Quote Originally Posted by ono View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Lance Uppercut View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Violent Demise View Post

Thank you. That is exactly what I'm talking about. For whatever reasons people love to bad mouth Wlad. If people like you ain't giving him credit on his wins over Peter, Thompson, Byrd and Brock what the fukk makes you think there going to give him credit for his win over Haye? A much smaller fighter with chin and stamina issues. They won't.
Chris Byrd- was the #1 ranked heavyweight in the world at the time, and he had been #1 for at least a year. And that was not only by The Ring, but by every other legitimate boxing journalist.

Calvin Brock and Samuel Peter were both undefeated top 10 contenders.

Sultan Ibragimov- was a title unification

Tony Thopmson and Ray Austin were knockouts of alphabet mandatories

Lamon Brewster- avenging a loss

Hasim Rahman- well I will give you that one. Rahman was spent.
Their status in a piss poor division is irrelavent. Who cares who is the best out of a very bad bunch? It's actually painful to watch - that's how bad it is.

I wasn't saying it's Wlad's fault, he has actually fought pretty much all that is out there. My point is, the division is an embarassment. The majority of the 'eilite' fighters are a good 1-2 stone overweight.

David Haye brings something completely different to the table. He's not an overweight plodder who is going to stand in front of him like a sitting duck.

If people criticize him then so be it, but to the majority, it's no lesser an achievement than beating any of the other heavyweight fighters.

Chances are Haye will get ko'd but this fight is being talked about like no other heavyweight fight...maybe since Lewis - Vitali.
But David Haye's staus in another piss poor division is suppose to be relevant?