Sometimes I wonder why you guys try. It amuses me at times that it's the guys who CLAIM to be the historical buffs and insinuate that I don't understand history, that sometimes totally overlook the history of the sport.
Throughout time, the US (and others, it's unfair to pick on them alone here maybe), has succeeded in iconising fighters.
Especially in America, FAME NAMES are more important than ACTUAL RECORDS.
Everybody knows Tarver is a shot fighter. Exactly the same as Briggs is too. Every objective fan knows they will never beat a REAL challenger, which are OBVIOUSLY still out there in force.
In fact, there's never been a more stacked HW division, with so many dangerous opponents in it's history.
The fact that a few ancient fossils manage to find their way into the rankings is irrelevant.
But did such things happen in the past?
DAMN right it did!
A 50 year old decrepit Archie Moore, sub 200, fighting the young "lion" Cassius Clay.
Did anybody earn their title shot by beating questionable opposition?
Previous challengers earned their shots by beating nothing but STRAIGHT UP BUMS MAINLY! I am not talking about guys ranked #10 or #35. I am talking about guys who have barely won their fights! Who have no business even being in the ring. Today, challengers are NOT ALLOWED to face bums at the top, they can only earn their shot by beating something relevant.
And so the WBA has orchestrated a couple of fame names to recognition that don't really deserve to be there. BLOODY HELL! Let's say the whole HW era is a disaster! LOL What a joke. As if there wasn't 10x more corruption in the past when the spotlight wasn't on! And what's that got to do with the quality of the HW boxers in general anyway?
Bookmarks