in year 1 as "Scottie Pippen" that we think of. It took him
Time to develop. It wasn't until he was Scottie Pippen, and the Bulls put a championship caliber roster around MJ that he started winning. However once the roster around him was of that caliber they never failed to win a title with MJ except in 94.

It doesn't take away from a player to win with championship caliber help.

Your second question, nobody knows. What we do know if the Celtics won a hell of a lot with Russell. Wilt may have won that many, he may have won five. Or three. I have no idea just like you.

Wilt doesn't really have arguments that make him superior to Jordan.

Titles? No.

Playoff performance? No.

Accolades? Jordan has a hell of a lot.

Regular Season numbers? Yes.

John Wooden basically claimed that had Wilt and Russell swapped roster, and coaches, and that it would have been Wilt holding all those rings.

But, for the sake of arguing, let's say that Chamberlain would have "only" won another five rings in his career...giving him seven (and then Russell would have "only" had six)...

where would you rank him then?

NBAplayoffs2001

07-10-2015, 08:26 PM

70s/80s was a GOAT boxing era. 80s middleweight especially :bowdown:
70s/80s NFL was really rough all over. Fights all the time. Extremely blue collar teams like Steelers, Raiders.
70s/80s NBA were Knicks/Lakers/Celtics.
I was born in the wrong era.:(

Pointguard

07-10-2015, 11:11 PM

If it's purely a skills comparison then Mayweather is very close to Leonard, he would lose to him due to size....but p4p skills? splitting hairs

Power punches
Footmovement
Combinations
Ability to change styles
Go totally offensive.

Definitely favors one of the fighters.

And LMAO at Mayweather sr. being the first to master the defense...the philly shell/shoulder roll has been used since at least the ****ing 50s/60s...He absolutely was not the first to pioneer/master it...
I never said pioneer. Master means you can win fights with that as your base. Sure Joe Frazier had some of it in his game but he won with the left hook and bob and weave, forward attack. Mastering it and it looking like Floyds current game... don't kid yourself. Name me the guy who won like that and mastered it like you are saying.

Saying Leonard > Mayweather because "look what he did to Mayweather sr."...is like saying Kyrie > Kobe because he's better than JR Smith..Terrible logic.

Terrible logic? I never said he was greater??? How about no logic at all??? I said he had more skills.

I brought up what he did to Mayweather SR. and then Canello to connect the fact that a welter weight didn't even attack Mayweather. He took no chances. Mayweather had 39 fights without anybody ever even doing a hard attack. Sugar Ray's approach was unique, different and way more resourceful than anybody in today's game

I think you'll find that Floyd hits harder than most people give him credit for....also Canelo was never a pressure fighter he's more of a boxer puncher/counter-puncher.

Floyd hits incredibly accurate, lots of punches directly on the nose and clean body shots. Which does make people second guess their attacks. But he shouldn't be on anybody's knockout list.

Canelo as a boxer puncher should know how to use his weight and leverage period. Its something you learn with learning the right cross. Yes its like saying a guy doesn't know how to do a layup. By the time you are a world class fighter it's first nature once you feel you are stronger than your opponent. Watch any fighter once he feels he's stronger than the other. They automatically press. Anybody considered in p4p has this on automatic pilot. The few exceptions, older Mayweather and Canelo.

Clearly you've never watched Roy Jones fight, beyond highlights. Jones was every bit the pot-shotter Floyd is. He rarely jabbed or threw combinations, and was in fact a very good defensive fighter. He also did NOT struggle with good defenses...He obliterated Toney and Hopkins who were/are both better on defense than Ray Leonard.

And he beats Hagler too.

Roy had the best combinations in the sport after Tyson left.

He jabbed early on, when he got confused see the first Hopkins fight when he realized that his speed wasn't going to get the job done. To be honest Hopkins beat him the second time too, Roy avoided Hopkins for years (this was well known) because Hopkins confused the shizt out of him. You clearly did not see either fight. To say he obliterated Hopkins, is absolutely and impossibility if you seen either fight.

Roy's pop shots are on a completely different level than Floyds - so which one did you not see? To say he only did pop shots is also an incredible oversight the only way you can think that is that you are youtubing best hits. Roy was to me, one of the best offensive machines ever and had one of the most dominating primes. Against Tarver, first Hopkins, Glenn Johnson you seen a rigidness that had trouble adapting. You fight better guys you have to adapt some. And Sugar Ray would have had him adapting.

Pointguard

07-10-2015, 11:25 PM

:applause: :applause: :applause:

I could expand on this...like a PEAK Magic...like this...

Or the fact that Magic took over a badly under-achieving Laker team, and immediately took them to the title, including a series-clinching blowout game, on the road, without Kareem, in which he hung a 42-15-7 stat-line.

Or the fact that he has the highest W-L% in NBA history at .740. BTW, without Kareem in his career... .742.

Or that when Kareem retired, he led LA to an even better record the next year, and then a Finals the year after that.

Or that when Magic retired, the Lakers immediately plunged back into mediocrity, where he found them.

I could go and on...but yes, Magic has a case for GOAT.

Can't rep you this but wow, thanks!

Carbine

07-11-2015, 12:04 AM

John Wooden basically claimed that had Wilt and Russell swapped roster, and coaches, and that it would have been Wilt holding all those rings.

But, for the sake of arguing, let's say that Chamberlain would have "only" won another five rings in his career...giving him seven (and then Russell would have "only" had six)...

where would you rank him then?

Depends. If he were on Boston would be embrace the role that Russell did?

Wilt may or may not have changed the dynamic of the whole team for better or worse. I'm not gonna sit here and guess what would have happened. We have to argue why DID happen.

Michael just flat out has as good an argument for GOAT as Wilt. At the very least: Unless you just put way too much emphasis on regular season numbers.

RoundMoundOfReb

07-11-2015, 12:05 AM

I never said pioneer. Master means you can win fights with that as your base. Sure Joe Frazier had some of it in his game but he won with the left hook and bob and weave, forward attack. Mastering it and it looking like Floyds current game... don't kid yourself. Name me the guy who won like that and mastered it like you are saying.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx0oAdtSXi8

^ Was better than Floyd Sr....significantly so

And what makes Jr. arguably the GOAT defensive fighter is not just the shoulder roll, it's the versatility. there's quite a few fights where he doesn't use it at all.. He pretty much didn't use the shoulder roll at all against pac and still made him look like a sparring partner,

I'll address the rest of your idiotic post later, when i have more time.

cheers.

inclinerator

07-11-2015, 01:10 AM

what's next? 60's technology are better than now

Pointguard

07-11-2015, 01:11 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tx0oAdtSXi8

^ Was better than Floyd Sr....significantly so

And what makes Jr. arguably the GOAT defensive fighter is not just the shoulder roll, it's the versatility. there's quite a few fights where he doesn't use it at all.. He pretty much didn't use the shoulder roll at all against pac and still made him look like a sparring partner,

I'll address the rest of your idiotic post later, when i have more time.

cheers.
Good stuff. There was something there but just like your basketball post and the naming of yourself after a basketball idiot, is it really generic to the argument? Its a sidebar, clown. The better show is a guy breaking the defense before Sugar Ray. I already moved on to fact I presented this to show Ray's resourcefulness in comparison to today's fighters:

I brought up what he did to Mayweather SR. and then Canello to connect the fact that a welter weight didn't even attack Mayweather. He took no chances. Mayweather had 39 fights without anybody ever even doing a hard attack. Sugar Ray's approach was unique, different and way more resourceful than anybody in today's game.

LAZERUSS

07-11-2015, 01:13 AM

what's next? 60's technology are better than now

You really think human athleticism is much greater today than 50 years ago?

https://www.ted.com/talks/david_epstein_are_athletes_really_getting_faster_b etter_stronger#t-56886

RidonKs

07-11-2015, 01:15 AM

I welcome anyone and everyone on ISH to go watch CuckFTW's videos of him playing ball and then come back here and tell me with a ****ing straight face that you still take him seriously.
he's a gamer who didn't grow up with the sport. i'd say he's doing pretty damn well.

AirFederer

07-11-2015, 03:44 AM

What if MJ and Magic had swapped teams in the 80ies? 7 rangz for MJ then plus his 6.

I could post a link to the NBA Record Book, or post quotes from peers and other HOFers, or provide his pure domination over his era, and players who would dominate in the next era...etc.,

but let me ask you two questions...

1. Why did MJ not win a ring in the 80's, and in fact, had a losing record in the post-season?

2. How many rings would Chamberlain have had, had he and Russell swapped rosters?

AirFederer

07-11-2015, 03:48 AM

I welcome anyone and everyone on ISH to go watch CuckFTW's videos of him playing ball and then come back here and tell me with a ****ing straight face that you still take him seriously.
Nevermind his stiff and awkward "moves". To fully grasp the greatness of his game you must ignore the eye test and focus solely on his stats.:D

Poetry

07-11-2015, 04:13 AM

what's next? 60's technology are better than now

Digital photography still hasn't caught up to traditional photography.

19th century technology > 21st century technology :D

Psileas

07-11-2015, 08:13 AM

Wilt doesn't really have arguments that make him superior to Jordan.

Titles? No.

Playoff performance? No.

Accolades? Jordan has a hell of a lot.

Regular Season numbers? Yes.

Playoff performance: Closer than you think, at least if your whole argument doesn't revolve on comparing their scoring averages. Regardless of how some want to spin it, Wilt is easily a GOAT level playoff performer (apart from regular season, of course).

Accolades: Not all of them existed in Wilt's time. DPOY's didn't exist, Finals' MVP's didn't exist up to '68, All-D teams didn't exist and regular season MVP's favored individual dominance less than in later years.

Also, how about bending the rules of the game itself in an effort to limit your dominance? How about people wondering if "basketball can survive Chamberlain", as a newspaper once wrote?
How about facing a HOF/top-50 player ever in individual matchups a hell of a lot more often?

You're fooling yourself if you think Wilt doesn't have a case over Jordan or anyone else.

sd3035

07-11-2015, 09:09 AM

Asukal

07-11-2015, 09:17 AM

Playoff performance: Closer than you think, at least if your whole argument doesn't revolve on comparing their scoring averages. Regardless of how some want to spin it, Wilt is easily a GOAT level playoff performer (apart from regular season, of course).

Accolades: Not all of them existed in Wilt's time. DPOY's didn't exist, Finals' MVP's didn't exist up to '68, All-D teams didn't exist and regular season MVP's favored individual dominance less than in later years.

Also, how about bending the rules of the game itself in an effort to limit your dominance? How about people wondering if "basketball can survive Chamberlain", as a newspaper once wrote?
How about facing a HOF/top-50 player ever in individual matchups a hell of a lot more often?

You're fooling yourself if you think Wilt doesn't have a case over Jordan or anyone else.

No he doesn't. Since when did choking equate to greatness? :confusedshrug:

30>22>18=2/6 :rolleyes:

LAZERUSS

07-11-2015, 09:19 AM

Nevermind his stiff and awkward "moves". To fully grasp the greatness of his game you must ignore the eye test and focus solely on his stats.:D

Awkward?

