Ps. Absolutely done you yet again! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Printable View
Ps. Absolutely done you yet again! 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
on the one hand you're saying Wlad is an old washed up plank of wood then saying it's a win that will go down in history as one of the greats ;D
How about Taylor over Hopkins, or Tarver over Jones? Both similar as per your criteria. Still haven't watched this fight though, and can't believe Fury won so fair play to him and you @ross .
Iv never said that. I said he wont deal with Fury who you dont like and you dont like this and are a poor mod judging by that childish comment you yourself made earlier about him being a "peg seller" that would have been deleted by mods on other forums.Quote:
Originally Posted by Howlin Mad Missy
:rolleyes:
Hmmm, very strange, no reply to this. Because you don't fucking have one! so Ross does what what Ross does best, go and hijack another thread and spurt out the same old Bollox. I would venture to say that there are loads of victories against guys who were "undisputed and dominant" for 2 years. makes it all very different, doesn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNo, it's very specific so that there can only be one answer. I'm not pissing on Fury's bonfire, fair play to him. I'm just pissing all over your argument. After all, in amongst all the horse shit you've posted recently, I clearly remember When somebody said Wlad had dominated the Division for 10 years, YOU said he's only done so for 2 years, because his brother had before that!!! So that kind of renders your thread as pretty meaningless and FACTUALLY INCORRECT, does it not? Now if you want to reply, crack on, but I'm bored of this , so I'll read it in the morning.Quote:
Originally Posted by ross
You've been hung by your own rope, so I suggest that in order for you to continue talking shite on other threads, the mods should free some space by getting rid of this Pointless, Factually incorrect Thread.;D:cool:
Shut up Primo! If you want to go by length of unification then Wlad is higher in the rankings than Holmes because Holmes only held one belt for his entire reign!Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraHmmm, very strange, no reply to this. Because you don't fucking have one! so Ross does what what Ross does best, go and hijack another thread and spurt out the same old Bollox. I would venture to say that there are loads of victories against guys who were "undisputed and dominant" for 2 years. makes it all very different, doesn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNo, it's very specific so that there can only be one answer. I'm not pissing on Fury's bonfire, fair play to him. I'm just pissing all over your argument. After all, in amongst all the horse shit you've posted recently, I clearly remember When somebody said Wlad had dominated the Division for 10 years, YOU said he's only done so for 2 years, because his brother had before that!!! So that kind of renders your thread as pretty meaningless and FACTUALLY INCORRECT, does it not? Now if you want to reply, crack on, but I'm bored of this , so I'll read it in the morning.Quote:
Originally Posted by ross
You've been hung by your own rope, so I suggest that in order for you to continue talking shite on other threads, the mods should free some space by getting rid of this Pointless, Factually incorrect Thread.;D:cool:
Hahahahaha! nice reply "Shut up Primo!" ;D;D;D;D it's not what I want to go by , it's what YOU want to go by , after all , you started the pointless thread. the only thing is , you keep changing the parameters!Quote:
Originally Posted by rossShut up Primo! If you want to go by length of unification then Wlad is higher in the rankings than Holmes because Holmes only held one belt for his entire reign!Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraHmmm, very strange, no reply to this. Because you don't fucking have one! so Ross does what what Ross does best, go and hijack another thread and spurt out the same old Bollox. I would venture to say that there are loads of victories against guys who were "undisputed and dominant" for 2 years. makes it all very different, doesn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNo, it's very specific so that there can only be one answer. I'm not pissing on Fury's bonfire, fair play to him. I'm just pissing all over your argument. After all, in amongst all the horse shit you've posted recently, I clearly remember When somebody said Wlad had dominated the Division for 10 years, YOU said he's only done so for 2 years, because his brother had before that!!! So that kind of renders your thread as pretty meaningless and FACTUALLY INCORRECT, does it not? Now if you want to reply, crack on, but I'm bored of this , so I'll read it in the morning.Quote:
Originally Posted by ross
You've been hung by your own rope, so I suggest that in order for you to continue talking shite on other threads, the mods should free some space by getting rid of this Pointless, Factually incorrect Thread.;D:cool:
I mean, look at the heading , according to that, you imply that there has never been a better win for any fighter EVER! you ridiculous fool! ;D;D;D;D
I said to you before the fight, that not many would be irritated by Fury winning, most would be quite pleased , and that's exactly how it's panned out. what most people would be irritated by is YOUR Nauseating droning and this is a perfect example. Have a nice day! :cool::cool:
Wlad has been "champion" for 10 years in an absolute dog shit division that is only now getting back to what it was. He hasn't beat anyone heading for the HOF.
