ADAM BOOTH:Haye 3rd best HW in world! Where would you place Haye right now?

[Fenster]

If you want to get technical, "Haye fought the best fighter" is also an opinion. "Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is actually the fact. As you were.

Actually that's not a fact. Haye was also a current heavyweight title holder as was Vitali.

Haye fought THE best fighter, who is still considered THE best fighter, according to all the worlds preeminent boxing publications/writers/web sites/TV stations (personally I believe Vitali is/was better than Wlad). As you were.

[TitoFan]

If you want to get technical, "Haye fought the best fighter" is also an opinion. "Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is actually the fact. As you were.

Actually that's not a fact. Haye was also a current heavyweight title holder as was Vitali.

"Chicken Little Boxing Loudmouth Champion" is not a universally recognized title.



Haye fought THE best fighter, who is still considered THE best fighter, according to all the worlds preeminent boxing publications/writers/web sites/TV stations (personally I believe Vitali is/was better than Wlad). As you were.

"Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is not a fact?? Tell me, what part of the statement is untrue? Are you picking on the "the" part? Because if so, objection overruled. Wlad was a current heavyweight titleholder at the time he fought Haye. Quit wasting my time.

Next case!

[Fenster]

If you want to get technical, "Haye fought the best fighter" is also an opinion. "Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is actually the fact. As you were.

Actually that's not a fact. Haye was also a current heavyweight title holder as was Vitali.

"Chicken Little Boxing Loudmouth Champion" is not a universally recognized title.



Haye fought THE best fighter, who is still considered THE best fighter, according to all the worlds preeminent boxing publications/writers/web sites/TV stations (personally I believe Vitali is/was better than Wlad). As you were.

"Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is not a fact?? Tell me, what part of the statement is untrue? Are you picking on the "the" part? Because if so, objection overruled. Wlad was a current heavyweight titleholder at the time he fought Haye. Quit wasting my time.

Next case!

Exhibit a) Wlad was THE current heavyweight title holder.

Exhibit b) Wlad was A current heavyweight title holder.

Does A differ from B? Yes. Is A incorrect? Yes. Is B correct? Yes.

Get your facts straight and stop wasting the court's time. Please proceed.

[TitoFan]

If you want to get technical, "Haye fought the best fighter" is also an opinion. "Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is actually the fact. As you were.

Actually that's not a fact. Haye was also a current heavyweight title holder as was Vitali.

"Chicken Little Boxing Loudmouth Champion" is not a universally recognized title.



Haye fought THE best fighter, who is still considered THE best fighter, according to all the worlds preeminent boxing publications/writers/web sites/TV stations (personally I believe Vitali is/was better than Wlad). As you were.

"Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is not a fact?? Tell me, what part of the statement is untrue? Are you picking on the "the" part? Because if so, objection overruled. Wlad was a current heavyweight titleholder at the time he fought Haye. Quit wasting my time.

Next case!

Exhibit a) Wlad was THE current heavyweight title holder.

Exhibit b) Wlad was A current heavyweight title holder.

Does A differ from B? Yes. Is A incorrect? Yes. Is B correct? Yes.

Get your facts straight and stop wasting the court's time. Please proceed.

None of this changes the fact that Haye is a shitty heavyweight, and proved unworthy of the shot given to him by the generous Wlad. This, after all, is the real heart of the matter.

[Fenster]

If you want to get technical, "Haye fought the best fighter" is also an opinion. "Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is actually the fact. As you were.

Actually that's not a fact. Haye was also a current heavyweight title holder as was Vitali.

"Chicken Little Boxing Loudmouth Champion" is not a universally recognized title.



Haye fought THE best fighter, who is still considered THE best fighter, according to all the worlds preeminent boxing publications/writers/web sites/TV stations (personally I believe Vitali is/was better than Wlad). As you were.

"Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is not a fact?? Tell me, what part of the statement is untrue? Are you picking on the "the" part? Because if so, objection overruled. Wlad was a current heavyweight titleholder at the time he fought Haye. Quit wasting my time.

Next case!

Exhibit a) Wlad was THE current heavyweight title holder.

Exhibit b) Wlad was A current heavyweight title holder.

Does A differ from B? Yes. Is A incorrect? Yes. Is B correct? Yes.

Get your facts straight and stop wasting the court's time. Please proceed.