:roll: :roll: :roll:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWrGWuU2Ak

And his "stats" were light-years ahead of the players of his era, several of whom would dominate the NBA after he left. Guys like Cowens, Hayes, Lanier, and Kareem.

And look at this "awkward" 35 year old Chamberlain in the '72 Finals...with one badly sprained wrist, and the other wrist FRACTURED...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvPQV1WHtsU

35 years old, and playing on a surgically repaired knee!

If you think h was "awkward" you better get your eyes checked my friend.

LAZERUSS

07-11-2015, 09:38 AM

No he doesn't. Since when did choking equate to greatness? :confusedshrug:

30>22>18=2/6 :rolleyes:

How about this "choker?"

30-27-5-8 .515 (in post-season NBA's that shot .425 in the same span)...

That was a prime Chamberlain in his first 67 playoff games, 35 of which were against Russell, and another six against Nate Thurmond.

Now, Asukiss, find me another GOAT candidate with that stat-line. I'll even help you out...find me another GOAT who put up ON playoff SERIES with that stat-line. In fact, you would be hard-pressed to find a GOAT with ONE GAM in which he scored 30 points, grabbed 27 rebounds, handed out five assists, blocked eight shots, and shot ten percentage points above the post-season league eFG% mark.

BTW, how many times was Shaq outrebounded in his post-season career? Hakeem? Kareem? A prime Shaq was being outrebounded by the 6-8 Rodman, and the 6-7 Ben Wallace. A prime Hakeem in his '94 Finals was not only outrebounded by Ewing, but by Oakley and Thorpe, as well. Hell, he was crushed by Shaq in two playoff series. And Kareem? A PEAK was outrebounded by Clyde Lee in one series, and by an old Wilt in TWO. Hell, later on he was crushed Moses in two more, and even a guard on his own team was routinely outrebounding him?

Chamberlain? In his 29 post-season series, he was NEVER outrebounded by an opposing center (and almost all of them are in the HOF.) And he was only outrebounded in ONE playoff series, and by an all-time great rebounder (Jerry Lucas), by ONE rpg. BUT, about when Lucas was a CENTER going up against Wilt? In the '72 Finals, a 35 year old Wilt, playing 47 mpg, outrebounded a 31 year old Lucas, playing 46 mpg by a ... 23-10 rpg margin!

And clutch?

Wilt's numbers in his 23 MUST WIN playoff games...13 of which came against HOF starting centers.

12-11 W-L record

31.1 ppg (Regular season career average was 30.1 ppg)
26.1 rpg (Regular season career average was 22.9 rpg)
3.4 apg (Regular season career average was 4.4 apg)
.540 FG% (Regular season career average was .540 FG%)

3 games of 50+ points

5 games of 40+ points (including a Finals 40+ elimination game)

13 games of 30+ points

6 games of 30+ rebounds

20 games of 20+ rebounds

BTW, Chamberlain's 31.1 ppg ranks THIRD, all-time, in PPG in MUST WIN playoff games, and just behind Lebron's 31.9 ppg and MJ's 31.3 ppg.

Go ahead and find an all-time great CENTER who put up those numbers in their MUST WIN playoff games.

Yes, Chamberlain has a STRONG case as the GOAT playoff performer. I would say that only MJ has a stronger one, and that would be based SOLELY on scoring.

Asukal

07-11-2015, 09:46 AM

How about this "choker?"

30-27-5-8 .515 (in post-season NBA's that shot .425 in the same span)...

That was a prime Chamberlain in his first 67 playoff games, 35 of which were against Russell, and another six against Nate Thurmond.

Now, Asukiss, find me another GOAT candidate with that stat-line. I'll even help you out...find me another GOAT who put up ON playoff SERIES with that stat-line. In fact, you would be hard-pressed to find a GOAT with ONE GAM in which he scored 30 points, grabbed 27 rebounds, handed out five assists, blocked eight shots, and shot ten percentage points above the post-season league eFG% mark.

BTW, how many times was Shaq outrebounded in his post-season career? Hakeem? Kareem? A prime Shaq was being outrebounded by the 6-8 Rodman, and the 6-7 Ben Wallace. A prime Hakeem in his '94 Finals was not only outrebounded by Ewing, but by Oakley and Thorpe, as well. Hell, he was crushed by Shaq in two playoff series. And Kareem? A PEAK was outrebounded by Clyde Lee in one series, and by an old Wilt in TWO. Hell, later on he was crushed Moses in two more, and even a guard on his own team was routinely outrebounding him?

Chamberlain? In his 29 post-season series, he was NEVER outrebounded by an opposing center (and almost all of them are in the HOF.) And he was only outrebounded in ONE playoff series, and by an all-time great rebounder (Jerry Lucas), by ONE rpg. BUT, about when Lucas was a CENTER going up against Wilt? In the '72 Finals, a 35 year old Wilt, playing 47 mpg, outrebounded a 31 year old Lucas, playing 46 mpg by a ... 23-10 rpg margin!

And clutch?

Go ahead and find an all-time great CENTER who put up those numbers in their MUST WIN playoff games.

Yes, Chamberlain has a STRONG case as the GOAT playoff performer. I would say that only MJ has a stronger one, and that would be based SOLELY on scoring.

Stop spewing bullshit grandpa. Wilt and Win are not synonymous. :whatever:

Must win? Well he didn't win. He is the GOAT choker with 2/6. Don't worry, lebron just might take that title in the next few years. :roll:

LAZERUSS

07-11-2015, 09:51 AM

Stop spewing bullshit grandpa. Wilt and Win are not synonymous. :whatever:

Must win? Well he didn't win. He is the GOAT choker with 2/6. Don't worry, lebron just might take that title in the next few years. :roll:

So MJ choked in his first six playoff seasons, and then again, right in the middle of his three-peats? Kareem in 12 of his? Hakeem in 13 of his? Shaq in 15 of his? You can go right down the list my friend.

RINGS = TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS.

GimmeThat

07-11-2015, 09:54 AM

without knowing much about boxing.

but I'm also even more intrigued about this question

are military generals, admirals far more superior in strategical/tactical expertise, now, then say compared to the 60's, or even early 1900's

as for human athleticism

I guess this is how I feel about it.

I like the playground, and I am sure that we all love it
but playground talks, is just what it is

you leave the playground
it's either the blame game, or the ability to forecast

LAZERUSS

07-11-2015, 10:29 AM

Playoff performance: Closer than you think, at least if your whole argument doesn't revolve on comparing their scoring averages. Regardless of how some want to spin it, Wilt is easily a GOAT level playoff performer (apart from regular season, of course).

Accolades: Not all of them existed in Wilt's time. DPOY's didn't exist, Finals' MVP's didn't exist up to '68, All-D teams didn't exist and regular season MVP's favored individual dominance less than in later years.

Also, how about bending the rules of the game itself in an effort to limit your dominance? How about people wondering if "basketball can survive Chamberlain", as a newspaper once wrote?
How about facing a HOF/top-50 player ever in individual matchups a hell of a lot more often?

You're fooling yourself if you think Wilt doesn't have a case over Jordan or anyone else.

I have said it before, but Chamberlain was the best player in the league in the entire decade of the 60's. Plain-and-simple.

Psileas

07-11-2015, 10:33 AM

No he doesn't. Since when did choking equate to greatness?

Since the same time choking was somehow connected with Wilt.

Asukal

07-11-2015, 10:37 AM

So MJ choked in his first six playoff seasons, and then again, right in the middle of his three-peats? Kareem in 12 of his? Hakeem in 13 of his? Shaq in 15 of his? You can go right down the list my friend.

RINGS = TEAM ACCOMPLISHMENTS.

Don't compare a guy who regularly falls short even when he had enough at his disposal to achieve victory to a guy who delivered when he had enough to win.
MJ's finals never went to a game 7, that's domination. Wilt fell short most of the time, that's getting dominated. 30>22>18=2/6 is the only argument I need shawn! :whatever:

LAZERUSS

07-11-2015, 10:43 AM

Don't compare a guy who regularly falls short even when he had enough at his disposal to achieve victory to a guy who delivered when he had enough to win.
MJ's finals never went to a game 7, that's domination. Wilt fell short most of the time, that's getting dominated. 30>22>18=2/6 is the only argument I need shawn! :whatever:

Chamberlain DOMINATED the greatest TEAM winner in NBA history.

That is all you need to know, my friend.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1I9jddU8eNWrI8MMOPs_0l58WnjFNADvF4iIcu0Sfz7A/edit?pli=1#gid=0

Nearly a 30-30 game (yes, 30 ppg and 30 rpg) EVERY single time he stepped on the floor against Russell in their 143 career H2H's.

Pure and absolute DOMINATION.

Next...

Asukal

07-11-2015, 11:07 AM

Chamberlain DOMINATED the greatest TEAM winner in NBA history.

That is all you need to know, my friend.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1I9jddU8eNWrI8MMOPs_0l58WnjFNADvF4iIcu0Sfz7A/edit?pli=1#gid=0

Nearly a 30-30 game (yes, 30 ppg and 30 rpg) EVERY single time he stepped on the floor against Russell in their 143 career H2H's.

Pure and absolute DOMINATION.

Next...

Uhhh, it's the other way around grandpa. He got dominated really bad. 11 rings to 2. :roll:

LAZERUSS

07-11-2015, 12:10 PM

Uhhh, it's the other way around grandpa. He got dominated really bad. 11 rings to 2. :roll:

:roll: :roll: :roll:

TEAM game.

BTW, if Russell dominated Wilt, then...

It doesn't work that way. You are claiming Russell was greater than Wilt by his 11-2 margin in rings. Russell actually held a 9-1 margin in TEAM rings from '60 thru '69 over Wilt's TEAMs, and a 7-1 margin in H2H TEAM wins.

So, if you are going to use that RIDICULOUS argument, then let the game's begin. And remember, these losses are directly blamed on the player, and not the TEAM:

Bird:

'80: Beaten badly by Dr. J, 4-1 in the '80 ECF's.
'82: Beaten by Dr. J in the '80 ECF's.
'83: Downright embarrassing. SWEPT by Marques Johnson.
'85: Easily whipped by Worthy in Finals.
'87: Blown apart by Worthy in the Finals.
'88: Shelled by Dantley in the '88 ECF's (shot .351 BTW.)
'90: Outplayed by Johnny Newman in first round loss
'91: Taken to task by Mark Aguirre.
'92: Someone by the name of Larry Sanders easily beats Bird.

BTW, as a sidenote, Bird only went 1-2 against the Bad Boys, and 1-2 against the Lakers (and in reality, it should have been 0-3.)

Kareem:

'70: Shelled by Reed in the ECF's.
'72: Dominated by WILT in the WCF's.
'73: Completely shutdown by Thurmond in the first round.
'74: Beaten by a 6-9 white red-head (and Cowens did outplay him in game 7)
'75: Kareem plays so poorly his team doesn't make the playoffs.
'76: Again, this career loser single-handedly keeps his team from making the playoffs.
'77: SWEPT by Walton in WCF's.
'78: Routed by Webster in the first round.
'79: Routed by Sikma in the second round.
'81: Single-handedly takes his 54-28 Lakers down the drain against Moses' 40-42 Rockets (in a series in which Moses just crushed him.)
'83: Meets Moses again...but this time Moses has even more help. A SWEEPING loss, all while getting annihilated by Moses.
'84: Beaten by Parish.
'86: Beaten badly by Sampson.
'89: Laimbeer almost shuts him out.

