Quote Originally Posted by Primo Carnera View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Primo Carnera View Post
Quote Originally Posted by ross View Post
Yes it is very specific because it such a good win.

Wlad was much more dominant and over a much longer period than most of those names put forward.
No, 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.
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?
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.
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!