None of this changes the fact that Haye is a shitty heavyweight, and proved unworthy of the shot given to him by the generous Wlad. This, after all, is the real heart of the matter.

There was nothing "generous" about it. It's called business.

Haye was the current biggest name heavyweight for Wlad, the WBA champion, the highest independently ranked heavyweight and most importantly the fighter that makes him most money.

AS for Haye being "unworthy." That's always easy to say with hindsight. Cotto was "unworthy" against Mayweather and Pac with hindsight. It's not like the fights were even remotely close. Fact.

[TitoFan]

If you want to get technical, "Haye fought the best fighter" is also an opinion. "Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is actually the fact. As you were.

Actually that's not a fact. Haye was also a current heavyweight title holder as was Vitali.

"Chicken Little Boxing Loudmouth Champion" is not a universally recognized title.



Haye fought THE best fighter, who is still considered THE best fighter, according to all the worlds preeminent boxing publications/writers/web sites/TV stations (personally I believe Vitali is/was better than Wlad). As you were.

"Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is not a fact?? Tell me, what part of the statement is untrue? Are you picking on the "the" part? Because if so, objection overruled. Wlad was a current heavyweight titleholder at the time he fought Haye. Quit wasting my time.

Next case!

Exhibit a) Wlad was THE current heavyweight title holder.

Exhibit b) Wlad was A current heavyweight title holder.

Does A differ from B? Yes. Is A incorrect? Yes. Is B correct? Yes.

Get your facts straight and stop wasting the court's time. Please proceed.

None of this changes the fact that Haye is a shitty heavyweight, and proved unworthy of the shot given to him by the generous Wlad. This, after all, is the real heart of the matter.

There was nothing "generous" about it. It's called business.

Haye was the current biggest name heavyweight for Wlad, the WBA champion, the highest independently ranked heavyweight and most importantly the fighter that makes him most money.

AS for Haye being "unworthy." That's always easy to say with hindsight. Cotto was "unworthy" against Mayweather and Pac with hindsight. It's not like the fights were even remotely close. Fact.

Cotto FOUGHT Mayweather and Pac.
Haye handed his ass to Wlad in a silver platter with trembling hands.

Big difference.

[Fenster]

If you want to get technical, "Haye fought the best fighter" is also an opinion. "Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is actually the fact. As you were.

Actually that's not a fact. Haye was also a current heavyweight title holder as was Vitali.

"Chicken Little Boxing Loudmouth Champion" is not a universally recognized title.



Haye fought THE best fighter, who is still considered THE best fighter, according to all the worlds preeminent boxing publications/writers/web sites/TV stations (personally I believe Vitali is/was better than Wlad). As you were.

"Haye fought the current heavyweight titleholder" is not a fact?? Tell me, what part of the statement is untrue? Are you picking on the "the" part? Because if so, objection overruled. Wlad was a current heavyweight titleholder at the time he fought Haye. Quit wasting my time.

Next case!

Exhibit a) Wlad was THE current heavyweight title holder.

Exhibit b) Wlad was A current heavyweight title holder.

Does A differ from B? Yes. Is A incorrect? Yes. Is B correct? Yes.

Get your facts straight and stop wasting the court's time. Please proceed.

None of this changes the fact that Haye is a shitty heavyweight, and proved unworthy of the shot given to him by the generous Wlad. This, after all, is the real heart of the matter.

There was nothing "generous" about it. It's called business.

Haye was the current biggest name heavyweight for Wlad, the WBA champion, the highest independently ranked heavyweight and most importantly the fighter that makes him most money.

AS for Haye being "unworthy." That's always easy to say with hindsight. Cotto was "unworthy" against Mayweather and Pac with hindsight. It's not like the fights were even remotely close. Fact.

Cotto FOUGHT Mayweather and Pac.
Haye handed his ass to Wlad in a silver platter with trembling hands.

Big difference.

The only big difference is the size of fighter.

Cotto was the BIGGER man against both. Haye was giving Wlad around 30lb and 4-5 inches in height.. Wlad had every conceivable advantage.

Just cause Haye didn't get beat-up like Cotto did, especially against little Pac, you can't hold that against him. If little Pac can bust Cotto up with that ease, what would Froch, Chavez jr or Hopkins do to him? Because that's the size difference you're dealing with. Fact.