Furthermore, KAJ won his only ring in the '70's with the easiest ride to a title in NBA history (and was outplayed by Wilt in the '71 WCF's.) And he doesn't even play in the clinching road win in '80 (as Magic leads the Lakers to the title.) He is then a second banana from '82 thru '85. From '86 thru '87, he is the third wheel. And in his last title, his Lakers win DESPITE his awful play.

Jordan:

'85: Beaten by Ricky Pierce.
'86: Swept by Danny Ainge.
'87: Again, swept by Ainge.
'88: Blown away by Dumars.
'89: Easily beaten by Dumars.
'90: Again...beaten by Dumars.
'91: Finally beats Dumars.
'94: Knows he can't win, and quits. team goes 55-27 without and loses a close game seven to the 56-26 Knicks, who go on to lose a close game seven to the 58-24 Rockets.
'95: Comes back but is badly beaten by Nick Anderson.

Oh, and how about Hakeem? While Wilt was "losing" to Russell in nine seasons...

'85: Blown out in the first round by Eaton
'86: Beaten by Parish
'87: Easily beaten in the second round by Alton Lister.
'88: SWEPT in first round by James Donaldson
'89: Beaten in the first round by Olden Polynice
'90: Beaten in the first round by Mychal Thompson (
'91: SWEPT in the first round by Divac.
'92: Single-handedly prevents his team from even making the playoffs.
'93: Beaten by Michael Cage
'96: SWEPT in the second round by Sam Perkins.
'97: Beaten by Greg Ostertag in the WCF's.
'98: Beaten by Greg Foster in the first round.
'99: Absolutely slaughtered by Shaq in the first round.
'00: Single-handedly keeps his team from making the playoffs.
'01: See above.
'02: Wiped out by Ben Wallace in the first round.

Furthermore...

MJ: LOST in NINE seasons.
Bird: LOST in TEN seasons.
Duncan: LOST in 12 seasons.
Kobe: LOST in 12 seasons.
Oscar: LOST in 13 seasons.
West: LOST in 13 seasons.
Baylor: LOST in 13 seasons.
Kareem: LOST in 14 seasons
Shaq: LOST in 15 seasons.
Hakeem: LOST in 16 seasons.

What a bunch of pathetic losers.

The REALITY was, Russell's CELTICS beat Wilt's TEAMS. Furthermore, Chamberlain outplayed Russell in one series, and beat him like a red-headed step child in their seven other H2H playoff series (including carrying his TEAM to a dominating win over Russell's eight-time defending Celtics in '67.)

Next...

Asukal

07-11-2015, 12:18 PM

:roll: :roll: :roll:

TEAM game.

BTW, if Russell dominated Wilt, then...

Next...

"Hey, thank you for leaving me off your Mount Rushmore. I

LAZERUSS

07-11-2015, 12:25 PM

[QUOTE=Asukal]"Hey, thank you for leaving me off your Mount Rushmore. I

scandisk_

07-11-2015, 12:28 PM

70's-90's HW > modern HW

modern LH,MW and below > 70's-80's

RJJ would murder em

Asukal

07-11-2015, 12:46 PM

John Wooden...

If Wilt and Russell swapped rosters, and coaches, and it it would have been Wilt holding all those rings.

Your favorite word. :roll:

LAZERUSS

07-11-2015, 01:20 PM

Your favorite word. :roll:

How about this, then...

WHEN Chamberlain had a supporting cast the equal of Russell's...

a 4-1 slaughter of Russell and his Celtics.

So, yes, IF Wilt would have had Russell's rosters and coaches, no doubt he would have been holding a TON of rings.

AirFederer

07-11-2015, 01:52 PM

I was talking about CavsFTW :roll:

Awkward?

:roll: :roll: :roll:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rCWrGWuU2Ak

And his "stats" were light-years ahead of the players of his era, several of whom would dominate the NBA after he left. Guys like Cowens, Hayes, Lanier, and Kareem.

And look at this "awkward" 35 year old Chamberlain in the '72 Finals...with one badly sprained wrist, and the other wrist FRACTURED...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uvPQV1WHtsU

35 years old, and playing on a surgically repaired knee!

If you think h was "awkward" you better get your eyes checked my friend.

Poochymama

07-11-2015, 02:00 PM

Playoff performance: Closer than you think, at least if your whole argument doesn't revolve on comparing their scoring averages. Regardless of how some want to spin it, Wilt is easily a GOAT level playoff performer (apart from regular season, of course).
.

Only if you don't account for pace at all, which would be stupid. Wilt's playoff stats are worse than every other top 10 guy besides Russell after taking into account pace and minutes, especially when you consider that scoring and efficiency(TS%) is the most important stat. No way does he have a case for GOAT playoff performer, your stan goggles are blinding you. You're a Wilt stan just like Laz, so your opinion on this subject is tainted.

Pointguard

07-13-2015, 10:38 PM

Only if you don't account for pace at all, which would be stupid. Wilt's playoff stats are worse than every other top 10 guy besides Russell after taking into account pace and minutes, especially when you consider that scoring and efficiency(TS%) is the most important stat. No way does he have a case for GOAT playoff performer, your stan goggles are blinding you. You're a Wilt stan just like Laz, so your opinion on this subject is tainted.
TS% isn't the most important stat. FG% is a much better indicator of greatness and is even a bigger distance when considering bigs (Like prime Dirk vs prime Shaq. TS% back then would be a different formula and it would have favored Wilt a bit. Its like saying people would draft a 7 foot stretch four before a dominating center.

LAZERUSS

07-13-2015, 10:59 PM

TS% isn't the most important stat. FG% is a much better indicator of greatness and is even a bigger distance when considering bigs (Like prime Dirk vs prime Shaq. TS% back then would be a different formula and it would have favored Wilt a bit. Its like saying people would draft a 7 foot stretch four before a dominating center.

Not only that, but those that use "pace" against the players of the 60's, never adjust for league-wide FG%'s either. Chamberlain had post-seasons in which he was shooting a full ten+ percentage points above the post-season league average. Hell, in his '64 playoff run, he averaged 34.7 ppg on a .543 FG%, in a post-season NBA that shot an eFG% of .420! And in his '65 EDF's, against Russell, and covering seven games, he averaged 30.1 ppg on a .555 FG% in a post-season that shot .429 overall (oh, and on 20.8 FGAs per game, as well.)

Poochymama

07-14-2015, 12:30 AM

Poochymama

07-14-2015, 12:31 AM

Not only that, but those that use "pace" against the players of the 60's, never adjust for league-wide FG%'s either. Chamberlain had post-seasons in which he was shooting a full ten+ percentage points above the post-season league average. Hell, in his '64 playoff run, he averaged 34.7 ppg on a .543 FG%, in a post-season NBA that shot an eFG% of .420! And in his '65 EDF's, against Russell, and covering seven games, he averaged 30.1 ppg on a .555 FG% in a post-season that shot .429 overall (oh, and on 20.8 FGAs per game, as well.)

Wilt's fg% would go down in today's slower pace and without 20 gimme transition buckets every game. Just because people were throwing up horrible form set shots and jump shots back then doesn't mean Wilt's looks would magically get better.

LAZERUSS

07-14-2015, 12:34 AM

There's literally 0 reason to use FG% if you can calculate TS%

It's not even debatable, it's just basic math.

Ah...there was in Wilt's era. Thanks to the research of Fpliii, we know that Chamberlain's EFFECTIVE TS%'s were roughly 2% higher than his ACTUAL TS%'s. Same with his FT%'s.

And again, Chamberlain's eFG%'s and even his EFFECTIVE TS%'s were MILES ahead of their respective post-season averages.

Not to mention the fact that Chamberlain SLAUGHTERED his peers on the glass, and held his opposing centers to WAY BELOW their seasonal FG%'s, as well.

LAZERUSS

07-14-2015, 12:43 AM

Wilt's fg% would go down in today's slower pace and without 20 gimme transition buckets every game. Just because people were throwing up horrible form set shots and jump shots back then doesn't mean Wilt's looks would magically get better.

Pure bullshit.

He would have much better spacing, and far less talented centers to face.

He was also a sprinter at KU.

If Shaq could hang 30 ppg .600 seasons in this era...then Chamberlain would EASILY have done it.

Asukal

07-14-2015, 12:48 AM

Pure bullshit.

He would have much better spacing, and far less talented centers to face.

He was also a sprinter at KU.

If Shaq could hang 30 ppg .600 seasons in this era...then Chamberlain would EASILY have done it.

Nah, shaq had really good footwork and massive weight paired with his strength. Wilt had tall tales and unused condoms. :oldlol:

Marchesk

07-14-2015, 03:14 AM

Wilt's fg% would go down in today's slower pace and without 20 gimme transition buckets every game. Just because people were throwing up horrible form set shots and jump shots back then doesn't mean Wilt's looks would magically get better.

Wilt shot 68.3% in the 66/67 season on 24 ppg. As Wilt shot less, his percentage went up, culminating in a record breaking FG% season in 73, which still stands today. It's laughable to think he would shoot worse in this era. He shot 72.7% from the field as a 36 year old.

Wilt scored tons of points in the post, so why would he struggle at a slower pace?

iTare

07-14-2015, 04:01 AM

Digital photography still hasn't caught up to traditional photography.

19th century technology > 21st century technology :D
If traditional photography is dead, then my relationship with my Canon 70D must be necrophilia. The images I create on my phones, with their weird colour balances, their *very* laggy shutters, their limited ability to crop, their narrow aperture, the lack of real zoom (in or out), inability to shoot RAW, low frame rate... need I go on? I can create a tasty PBJ sandwich on my knee, using my finger as a knife but if I wish to have a dinner party I need a properly equipped kitchen.

sportjames23

07-14-2015, 04:04 AM

julizaver

07-14-2015, 10:23 AM

Do you believe the sport of boxing right now is just as strong as it was in the 70s/80s?

When speaking about heavy weight definitely. Just put Tyson vs Klitchko (Tyson best years were in the late 80s) and all the other bigs. And a prime Ali - so fast, so invincible in defense.

Psileas

07-14-2015, 11:00 AM

Wilt shot 68.3% in the 66/67 season on 24 ppg. As Wilt shot less, his percentage went up, culminating in a record breaking FG% season in 73, which still stands today. It's laughable to think he would shoot worse in this era. He shot 72.7% from the field as a 36 year old.

Wilt scored tons of points in the post, so why would he struggle at a slower pace?

In general, it's laughable to think that, at a slower pace, a center is going to shoot worse, whereas it's both easier to create a good offense and feed the center under these exact conditions. Which, btw, is a major reason why I think PER is such BS.

AirFederer

07-14-2015, 12:51 PM

I'd like to see the average shot clock when Wilt dominated scoring in the sixties. To me it seems obvious that he -at that pace- must have gotten a lot of fast break points. A lot. And a lot off OR.

