How the hell can ANYONE determine how good/great a boxer whom they've never seen fight is?
How the hell can ANYONE determine how good/great a boxer whom they've never seen fight is?
Joe Calzaghe would have to stay on the outside otherwise his pretty face would get battered like the elephant man. Under the current rule Greb would be disqualified so would be largely ineffective. Under the old rule Harry would make Joe his girlfriend.![]()
Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.
True enough. But based on what I read here, I wouldn't have thought one or two fights was enough to form an opinion. at least to judge him as the best. And it is my understanding that there is precious little of him available from his time at welterweight, which is what many people base their judgement on. But no big deal.
Yeah I do see your point though. Thats why I have no "all time greatest" list. Especially with the years from 1900-1950, 1) we have very little footage to view the fighters and 2) they were shady times, fueled by racial predjudice and controlled by criminals. There were probably tons of guys who were as good or better than SRR, but never got a chance because they were black and could fight, or because they never had the connections or didn't want to play ball with the mob (Charley Burley could be a good example of this).
How the hell can I compare Floyd Mayweather, a guy who I have EVERY SINGLE ONE of his fights on DVD, to a guy like Stanley Ketchel, who I've only seen in one fight, where Jack Johnson knocked his teeth clean out of his mouth.
Last edited by Andre; 11-29-2008 at 09:27 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks