this or that fighter would give anybody trouble in the history of boxing. thats such a bold statement and its thrown around way too easily. i have heard it too many times with the klit brothers that they would give any HW in history problems but i have also heard it about other fighters.
the problem with the statement is that most fighters wouldnt give most people problems. you have to be very good to give everybody problems that you fight. we can see tons of examples of older fighters that were great, yet they got beat multiple times and didnt always put up a great fight against their opponents. i think that there are only a handful of fighters in history that would really give just about anybody they fought a lot of trouble. most fighters may win more than they lose, but put them in the golden age of their weight class and i guarantee that most would get easily beaten on more than one occasion.
ill use the klits as an example since they are the ones i hear it the most from. you put them in the 70's and whether or not you think they become the champion, do you think that they are going to be undefeated? and if not, do you seriously think that there arent fighters that would easily win because of styles or because they are just better? i mean, look at ken norton. he was a very good fighter but easily got beaten by some big punchers.
so really im just saying that that phrase bothers me because it just isnt true for most cases that its used in. thanks for reading.
Bookmarks