Dro

07-14-2015, 01:25 PM

Nah, shaq had really good footwork and massive weight paired with his strength. Wilt had tall tales and unused condoms. :oldlol:
Completely uninformed...If you don't think Wilt was strong, then you don't know shit....

Asukal

07-14-2015, 01:33 PM

Completely uninformed...If you don't think Wilt was strong, then you don't know shit....

:biggums: :oldlol: :lol :roll:

Round Mound

07-15-2015, 09:06 PM

80s Was The Best Decade In Many Things Including Having...Roberto Duran, Sugar Ray Leonard, Marvin Hagler and Thomas Hearns in the Same Weight Class For Many Years of That Glorious Decade :bowdown:

La Frescobaldi

07-16-2015, 12:15 AM

When speaking about heavy weight definitely. Just put Tyson vs Klitchko (Tyson best years were in the late 80s) and all the other bigs. And a prime Ali - so fast, so invincible in defense.

Boxing is an entirely different situation from basketball. Both have seen enormous improvements in skills, but basketball players are the same size they've always been. Don't confuse body sculpting with actual strength. HW boxing has seen an enormous change.

Either Klitschko would defeat Iron Mike. The only possible chance Mike would have would be in the first four or five rounds? If that. But their early-rounds-defense is the highest level of boxing skill ever seen at the heavyweight level.

Wladimir Klitschko has gone entire bouts where he was hit fewer than FIVE TIMES - in title fights against champions. That has literally never been seen before.

But it would be much closer than anything Ali could do. Prime Ali (6'3" 205lbs.) would have been a cruiser by any standard of the last 20 years. A latter-day Ali (who never had 6 pack abs in his life and after '71 always had flab rolling over his shorts) would be able to get in the ring with a Lennox or a Klitschko, because his skills were so enormous, but he would just have to run away from them. They would be overwhelmingly too powerful. All three of those guys punch harder than Foreman or Norton.

The myths of those old guys beating up on modern day boxers don't fit with the cold hard light of reality.
Joe Louis boxed at 192 lbs. Ali's first 5 or 6 years of pro fights he was sub-200 also. Both of them spent most of their careers fighting guys far beneath their level. Joe Frazier, blind in one eye, 40 lbs lighter than these guys, and.... sorry to pour ice water on that fuzzy daydream..... who never had a power punch, decked Ali fairly often. These guys would literally fly if Lennox or Wladimir wound up on them.
It wouldn't be close at all. UDs or KOs or the towel.

RoundMoundOfReb

07-16-2015, 05:05 AM

Klitschko is better than Tyson. Tyson is the most overrated fighter of all time. Lewis >> Tyson.

Angel Face

07-16-2015, 05:21 AM

Klitschko is better than Tyson. Tyson is the most overrated fighter of all time. Lewis >> Tyson.

Prime Tyson would ktfo Klitschko, any of the bros. Reason Wlad is dominating Heavies today is because there's no good competition.

RoundMoundOfReb

07-16-2015, 05:31 AM

Prime Tyson would ktfo Klitschko, any of the bros. Reason Wlad is dominating Heavies today is because there's no good competition.
And exactly which great competition did Tyson beat? Douglas gave him a lesson.

Angel Face

07-16-2015, 05:39 AM

Its much weaker now. Google Mayweather vs Sugar Ray Leonard. Daddy Mayweather used the same defense Floyd does. Both were minimalist on offense. 70's/80's was the best boxing ever.

They share same type of defense, but Sr. Is nowhere near the boxer Jr. is. Prime Pac and Mayweather could hang against the fab 4.

Duran vs Pacquiao would be a dope match. :bowdown:

Pointguard

07-16-2015, 01:55 PM

They share same type of defense, but Sr. Is nowhere near the boxer Jr. is. Prime Pac and Mayweather could hang against the fab 4.

Duran vs Pacquiao would be a dope match. :bowdown:
Yeah, that would be great with Pac man going in and out and Duran block, duck punch marching forward. I think both could hang. The biggest difference would be they would have been pressured into a fight where it got uncomfortable and with guys who would take more risk than the current day fighters. No way do guys like Canello and Vargas have chance back then.

Pointguard

07-16-2015, 04:02 PM

Either Klitschko would defeat Iron Mike. The only possible chance Mike would have would be in the first four or five rounds? If that. But their early-rounds-defense is the highest level of boxing skill ever seen at the heavyweight level.

Wladimir Klitschko has gone entire bouts where he was hit fewer than FIVE TIMES - in title fights against champions. That has literally never been seen before.

But it would be much closer than anything Ali could do. Prime Ali (6'3" 205lbs.) would have been a cruiser by any standard of the last 20 years. A latter-day Ali (who never had 6 pack abs in his life and after '71 always had flab rolling over his shorts) would be able to get in the ring with a Lennox or a Klitschko, because his skills were so enormous, but he would just have to run away from them. They would be overwhelmingly too powerful. All three of those guys punch harder than Foreman or Norton.

The myths of those old guys beating up on modern day boxers don't fit with the cold hard light of reality.
Joe Louis boxed at 192 lbs. Ali's first 5 or 6 years of pro fights he was sub-200 also. Both of them spent most of their careers fighting guys far beneath their level. Joe Frazier, blind in one eye, 40 lbs lighter than these guys, and.... sorry to pour ice water on that fuzzy daydream..... who never had a power punch, decked Ali fairly often. These guys would literally fly if Lennox or Wladimir wound up on them.
It wouldn't be close at all. UDs or KOs or the towel.
I dont get your point here.

Lamont Brewster (who I was very cool with his ex)and Corrine Sanders leveraged Vitali and Rahman (looked to be 30lbs lighter than Lennox, clobbered Lennox in his prime and he doesn't have a punch. All three were sloppy fighters. While Lennox beat Holyfield once in 2 decisions, Holyfield was a light heavy weight in the beginning that got hit a lot. Yet Lennox couldn't do much with him and lost the last three rounds of the first fight with. Lennox rocking the tougher chinned Klitxcho is a knock on the brothers. George Forman was knocking 200lb people in the air. Sonny Liston was doing the same. The guys that beat the Klizts and Lennox were really bad fighters, and weren't very skilled.

Lennox is older than Tyson but wasn't a thought in Tyson's prime, Ty peaked early, but putting Lennox in a separate category of all HWs as being better than them is a bit crazy. Your big three could not handle skilled big punchers. While they are bigger than Foreman, Tyson and Liston their punches are obviously of a inferior quality. And much weaker than most great heavyweight punchers. And the brothers have a suspect chin to boot.

Only Ali is in the same tier as prime Tyson in HW defense. And no way would I compare the K bros with prime Tyson. From defense to Offense, Tyson is in a class of his own. Not even Mayweather Jr is in his class.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uYZzMPsm6c4

La Frescobaldi

07-17-2015, 08:46 AM

I dont get your point here.

Lamont Brewster (who I was very cool with his ex)and Corrine Sanders leveraged Vitali and Rahman (looked to be 30lbs lighter than Lennox, clobbered Lennox in his prime and he doesn't have a punch. All three were sloppy fighters. While Lennox beat Holyfield once in 2 decisions, Holyfield was a light heavy weight in the beginning that got hit a lot. Yet Lennox couldn't do much with him and lost the last three rounds of the first fight with. Lennox rocking the tougher chinned Klitxcho is a knock on the brothers. George Forman was knocking 200lb people in the air. Sonny Liston was doing the same. The guys that beat the Klizts and Lennox were really bad fighters, and weren't very skilled.

Lennox is older than Tyson but wasn't a thought in Tyson's prime, Ty peaked early, but putting Lennox in a separate category of all HWs as being better than them is a bit crazy. Your big three could not handle skilled big punchers. While they are bigger than Foreman, Tyson and Liston their punches are obviously of a inferior quality. And much weaker than most great heavyweight punchers. And the brothers have a suspect chin to boot.

Only Ali is in the same tier as prime Tyson in HW defense. And no way would I compare the K bros with prime Tyson. From defense to Offense, Tyson is in a class of his own. Not even Mayweather Jr is in his class.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uYZzMPsm6c4
Brewster never fought Vitali he fought Wladimir and only beat him because he gassed, when they re-matched Brewster got completely dominated & destroyed.
Vitali lost to Lewis on a cut, all cards had VK winning that fight. He smashed Sanders.
It's easy to confuse the brothers so I won't say more.

There's footage of Mike leaping in the air in desperate attempt to even get to Lewis. If Mike had more reach maybe he would tell a different tale. In his day he was known for that astounding bull-rush but he would run straight into Wladimir's left jab which has one-punch knocked out multiple heavyweights.
Tyson had probably the shortest time of greatness of any ATG tho it wasn't due to the ring but his own folly out of the gym. As I said he would do better against them than Ali would.

Ali's early and mid-career defense I won't bash but you know his style, arms down and duck & weave... it was pure athleticism. The man had a chin but when he slowed down a little he got hit in the head A LOT. More than any ATG and it's not close.
Also you'll have to explain why he filled his card with bums for years, why he ducked so many major fighters, and where he ever fought anyone remotely of their size, speed and skill. Foreman was the big guy at 217lbs.
But as far as defense both he and Tyson relied too much on sheer speed, their defensive glove and arm work was not as great. Neither of them are close to the Klitschkos' technical skills in defense, my friend... I recommend watching more film of the Klitschkos opponents. They look great against everyone else but they can't land a blow on Wladimir.....

Out of those early days, I mean '60s-70s, Foreman was the only guy with a punch comparable to the modern day gentlemen.
Competition in the so-called Golden Era was nothing compared to today.... look at Olympic heavyweights, last time an American won was 30 years ago and it had been a long time before that..... Eastern countries were barred from competing in the pros with the West when all those guys boxed. When the ban was lifted, American boxers immediately disappeared, and lololol people suddenly started saying "boxing is in decline" LMAO.

I loved all those guys but they lived in a very small insulated American world of boxing. When the rest of the world got invited to the games American boxers shrank real bad.

Rooster

07-17-2015, 12:12 PM

Brewster never fought Vitali he fought Wladimir and only beat him because he gassed, when they re-matched Brewster got completely dominated & destroyed.
Vitali lost to Lewis on a cut, all cards had VK winning that fight. He smashed Sanders.
It's easy to confuse the brothers so I won't say more.

There's footage of Mike leaping in the air in desperate attempt to even get to Lewis. If Mike had more reach maybe he would tell a different tale. In his day he was known for that astounding bull-rush but he would run straight into Wladimir's left jab which has one-punch knocked out multiple heavyweights.
Tyson had probably the shortest time of greatness of any ATG tho it wasn't due to the ring but his own folly out of the gym. As I said he would do better against them than Ali would.

Ali's early and mid-career defense I won't bash but you know his style, arms down and duck & weave... it was pure athleticism. The man had a chin but when he slowed down a little he got hit in the head A LOT. More than any ATG and it's not close.
Also you'll have to explain why he filled his card with bums for years, why he ducked so many major fighters, and where he ever fought anyone remotely of their size, speed and skill. Foreman was the big guy at 217lbs.
But as far as defense both he and Tyson relied too much on sheer speed, their defensive glove and arm work was not as great. Neither of them are close to the Klitschkos' technical skills in defense, my friend... I recommend watching more film of the Klitschkos opponents. They look great against everyone else but they can't land a blow on Wladimir.....

