Re: Boxing Records You Admire the Most/Least
I like the title of this thread a lot, Resume is such a gay word
Re: Boxing Records You Admire the Most/Least
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SlimTrae
Most: Hank Armstrong. Held world titles in three different weight divisions simultaneously, all three titles were undisputed championships.
least: Pacquiao -eight division titles
Hank didn't need no darn tootin catchweight fights. His record = mas macho!
'
Pac's record IMO doesn't register as legendary to me because had he fought in 1930s 1940s, 50s, 60s, he'd have to go from smallest to heavyweight to do that!
Flip the script, had Hank Armstrong fought in his era, whose to say he would have won 9 or 10?
I love Pac as an action fighter, great power, speed, will, but that record IMO is kinda bogus, especially considering that he never held 2 belts in any division, let alone clean it out.
but on the down side its another @SlimTrae thread from the land that time forgot ;D
Re: Boxing Records You Admire the Most/Least
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SlimTrae
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SlimTrae
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Master
Paulie was cocky against Cotto and took a deserved and fearful beating. He is a top boxing commentator and very accurate with everything he says.
Looking up his record I didnt know how he got booted off showtime. Didnt think his commentating was controversial but I didnt listen to whatever fight he did that pissed them off.
And on his cockiness, he did a commentary reviewing the fight. He stated he knew he fell behind on the cards and felt he had no choice to but to fight it out. Also stated Cotto wasn't just a brawler to him, he knew how to force Paulie to fight. I think that meant he was in a no-win scenario. Just man enough to take on the big test whenever it came.
Sidenote- seems boxrec wants membership to access records now- do you know of any websites that gives a fighter's record?:)
I can access it, just tried it right now.
Ok, maybe its my browser. It kept taking me to their amatuer records. or a boxrec fight but not the record. Guess I have to type boxrec 1st and then the fighter, I'm good now!
Yeah, that's the way I've always done it. I'll search a specific boxer, then go to his boxrec page. Have never been denied.
However, for certain details like the weights and the number of rounds (both scheduled and ending) it seems you need an account.
Re: Boxing Records You Admire the Most/Least
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SlimTrae
Most: Hank Armstrong. Held world titles in three different weight divisions simultaneously, all three titles were undisputed championships.
least: Pacquiao -eight division titles
Hank didn't need no darn tootin catchweight fights. His record = mas macho!
'
Pac's record IMO doesn't register as legendary to me because had he fought in 1930s 1940s, 50s, 60s, he'd have to go from smallest to heavyweight to do that!
Flip the script, had Hank Armstrong fought in his era, whose to say he would have won 9 or 10?
I love Pac as an action fighter, great power, speed, will, but that record IMO is kinda bogus, especially considering that he never held 2 belts in any division, let alone clean it out.
but on the down side its another @
SlimTrae thread from the land that time forgot ;D
What a whipper snapper ;D
Pacman, Malinaggi, Tyson, Holyfield etc it's hardly ancient Rome is it? I am with you on Resume though. Sounds like one of those posh French afters that Al pays £25 for.
Re: Boxing Records You Admire the Most/Least
[QUOTE=Beanz;1573298]
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SlimTrae
Most: Hank Armstrong. Held world titles in three different weight divisions simultaneously, all three titles were undisputed championships.
least: Pacquiao -eight division titles
Hank didn't need no darn tootin catchweight fights. His record = mas macho!
'
Pac's record IMO doesn't register as legendary to me because had he fought in 1930s 1940s, 50s, 60s, he'd have to go from smallest to heavyweight to do that!
Flip the script, had Hank Armstrong fought in his era, whose to say he would have won 9 or 10?
I love Pac as an action fighter, great power, speed, will, but that record IMO is kinda bogus, especially considering that he never held 2 belts in any division, let alone clean it out.
but on the down side its another @
SlimTrae thread from the land that time forgot ;D
What a whipper snapper ;D
Pacman, Malinaggi, Tyson, Holyfield etc it's hardly ancient Rome is it? I am with you on Resume though. Sounds like one of those posh French afters that Al pays £25 for.[/QUOTE]
£35 for ;)
Re: Boxing Records You Admire the Most/Least
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SlimTrae
Most: Hank Armstrong. Held world titles in three different weight divisions simultaneously, all three titles were undisputed championships.
least: Pacquiao -eight division titles
Hank didn't need no darn tootin catchweight fights. His record = mas macho!
'
Pac's record IMO doesn't register as legendary to me because had he fought in 1930s 1940s, 50s, 60s, he'd have to go from smallest to heavyweight to do that!
Flip the script, had Hank Armstrong fought in his era, whose to say he would have won 9 or 10?
I love Pac as an action fighter, great power, speed, will, but that record IMO is kinda bogus, especially considering that he never held 2 belts in any division, let alone clean it out.
but on the down side its another @
SlimTrae thread from the land that time
preserved;D
Fixed it 4 ya! ;D
Well let me get back to the oldies - who still pull in million ppvs :rolleyes:
Mike Tyson’s exhibition fight against Roy Jones Jr pulled in 1.2million pay-per-view buys, it has been revealed.
I'll stay oldschool and hang on to the greats before my day, during my day and today. Isn't that a sportsfan? one who can discuss all eras?
O0
Re: Boxing Records You Admire the Most/Least
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
I like the title of this thread a lot, Resume is such a gay word
You like gay sounding titles? Um, you might wanna keep that to yourself. Unless you're coming out the closet?;D
Re: Boxing Records You Admire the Most/Least
:) no I actually said your thread title wasn't gay so I liked it
so well done :lickish:
and that emoji wasnt a gay lick