Fury pulled off a good upset. That's it. (thankfully)
So what is Holmes reign worth? Never unified. Only had to face one organisations challengers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
Holmes reign is irrelevant to the topic.
Name a Hall of Famer that Wlad has beat or an opponent that will go into the HOF?
You agree with me, right, that Wlad benefitted from not having to face his most serious threat over the past 10 years - Vitali.
Yes I do agree and im mostly being pedantic. Im good at arguing as you all know. Like Primo keeps saying, its not Fury people dislike its me!;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
My point is how signifcant an opponent and win it is and there are very few by other boxers in the last 25 years that have a win over such a long standing and "dominant" champion.
But yes in a head to head I think Vitali could be too tough for Wlad but I also think Vitali would be too stiff for Fury. He also couldnt deal with speed and lots of punches. Chisora gave him fits and Sanders was also tagging him comfortably in their fight, even dropping Vitali at the end of the first. Sanders was not fit in that fight.
I didn't say I didn't like you. how can I dislike you, I don't know you? tad sensitive me thinks.;DQuote:
Originally Posted by rossYes I do agree and im mostly being pedantic. Im good at arguing as you all know. Like Primo keeps saying, its not Fury people dislike its me!;DQuote:
Originally Posted by Fenster
My point is how signifcant an opponent and win it is and there are very few by other boxers in the last 25 years that have a win over such a long standing and "dominant" champion.
But yes in a head to head I think Vitali could be too tough for Wlad but I also think Vitali would be too stiff for Fury. He also couldnt deal with speed and lots of punches. Chisora gave him fits and Sanders was also tagging him comfortably in their fight, even dropping Vitali at the end of the first. Sanders was not fit in that fight.
and "Chisora gave Vitali fits?" the Best Shot Chisora got in was at the head to head at the weigh-in. Cunt hardly won a round.:rolleyes:
It was arguably the biggest upset in heavyweight history since Brixton's Danny Williams - who was carefully selected to be destroyed in one round, and was told minutes before the fight he's not getting paid, as the promoter ripped everyone off - bashed up Iron Mike.
I Still haven't had a reply, apart from "Shut up Primo", so I thought I would re-post it again!Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNo, it's very specific so that there can only be one answer. I'm not pissing on Fury's bonfire, fair play to him. I'm just pissing all over your argument. After all, in amongst all the horse shit you've posted recently, I clearly remember When somebody said Wlad had dominated the Division for 10 years, YOU said he's only done so for 2 years, because his brother had before that!!! So that kind of renders your thread as pretty meaningless and FACTUALLY INCORRECT, does it not? Now if you want to reply, crack on, but I'm bored of this , so I'll read it in the morning.Quote:
Originally Posted by ross
Tell me another win over a fighter who has held a world title for so long? Yes he hasnt dominated the whole division for that entire period but how many other wins have been over a fighter who has defended a title as long? Hatton over Tszyu which is a fight along with Clay v Liston that I used for those finding it hard to imagine Fury beating Wlad. The. randal over Chavez and after that out of the thousands of world title fights in the last 25 years there arent many if any and certainly not at heavyweight!Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraI Still haven't had a reply, apart from "Shut up Primo", so I thought I would re-post it again!Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraNo, it's very specific so that there can only be one answer. I'm not pissing on Fury's bonfire, fair play to him. I'm just pissing all over your argument. After all, in amongst all the horse shit you've posted recently, I clearly remember When somebody said Wlad had dominated the Division for 10 years, YOU said he's only done so for 2 years, because his brother had before that!!! So that kind of renders your thread as pretty meaningless and FACTUALLY INCORRECT, does it not? Now if you want to reply, crack on, but I'm bored of this , so I'll read it in the morning.Quote:
Originally Posted by ross