Out of those early days, I mean '60s-70s, Foreman was the only guy with a punch comparable to the modern day gentlemen.
Competition in the so-called Golden Era was nothing compared to today.... look at Olympic heavyweights, last time an American won was 30 years ago and it had been a long time before that..... Eastern countries were barred from competing in the pros with the West when all those guys boxed. When the ban was lifted, American boxers immediately disappeared, and lololol people suddenly started saying "boxing is in decline" LMAO.

I loved all those guys but they lived in a very small insulated American world of boxing. When the rest of the world got invited to the games American boxers shrank real bad.

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

Ali had the greatest resume in heavyweight history. :bowdown:

Name me one fighter he should have fought but ducked.:confusedshrug:

And Foreman is not even the hardest heavyweight puncher in their era:no:

STATUTORY

07-17-2015, 12:22 PM

I loved all those guys but they lived in a very small insulated American world of boxing. When the rest of the world got invited to the games American boxers shrank real bad.

It's the same logic with the NBA, wilt and rusell played in the pre international ball era...

Rooster

07-17-2015, 12:23 PM

Rooster

07-17-2015, 12:32 PM

Clearly you've never watched Roy Jones fight, beyond highlights. Jones was every bit the pot-shotter Floyd is. He rarely jabbed or threw combinations, and was in fact a very good defensive fighter. He also did NOT struggle with good defenses...He obliterated Toney and Hopkins who were/are both better on defense than Ray Leonard..

You must be confusing the version of Hopkins when Roy first fought him to now.
And Toney was severely dehydrated when Roy beat him.

RoundMoundOfReb

07-17-2015, 12:34 PM

It's the same logic with the NBA, wilt and rusell played in the pre international ball era...
Excellent point. Another reason why the 60s was a weak era.

RoundMoundOfReb

07-17-2015, 12:35 PM

K Bros era are worst in heavyweight history. These bros has not beaten anyone that closely resemble an elite fighter.
No, they aren't. It is most definitely a weak era for heavyweight boxing, but the Klitschkos (Wlad) are great.

Rooster

07-17-2015, 12:36 PM

RoundMoundOfReb

07-17-2015, 12:36 PM

You must be confusing the version of Hopkins when Roy first fought him to now.
And Toney was severely dehydrated when Roy beat him.

I'm not even the biggest Jones fan but the version of Hopkins he beat was prime or at least close to it. He didn't lose for 12 years after that.

And yes Toney was drained...

Rooster

07-17-2015, 12:38 PM

No, they aren't. It is most definitely a weak era for heavyweight boxing, but the Klitschkos (Wlad) are great.

I never said they are not great but who did they beat?:confusedshrug:

Rooster

07-17-2015, 12:39 PM

I'm not even the biggest Jones fan but the version of Hopkins he beat was prime or at least close to it. He didn't lose for 12 years after that.

And yes Toney was drained...

But are you implying that version of Hopkins was the master defensively:confusedshrug:

RoundMoundOfReb

07-17-2015, 12:41 PM

I never said they are not great but who did they beat?:confusedshrug:
Who did Marciano beat?

Wlad has quite a few very good wins (Povetkin, recently). You're right though, no great wins.

RoundMoundOfReb

07-17-2015, 12:42 PM

But are you implying that version of Hopkins was the master defensively:confusedshrug:

Yes, he was a good defensive fighter then. Sure he grew more intelligent as he aged but he was physically at his best then (28).

Rooster

07-17-2015, 12:45 PM

Who did Marciano beat?

Wlad has quite a few very good wins (Povetkin, recently). You're right though, no great wins.

Marciano never beaten any great fighter in their prime, mostly grandpas by the time he faced them. And despite his perfect record, he's not regarded on the same level of Ali. K Bros are the same.

RoundMoundOfReb

07-17-2015, 12:46 PM

Marciano never beaten any great fighter in their prime, mostly grandpas by the time he faced them. And despite his perfect record, he's not regarded on the same level of Ali. K Bros are the same.

I agree. They aren't Ali/Louis level but they are great nonetheless. Better than Tyson (most overrated fighter).

Rooster

07-17-2015, 12:47 PM

Yes, he was a good defensive fighter then. Sure he grew more intelligent as he aged but he was physically at his best then (28).

:facepalm :facepalm

He was a crude brawler. He transformed himself later in his career just like Barrera.

RoundMoundOfReb

07-17-2015, 12:50 PM

:facepalm :facepalm

He was a crude brawler. He transformed himself later in his career just like Barrera.

:facepalm

No he wasn't. I don't even like Jones, but that version of Hopkins was perfectly fine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WCnT1HxMDE

FAR from a crude brawler. A "crude brawler" is someone like Maidana.

Rooster

07-17-2015, 01:03 PM

:facepalm

No he wasn't. I don't even like Jones, but that version of Hopkins was perfectly fine.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5WCnT1HxMDE

FAR from a crude brawler. A "crude brawler" is someone like Maidana.

Compare that version and 10 years later and tell me that you did not see any difference.:rolleyes:

Are you telling me the guy that struggled against pedestrian Mercado is the same fighter that schooled Pavlik, Tito etc.:confusedshrug:

RoundMoundOfReb

07-17-2015, 01:11 PM

Compare that version and 10 years later and tell me that you did not see any difference.:rolleyes:

Are you telling me the guy that struggled against pedestrian Mercado is the same fighter that schooled Pavlik, Tito etc.:confusedshrug:

He didn't "struggle" against Mercado he clearly beat him in the first fight and stopped him in the second.

And yeah, that version is better than the 43 year old version that fought Pavlik...Tito was probably his peak

Rooster

07-17-2015, 01:26 PM

He didn't "struggle" against Mercado he clearly beat him in the first fight and stopped him in the second.

And yeah, that version is better than the 43 year old version that fought Pavlik...Tito was probably his peak

Officially it was a draw but I agree he should have gotten the nod. But he got knockdown twice on that fight claiming he struggled because of the altitude but he look like a crude brawler looking for a knockout. Compare that version of Hopkins and 10 years late and it's even close and its two totally different fighter.

La Frescobaldi

07-17-2015, 02:04 PM

It's the same logic with the NBA, wilt and rusell played in the pre international ball era...
I don't disagree with that at all, nor about 50s NBA which was only marginally integrated either... but let's point out Chamberlains own teammate Meschery who was Russian (mainly an enforcer type of what little I saw, he went to start-up Sonics on forced move).

La Frescobaldi

07-17-2015, 02:16 PM

:facepalm :facepalm :facepalm

Ali had the greatest resume in heavyweight history. :bowdown:

Name me one fighter he should have fought but ducked.:confusedshrug:

And Foreman is not even the hardest heavyweight puncher in their era:no:
Foreman was only most famous guy he ducked. Thad Fletcher another; Ali was often ridiculed by the announcers for fighting guys like Mathis, Blin Foley when there were a lot of fights available with first tier guys.

Ali's resume is not better than Joe Louis nor W Klitschko. Arguably Holmes too since he held the title 2 or 3x longer.
Just because guys like Shavers and Terrell were famous doesn't mean they were ever at any kind of global level. That's all there was in America at the time.

Pointguard

07-17-2015, 02:28 PM

Brewster never fought Vitali he fought Wladimir and only beat him because he gassed, when they re-matched Brewster got completely dominated & destroyed.
Vitali lost to Lewis on a cut, all cards had VK winning that fight. He smashed Sanders.
It's easy to confuse the brothers so I won't say more. Brewster was better than Byrd. You were better off overlooking that one.

There's footage of Mike leaping in the air in desperate attempt to even get to Lewis. If Mike had more reach maybe he would tell a different tale. In his day he was known for that astounding bull-rush but he would run straight into Wladimir's left jab which has one-punch knocked out multiple heavyweights.
Mike was a relic of his prime at that time and abandoned his classic style by then. The VK bros are a new level slow. much slower than the guys in Tyson video.

Tyson had probably the shortest time of greatness of any ATG tho it wasn't due to the ring but his own folly out of the gym. As I said he would do better against them than Ali would.

Tyson's reign might be the most impressive ever. You can take the best of the three you mentioned and it would look like a joke next to Tyson's peak.

Ali's early and mid-career defense I won't bash but you know his style, arms down and duck & weave... it was pure athleticism. The man had a chin but when he slowed down a little he got hit in the head A LOT. More than any ATG and it's not close.
You go by primes in boxing. I know its the only way to get at Ali is after the disease settled in. Its much worse to do this than measuring Jordan after retirement.

But as far as defense both he and Tyson relied too much on sheer speed, their defensive glove and arm work was not as great. Neither of them are close to the Klitschkos' technical skills in defense, my friend... RoundMoundofReb please interject here. Feet are the first line of defense, the whole body gets balance from the feet as well as distance, reflexes, hands high, upper body movement, jab, then repositioning. Are the main technical tools. The K bros reflexes are even bad but their jabs are pretty good. They are pretty slow too. Upper body movement and foot movement are medium to lower tier. in slow motion Ali and Tyson are vastly superior in defense.

I recommend watching more film of the Klitschkos opponents. They look great against everyone else but they can't land a blow on Wladimir.....
The only good fighter they fought, Lennox, beat Vitali while overweight, tired and slow while hardly using his jab. Thats the only opponent anybody will be talking about in five years and Lennox looked horrible that fight. Being that they cut easily Ali would not have problem with them. Ali is so much more faster and accurate than Lennox its crazy.

Out of those early days, I mean '60s-70s, Foreman was the only guy with a punch comparable to the modern day gentlemen.

I loved all those guys but they lived in a very small insulated American world of boxing. When the rest of the world got invited to the games American boxers shrank real bad.
Nobody in the modern era punches like Tyson did.

American heavyweights are just bad now but are dominant in every other weight group. But its not like this is upping the Eastern European block because there aren't any good heavyweights here.

Rooster

07-17-2015, 02:29 PM

Foreman was only most famous guy he ducked. Thad Fletcher another; Ali was often ridiculed by the announcers for fighting guys like Mathis, Blin Foley when there were a lot of fights available with first tier guys.

Ali's resume is not better than Joe Louis nor W Klitschko. Arguably Holmes too since he held the title 2 or 3x longer.
Just because guys like Shavers and Terrell were famous doesn't mean they were ever at any kind of global level. That's all there was in America at the time.

:facepalm
Did Ali knocked out Foreman when everyone thought he will get KTFO.:confusedshrug:

Ali has beaten ATGs like Liston, Frazier, Foreman .in their primes :applause:

Who did W Klitschko ever beaten that are close to that level:no:

Pointguard

07-17-2015, 02:38 PM

Foreman was only most famous guy he ducked. Thad Fletcher another; Ali was often ridiculed by the announcers for fighting guys like Mathis, Blin Foley when there were a lot of fights available with first tier guys.

Ali's resume is not better than Joe Louis nor W Klitschko. Arguably Holmes too since he held the title 2 or 3x longer.
Just because guys like Shavers and Terrell were famous doesn't mean they were ever at any kind of global level. That's all there was in America at the time.
Ali fought everybody. Fletcher, really.

On the Klitxcho resume... is there going to be any HOFers on it at all? Lennox and thats it right? Thats really hard to do.

La Frescobaldi

07-17-2015, 03:43 PM

Brewster was better than Byrd. You were better off overlooking that one.

Mike was a relic of his prime at that time and abandoned his classic style by then. The VK bros are a new level slow. much slower than the guys in Tyson video.

Tyson's reign might be the most impressive ever. You can take the best of the three you mentioned and it would look like a joke next to Tyson's peak.

You go by primes in boxing. I know its the only way to get at Ali is after the disease settled in. Its much worse to do this than measuring Jordan after retirement. RoundMoundofReb please interject here. Feet are the first line of defense, the whole body gets balance from the feet as well as distance, reflexes, hands high, upper body movement, jab, then repositioning. Are the main technical tools. The K bros reflexes are even bad but their jabs are pretty good. They are pretty slow too. Upper body movement and foot movement are medium to lower tier. in slow motion Ali and Tyson are vastly superior in defense.

The only good fighter they fought, Lennox, beat Vitali while overweight, tired and slow while hardly using his jab. Thats the only opponent anybody will be talking about in five years and Lennox looked horrible that fight. Being that they cut easily Ali would not have problem with them. Ali is so much more faster and accurate than Lennox its crazy.

Nobody in the modern era punches like Tyson did.

American heavyweights are just bad now but are dominant in every other weight group. But its not like this is upping the Eastern European block because there aren't any good heavyweights here.
Not time enough to answer bro just we could not disagree more about defense.

Here is Ali's doctor on why that disease set in:
http://articles.latimes.com/1987-07-16/sports/sp-4337_1_muhammad-ali

"Muhammad Ali suffers from Parkinson's syndrome because of injuries to the brain he sustained during his 22-year boxing career, his doctor said Wednesday.

During his 61-bout career, the three-time heavyweight champion often boasted that his face was still pretty and unmarred by the head blows landed by Joe Frazier, George Foreman, Leon Spinks, Larry Holmes and others.

Nevertheless, damage was occurring inside, where it was not apparent, according to Dr. Dennis Cope, Ali's physician and director of the training program in general internal medicine at the UCLA Medical Center.

"Our feeling is that Muhammad Ali's condition is 'pugilistic brain syndrome,' caused by injuries to the brain from fighting," Cope said in a telephone interview."

No boxer with great defense ever took the bludgeoning to the head that Ali did.

GimmeThat

07-17-2015, 05:03 PM

if you score a 9.7 over three opponents who scored a 9.5 9.5 9.5 dominant
or is it more dominant to score a 9.8 over a 9.6

Is it if you take out their best player, the rest is taken cared of
or is it if you beat out all of the best ranked opponents, whose difficulty all happen to be right around the same level

what makes a golden era?
for those that are even involved in the categorization.

my guess tells me that, it involves how one treats their opponent.

wpdougie2180

07-17-2015, 07:51 PM

Foreman was only most famous guy he ducked. Thad Fletcher another; Ali was often ridiculed by the announcers for fighting guys like Mathis, Blin Foley when there were a lot of fights available with first tier guys.

Ali's resume is not better than Joe Louis nor W Klitschko. Arguably Holmes too since he held the title 2 or 3x longer.
Just because guys like Shavers and Terrell were famous doesn't mean they were ever at any kind of global level. That's all there was in America at the time.

He didn't duck Thad Spencer dude just never made it to title contention to get a fight With Ali. Losing to Ali victim Jerry Quarry in a title tourney. And losing his last 8 fights after that.

http://www.thesweetscience.com/news/articles/1252-the-sad-saga-of-thad-spencer

Pointguard

07-18-2015, 01:56 AM

Not time enough to answer bro just we could not disagree more about defense.

Here is Ali's doctor on why that disease set in:
http://articles.latimes.com/1987-07-16/sports/sp-4337_1_muhammad-ali

"Muhammad Ali suffers from Parkinson's syndrome because of injuries to the brain he sustained during his 22-year boxing career, his doctor said Wednesday.

During his 61-bout career, the three-time heavyweight champion often boasted that his face was still pretty and unmarred by the head blows landed by Joe Frazier, George Foreman, Leon Spinks, Larry Holmes and others.

Nevertheless, damage was occurring inside, where it was not apparent, according to Dr. Dennis Cope, Ali's physician and director of the training program in general internal medicine at the UCLA Medical Center.

"Our feeling is that Muhammad Ali's condition is 'pugilistic brain syndrome,' caused by injuries to the brain from fighting," Cope said in a telephone interview."

No boxer with great defense ever took the bludgeoning to the head that Ali did.
We are comparing primes. You are just being unreasonable. Ali could have gotten Parkison's from just several blows to the head. He took a lot when Liston put a blinding element on his gloves and Ali couldn't see for a round and a half. Ali still got the TKO. Younger Ali would have fought Foreman differently as well.

Comparing this defense, this is a classic video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkhpZoPOfZI to any other heavy weight is unfair. The incredibly slow Klitzcho is a joke. I didn't know this was you Frescobaldi until I got home. But its an incredibly odd stand to take.

La Frescobaldi

07-18-2015, 06:44 PM

We are comparing primes. You are just being unreasonable. Ali could have gotten Parkison's from just several blows to the head. He took a lot when Liston put a blinding element on his gloves and Ali couldn't see for a round and a half. Ali still got the TKO. Younger Ali would have fought Foreman differently as well.

Comparing this defense, this is a classic video, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkhpZoPOfZI to any other heavy weight is unfair. The incredibly slow Klitzcho is a joke. I didn't know this was you Frescobaldi until I got home. But its an incredibly odd stand to take.

Why is it odd? Because I typically defend old-school basketball players like Frazier Reed Chamberlain or West on this forum... and not the boxers of that day?

Ali was an ATG in boxing, man, beyond doubt. He would be a cruiserweight today. Just as your nice movie shows him. incredibly speedy and dangerous, but small.
He never fought anyone remotely like Wladimir Klitschko. Ali took more shots to the head in dozens of single bouts that he was in, even against bums, than Klitschko has taken in any year since 2004.
It is a far greater display of defense to never sustain a blow than it is to get bludgeoned repeatedly in the head. To me, it's odd that you can't see that fact for what it is.

Pointguard

07-19-2015, 12:28 AM

Why is it odd? Because I typically defend old-school basketball players like Frazier Reed Chamberlain or West on this forum... and not the boxers of that day?

Ali was an ATG in boxing, man, beyond doubt. He would be a cruiserweight today. Just as your nice movie shows him. incredibly speedy and dangerous, but small.
He never fought anyone remotely like Wladimir Klitschko. Ali took more shots to the head in dozens of single bouts that he was in, even against bums, than Klitschko has taken in any year since 2004.
It is a far greater display of defense to never sustain a blow than it is to get bludgeoned repeatedly in the head. To me, it's odd that you can't see that fact for what it is.
Foreman punched much harder than Vladimir and was tall. The Klitzchos definitely never fought a fighter remotely like Ali. Ali was faster, smarter, better defensive, quicker, more elusive, more agile, better conditioned, and smarter than anybody Kilitzchos fought. That's a lot of adjectives. Foreman was a whole different level harder puncher than Vlad. I will say the same of light heavyweight Liston and Mike Tyson a whole two levels harder. Weight doesn't do you that many favors. Their loses are horrible and against horrible fighters that were small. Lennox was the only guy that had a lot of skill and experience that fought these guys and he was over the hill and horrifically slow when he beat Vitali.

Ali in his prime is vastly superior than either Klitzchos in defense - not close at all. You can't be serious when you argue this. I mean are the brothers so bad that you have to compare them to disease ridden HW's. That's atrocious. But yeah, they would have beaten older Ali but would have trouble hitting him in his prime.

They had one big test and they lost that. I don't see this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAAZYauvt4c as the apex of HW boxing. I don't see them as very skilled. As having great knock out power, sobeit being heavy enough to knock the large number of horrific fighters out.

La Frescobaldi

07-19-2015, 06:52 AM

Foreman punched much harder than Vladimir and was tall. The Klitzchos definitely never fought a fighter remotely like Ali. Ali was faster, smarter, better defensive, quicker, more elusive, more agile, better conditioned, and smarter than anybody Kilitzchos fought. That's a lot of adjectives. Foreman was a whole different level harder puncher than Vlad. I will say the same of light heavyweight Liston and Mike Tyson a whole two levels harder. Weight doesn't do you that many favors. Their loses are horrible and against horrible fighters that were small. Lennox was the only guy that had a lot of skill and experience that fought these guys and he was over the hill and horrifically slow when he beat Vitali.

Ali in his prime is vastly superior than either Klitzchos in defense - not close at all. You can't be serious when you argue this. I mean are the brothers so bad that you have to compare them to disease ridden HW's. That's atrocious. But yeah, they would have beaten older Ali but would have trouble hitting him in his prime.

They had one big test and they lost that. I don't see this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAAZYauvt4c as the apex of HW boxing. I don't see them as very skilled. As having great knock out power, sobeit being heavy enough to knock the large number of horrific fighters out.

That's cool bro. Clearly we have different views on what counts in defense.
I prefer the man who goes 5 and 6 rounds at a time, in almost every fight, WITHOUT A GLOVE LAID ON HIM.

And I can't say it plainer than this; of course Ali was quicker, so is Mayweather or Sugar Ray. Lighter weight classes are quicker. If any version of Prime Ali got in a ring with those guys he would run away just like a rabbit after one or two blows to his unguarded head.

Foreman... may be; like I said, he's the only guy of that era who could compete with today's era HW champion because he could really hit.

Pointguard

07-19-2015, 12:47 PM

That's cool bro. Clearly we have different views on what counts in defense.
I prefer the man who goes 5 and 6 rounds at a time, in almost every fight, WITHOUT A GLOVE LAID ON HIM.

And I can't say it plainer than this; of course Ali was quicker, so is Mayweather or Sugar Ray. Lighter weight classes are quicker. If any version of Prime Ali got in a ring with those guys he would run away just like a rabbit after one or two blows to his unguarded head.

Foreman... may be; like I said, he's the only guy of that era who could compete with today's era HW champion because he could really hit.
Ok. Ali is the greatest because of what he did to heavy punchers. That's his main legacy. While he used his feet, he didn't run like you are saying. Running is just getting away. Ali was easily one of the most active heavy weight fighters ever. The best offensive attack in the Heavy Weight division because of his stellar jab.

Even you are saying Foreman was a great puncher, and did Ali run away from him? Foreman was knocking people in the air and Ali stood right in front of him. Chris Byrd stood right in front of Klitscho and weighed like 30 to 40 obs lighter with HIS HANDS down and still beat Vitali. And Chris Byrd is barely a good fighter.

La Frescobaldi

07-20-2015, 05:57 AM

Ok. Ali is the greatest because of what he did to heavy punchers. That's his main legacy. While he used his feet, he didn't run like you are saying. Running is just getting away. Ali was easily one of the most active heavy weight fighters ever. The best offensive attack in the Heavy Weight division because of his stellar jab.

Even you are saying Foreman was a great puncher, and did Ali run away from him? Foreman was knocking people in the air and Ali stood right in front of him. Chris Byrd stood right in front of Klitscho and weighed like 30 to 40 obs lighter with HIS HANDS down and still beat Vitali. And Chris Byrd is barely a good fighter.
Greatest of his own time, but thats it. That day is long past. Far too small.

Foreman was a great puncher; and Ali as I have said repeatedly, has brain damage because the defensive strategies he used when he was too old to run anymore, were so poor.

RoundMoundOfReb

07-20-2015, 02:47 PM

La Frescobaldi

07-20-2015, 10:11 PM

Nobody really considers Ali the greatest. If you ask 95/100 boxing historians they'll say Ray Robinson (serial woman beater btw). Most won't even have Ali second. In fact it's probably about 50/50 as to whether or not he's best Heavyweight ever. A lot of people will say Louis.

True.

The hassle with it, and my whole point in the thread really, is even more true about Joe than Ali. All those guys are tiny compared.

Louis wasn't a heavyweight by any standard of the last 25 years (really, the last 40). He boxed at 190 lbs and below. He could even go light instead of cruiser quite easily.... let alone heavyweight.

The weight classes are long overdue for a revision like what they use in Olympics. Because like PG insists on.... and I love almost every post he ever makes.... Ali was blazing fast compared to these guys. But you might as well say welterweights are always faster than Ali which is equally true.
MA was Jordanesque in his domination... but only within his own timeframe of heavyweight.

Pointguard

07-20-2015, 11:03 PM

Nobody really considers Ali the greatest. If you ask 95/100 boxing historians they'll say Ray Robinson (serial woman beater btw). Most won't even have Ali second. In fact it's probably about 50/50 as to whether or not he's best Heavyweight ever. A lot of people will say Louis.
http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/greatest/featureVideo?page=greatest110
http://www.boxing.com/the_one_hundred_greatest_heavyweights_of_all_time_ part_ten_10_1.html
http://www.boxinginsider.com/columns/ten-great-heavyweights-time/
http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Division-By-Division_-_The_Greatest_Fighters_of_All-Time
http://www.boxingscene.com/-top-25-heavyweights-all-time-top-ten--26161
http://www.si.com/more-sports/photos/2009/11/18-1top-10-all-time-greatest-heavyweights/10

That's five pages of google sites with rankings - sites all are dedicated to boxing within the first five pages (you can dig further I used term (greatest fighter all time, rankings) of google and I included SI and ESPN because they are pretty dedicated. Its easily Ali. A little comp by Sugar Ray. Ali almost unanimous among heavyweights and Ali had a lot of hardcore haters because of throwing away the Olympic medal and his war protest. He lost votes on that. But nevermind that, its lopsided already. Not 50/50 even for Robinson much less Louis.

Pointguard

07-20-2015, 11:36 PM

Sarcastic

07-21-2015, 12:55 AM

Rooster

07-21-2015, 01:53 AM

http://sports.espn.go.com/sports/boxing/greatest/featureVideo?page=greatest110
http://www.boxing.com/the_one_hundred_greatest_heavyweights_of_all_time_ part_ten_10_1.html
http://www.boxinginsider.com/columns/ten-great-heavyweights-time/
http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Division-By-Division_-_The_Greatest_Fighters_of_All-Time
http://www.boxingscene.com/-top-25-heavyweights-all-time-top-ten--26161
http://www.si.com/more-sports/photos/2009/11/18-1top-10-all-time-greatest-heavyweights/10

That's five pages of google sites with rankings - sites all are dedicated to boxing within the first five pages (you can dig further I used term (greatest fighter all time, rankings) of google and I included SI and ESPN because they are pretty dedicated. Its easily Ali. A little comp by Sugar Ray. Ali almost unanimous among heavyweights and Ali had a lot of hardcore haters because of throwing away the Olympic medal and his war protest. He lost votes on that. But nevermind that, its lopsided already. Not 50/50 even for Robinson much less Louis.

:facepalm

The lists are mostly heavyweight rankings. Walker Smith Jr. never fought in a heavyweight division.

Rooster

07-21-2015, 02:10 AM

From 1962 - 1967 suspension in his prime, then 70-77 Ali was great all the way thru. As an individual Ali had the best 7 prime (tho 12 are listed above) years in boxing. He would have had ten super years if not for the suspension - not like he needed as he's easily considered the best. His last years were really bad but nearly all of the great ones (outside of Money) went out pretty bad.

Btw, the Parkinson's was not medically definitively defined as done by punches as Fresco has said above. Could be, but it shouldn't be taken as fact.

No one had a better prime than Walker Smith Jr in a history of boxing.:no: Not even close.:rolleyes: The guy only lost once in his first 131 fights to a guy who outweighed him by 16 pounds. You can also count his 85-2 as an amateur with 69 freaking knockouts and 40 of them by first round.

Rooster

07-21-2015, 02:13 AM

Greatest of his own time, but thats it. That day is long past. Far too small.

Foreman was a great puncher; and Ali as I have said repeatedly, has brain damage because the defensive strategies he used when he was too old to run anymore, were so poor.

Are you saying Shavers or Liston can't crack the chins of Lewis and the K Bros especially Wladimir.:facepalm

Pointguard

07-21-2015, 01:03 PM

No one had a better prime than Walker Smith Jr in a history of boxing.:no: Not even close.:rolleyes: The guy only lost once in his first 131 fights to a guy who outweighed him by 16 pounds. You can also count his 85-2 as an amateur with 69 freaking knockouts and 40 of them by first round.

SR Leonard and Duran gave credence to the lighter weight divisions which is why you hear little about Welterweights. before the 1980's. Boxing was usually the second or third job for most of the lighter weight divisions.

Beating up busboys, dishwashers, conductors, and street vendors, sometimes twice in the same month, wasn't as prestigious as fighting heavyweights. So prime is heavily set by opponents and the value brought to the sport. Not his fault at all but the atmosphere of fighting 16 times in a year cheapens the value as well. I cant make much out of SR being that I dont see much of him. Its the Wilt dilemma most share pan these boards to a degree.

Rooster

07-21-2015, 04:01 PM

SR Leonard and Duran gave credence to the lighter weight divisions which is why you hear little about Welterweights. before the 1980's. Boxing was usually the second or third job for most of the lighter weight divisions.

Beating up busboys, dishwashers, conductors, and street vendors, sometimes twice in the same month, wasn't as prestigious as fighting heavyweights. So prime is heavily set by opponents and the value brought to the sport. Not his fault at all but the atmosphere of fighting 16 times in a year cheapens the value as well. I cant make much out of SR being that I dont see much of him. Its the Wilt dilemma most share pan these boards to a degree.

So let me guess, beating HOF fighters 21 times and beating top 10 contenders 41 times is not impressive. :confusedshrug:

Well name me anyone that has that resume close to that.:rolleyes:

Unless you expect fighters fighting blockbusters after blockbusters. :confusedshrug:

Even at this era where the big time fighters only fight 2-3 times a year, you usually see a stay busy fights with bums in between. :rolleyes:

Most of his SRR videos took place in a middleweight division where he went up in weight class because

No one can beat him at the lightweight to welterweight where he went 89-0 .:bowdown:

If you gonna use weight class as an excuse, well you can't possibly say Floyd is great either because he can't even go up to middleweight and most likely he will get KTFO by top 10 heavyweights. Prestigious to weight class in boxing is relative term. Ali fought in golden era of heavyweight boxing but by the 80s, prestigious fights are in welterweights.

Pointguard

07-21-2015, 09:29 PM

So let me guess, beating HOF fighters 21 times and beating top 10 contenders 41 times is not impressive.
You can guess all you want. Means absolutely nothing to me.

Well name me anyone that has that resume close to that.:rolleyes:
I don't look at resumes. I just explained that. I look at the fighter and what I know and see. The stories I read of back then are crazy. Sugar Ray had like 190 fights (300 fights overall) and no money. Henry Armstrong was a great at that weight too (SSR's idol) and he had worse problems. Desperation ran rampant during his career. And his opponents had to be worse off than him. Too hard to guess on.

If you gonna use weight class as an excuse, well you can't possibly say Floyd is great either because he can't even go up to middleweight and most likely he will get KTFO by top 10 heavyweights. Prestigious to weight class in boxing is relative term. Ali fought in golden era of heavyweight boxing but by the 80s, prestigious fights are in welterweights.
Its not an excuse I never ranked SRR cause I barely seen him fight outside of the St Valentines Day Massacre. While impressive I didn't like his defense at all. One definitely has to say relative to his peers, he's one of the best for sure.

Rooster

07-21-2015, 10:48 PM

You can guess all you want. Means absolutely nothing to me.

I don't look at resumes. I just explained that. I look at the fighter and what I know and see. The stories I read of back then are crazy. Sugar Ray had like 190 fights (300 fights overall) and no money. Henry Armstrong was a great at that weight too (SSR's idol) and he had worse problems. Desperation ran rampant during his career. And his opponents had to be worse off than him. Too hard to guess on.

Its not an excuse I never ranked SRR cause I barely seen him fight outside of the St Valentines Day Massacre. While impressive I didn't like his defense at all. One definitely has to say relative to his peers, he's one of the best for sure.

So you call yourself a fight fan but you don't look at their resume.:confusedshrug:

Sure you can look at the videos and highlights of certain fighter but you can't possibly see and know how great they are unless they are fighting another great fighter.:rolleyes:

One can look great against bums and one can struggle when they finally meet their match.

Just like the video you said you saw by SRR against the same ATG.

Since you mention defense, SRR is not exactly Sweat Pea or El Intocable but since you think Ali got a great defense:rolleyes: , that's an oxymoron.:oldlol:

Pointguard

07-21-2015, 11:49 PM

So you call yourself a fight fan but you don't look at their resume.:confusedshrug:
I am a fan of what I see. That's what true fans do. Its not a religion where you worship what's unseen. That's just jock riding the guy you think you should like. Its not your judgement at all. Its what blind followers do.

Sure you can look at the videos and highlights of certain fighter but you can't possibly see and know how great they are unless they are fighting another great fighter.:rolleyes:
Another useless, distraction on your part. You need emoticons to add imaginary value to your abstract thoughts? Speak plain dude and coherently. You rarely talk boxing and that's the conversation in front of you. Half the time you are holding some conversation with yourself and way overused emoticons.

Since you mention defense, SRR is not exactly Sweat Pea or El Intocable but since you think Ali got a great defense:rolleyes: , that's an oxymoron.:oldlol: :lol It was just a matter of time :D

I already provided a video??? Very different if I didn't and I that video isn't about his defensive prowess. But there are some which cover that ground as well. Please put out something that disproves that there are guys as evasive or defensively enhanced as Ali in the heavyweight division. Not a hard task at all. Lets see you talk boxing rather than these weak one liners that show a lame attempt at wit without knowledge.

Rooster

07-22-2015, 12:59 AM

I am a fan of what I see. That's what true fans do. Its not a religion where you worship what's unseen. That's just jock riding the guy you think you should like. Its not your judgement at all. Its what blind followers do.

Another useless, distraction on your part. You need emoticons to add imaginary value to your abstract thoughts? Speak plain dude and coherently. You rarely talk boxing and that's the conversation in front of you. Half the time you are holding some conversation with yourself and way overused emoticons.

:lol It was just a matter of time :D

I already provided a video??? Very different if I didn't and I that video isn't about his defensive prowess. But there are some which cover that ground as well. Please put out something that disproves that there are guys as evasive or defensively enhanced as Ali in the heavyweight division. Not a hard task at all. Lets see you talk boxing rather than these weak one liners that show a lame attempt at wit without knowledge.

Are you saying that Ali was defensively enhance:facepalm

Did you just forgot to add that his natural talent and his sturdy chin enabled him to get away with his obvious defensive technical flaws. By natural talent means his speed and his reflexes. He leans away from punches instead of moving side to side, he put his right hand on the side when he throws his jabs, he's vulnerable to getting hit by left hooks( got knocked down by Frazier, Banks, Cooper ) especially when he threw outside uppercuts because he usually dropped his hands (right hand usually) and then the blocking punches is not in his arsenal.

Yes he got away with when he was younger against Liston who jabs very well but Frazier and Norton were able to connect at good rate as soon as he loses those speed and slowed reflexes.:confusedshrug:

Just watch Ali when he fought Jimmy Young and tell me his defense fundamentally or lack thereof. LMAO

Pointguard

07-22-2015, 01:48 AM

Are you saying that Ali was defensively enhance:facepalm

Did you just forgot to add that his natural talent and his sturdy chin enabled him to get away with his obvious defensive technical flaws. By natural talent means his speed and his reflexes. He leans away from punches instead of moving side to side, he put his right hand on the side when he throws his jabs, he's vulnerable to getting hit by left hooks( got knocked down by Frazier, Banks, Cooper ) especially when he threw outside uppercuts because he usually dropped his hands (right hand usually) and then the blocking punches is not in his arsenal.
His defense had some flaws but no heavyweight used their feet and upper body movement better than Ali. He controlled distance better than any heavy weight. Had the best foot movement easily, evasiveness, best jab to keep opponent off balance, in/out, side to side, perpetual motion, constant activity, great reflexes, great endurance, ability to control the pace. That's a lot of defensive things to be the best at or near the best at.

Yes he got away with when he was younger against Liston who jabs very well but Frazier and Norton were able to connect at good rate as soon as he loses those speed and slowed reflexes.:confusedshrug:
Yeah he came back a little slower with his reflexes. He lost some of it at around 31 which is common for heavier guys. Still he wasn't getting knocked out. It wasn't as drastic as say Roy Jones but fighters usually have trouble adapting to lost reflexes. Manny was hoping to catch Floyd with reduced reflexes but Floyd is still at a great level with his. Ali was able to shelter his with an incredible activity level.

Pointguard

07-22-2015, 01:57 AM

Just watch Ali when he fought Jimmy Young and tell me his defense fundamentally or lack thereof. LMAO
Anybody can have a sluggish day. Big deal. You show how little you know.

This video shows you most of the things I talk about above.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKhWqGNep-s

Please tell me who do you have as a better heavy weight defender. Its a simple request.

Rooster

07-22-2015, 01:59 AM

His defense had some flaws but no heavyweight used their feet and upper body movement better than Ali. He controlled distance better than any heavy weight. Had the best foot movement easily, evasiveness, best jab to keep opponent off balance, in/out, side to side, perpetual motion, constant activity, great reflexes, great endurance, ability to control the pace. That's a lot of defensive things to be the best at or near the best at.

Yeah he came back a little slower with his reflexes. He lost some of it at around 31 which is common for heavier guys. Still he wasn't getting knocked out. It wasn't as drastic as say Roy Jones but fighters usually have trouble adapting to lost reflexes. Manny was hoping to catch Floyd with reduced reflexes but Floyd is still at a great level with his. Ali was able to shelter his with an incredible activity level.

I think you never heard of Galveston Giant.:confusedshrug:

Pointguard

07-22-2015, 02:20 AM

I think you never heard of Galveston Giant.:confusedshrug:

Show us on Youtube. I'm not asking for a lot. You are going back to the 1800's because you know you have lost the argument. Ironically he has as much footage as SSR.

Hey, you gave it an honest try.

Rooster

07-22-2015, 02:28 AM

Anybody can have a sluggish day. Big deal. You show how little you know.

This video shows you most of the things I talk about above.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKhWqGNep-s

Please tell me who do you have as a better heavy weight defender. Its a simple request.

I mention Jimmy Young and still did not get it. :facepalm

Jersey Joe Walcott, Louis, Dempsey, Corbett, Tunney, Loughran, Archie Moore ( he has enough heavyweight fights) all can be argued better defensively. Even the fat version of Toney was textbook defensively.

Rooster

07-22-2015, 02:36 AM

Show us on Youtube. I'm not asking for a lot. You are going back to the 1800's because you know you have lost the argument. Ironically he has as much footage as SSR.

Hey, you gave it an honest try.

:facepalm :facepalm

This is what happened to casuals fans:facepalm :oldlol:

Does not know SRR is not a heavyweight:facepalm

Think Mayweather Sr was the first one to master the shoulder roll defense:oldlol:

Think Ali was the Greatest Heavyweight defensively.:facepalm :oldlol:

Why don't you study and watch more fights instead of you asking for youtubes:oldlol: :facepalm

Pointguard

07-22-2015, 02:59 AM

Does not know SRR is not a heavyweight:facepalm
:lol Destroyed. Never said he was. But I understand how the desperate you are.

Think Ali was the Greatest Heavyweight defensively.:facepalm :oldlol:
you have no counter because you want to worship the dead and know you lost that battle. What did you do? Ask your great grandfather to answer that for you.

Why don't you study and watch more fights instead of you asking for youtubes:oldlol: :facepalm
hahaha, I asked you a simple question. You keep going back to pre video - even the 1800's, because you are secure in not backing your thoughts up. You're a little too young to be scared of youtube. And you want to act like you are some historian, but when put to task you can't prove or back yourself up. And your use of emoticons is worse than your scholarship.

Rooster

07-22-2015, 03:20 AM

:lol Destroyed. Never said he was. But I understand how the desperate you are.

you have no counter because you want to worship the dead and know you lost that battle. What did you do? Ask your great grandfather to answer that for you.

hahaha, I asked you a simple question. You keep going back to pre video - even the 1800's, because you are secure in not backing your thoughts up. You're a little too young to be scared of youtube. And you want to act like you are some historian, but when put to task you can't prove or back yourself up. And your use of emoticons is worse than your scholarship.

Good night bruh:cheers:

Your argument became me so this is not counter productive:cry:

Keep your trophy for winning the argument:oldlol:

I thought I'm gonna gain some boxing knowledge from old farts like you but you left me hanging:cry:

Pointguard

07-22-2015, 01:19 PM

Your argument became me so this is not counter productive.

Don't take it that hard. But don't challenge people if you aren't up for it.

I thought I'm gonna gain some boxing knowledge from old farts like you but you left me hanging:cry:
I'm sure you have a lot of thoughts that never pan out. If you were a bright, humble, respectful guy your life would be very different.

If you came in with that attitude of gaining knowledge you need a lot of work on how you present yourself. When people see a lot of emoticons they think you are just clowning and will treat you as such. You are on a big stage here and its best to choose your battles wisely. You are not a dumb guy but can come off that way because you aren't aware that there are always people that can tell a person putting on airs.

Don't ever say I didn't give you something.

KendrickPerkins

07-22-2015, 01:23 PM

Don't take it that hard. But don't challenge people if you aren't up for it.

I'm sure you have a lot of thoughts that never pan out. If you were a bright, humble, respectful guy your life would be very different.

If you came in with that attitude of gaining knowledge you need a lot of work on how you present yourself. When people see a lot of emoticons they think you are just clowning and will treat you as such. You are on a big stage here and its best to choose your battles wisely. You are not a dumb guy but can come off that way because you aren't aware that there are always people that can tell a person putting on airs.

Don't ever say I didn't give you something.
Look it's the delusional 40 year old weirdo thinking he's dishing out knowledge.

:roll:

What a sad sad case you are.

Pointguard

07-22-2015, 02:33 PM

Look it's the delusional 40 year old weirdo thinking he's dishing out knowledge.

:roll:

I mentor at risk kids and and turn 70% of at risk kids to college graduates. I used some of that here. Its rewarding work. For you the dose would have to be a lot stronger than what's given to economically disadvantaged kids but you would have to first admit to your weakness.

KendrickPerkins

07-22-2015, 05:38 PM

I mentor at risk kids and and turn 70% of at risk kids to college graduates. I used some of that here. Its rewarding work. For you the dose would have to be a lot stronger than what's given to economically disadvantaged kids but you would have to first admit to your weakness.
Translation: You're a broke delusional loser.

Go help those broke ******s running around the shithole of chicago for us... or NY... or wherever a broke delusional clown like you stays.

You have garbage opinions and a garbage personality. You = garbage.

You've done nothing with YOUR life so you think mentoring broke kids makes up for that? Like you're God's gift to the land because you have no real life and help "at risk" aka poor kids who would've probably graduated anyway?

Go make some friends. Or a real salary. Your personality is almost as sad as your life.

You just don't get it.

Rooster

07-22-2015, 06:36 PM

Don't take it that hard. But don't challenge people if you aren't up for it.

I'm sure you have a lot of thoughts that never pan out. If you were a bright, humble, respectful guy your life would be very different.

If you came in with that attitude of gaining knowledge you need a lot of work on how you present yourself. When people see a lot of emoticons they think you are just clowning and will treat you as such. You are on a big stage here and its best to choose your battles wisely. You are not a dumb guy but can come off that way because you aren't aware that there are always people that can tell a person putting on airs.

Don't ever say I didn't give you something.

:facepalm :facepalm

Ad hominem :oldlol: :cry: :oldlol: :cry:

Pointguard

07-23-2015, 02:33 PM

Translation: You're a broke delusional loser.

Go help those broke ******s running around the shithole of chicago for us... or NY... or wherever a broke delusional clown like you stays.
They were once broke but aren't now. You on the other hand are broke now. I didn't even have to break you down you went there because you couldn't help yourself.

You have garbage opinions and a garbage personality. You = garbage. So says the hater of people developing themselves. You are a backwards guy so garbage might be your apex ambition or a way of life for you.

You've done nothing with YOUR life so you think mentoring broke kids makes up for that? Like you're God's gift to the land because you have no real life and help "at risk" aka poor kids who would've probably graduated anyway?Broke to fixed is always a good thing. However, BROKE to a public meltdown is stuff true clowns are made of. Especially when the meltdown was about somebody helping another person. What's really funny is that I had just mentioned people can see personality deficiencies pretty easy. I had no idea you would start raising your hand like a deranged idiot. You were hyped for this meltdown.

You just don't get it.

:lol