Quote Originally Posted by p4pking View Post
Obviously using any crossover examples is not going to tell you anything one way or another. Of course someone who trains their whole life for one sport and then once well past their physical peak decides to give another a shot isn't going to be dominant, that's just redundant to say. I would HOPE that the arguement you are trying to respond to is that if one athlete had focused entirely one another sport from the get go, INSTEAD of their chosen sport, they could be better than so and so, which in the case of boxing obviously holds very little weight either. The point I was making is that Lebron James, for instance, is a FAR FAR FAR better pure athlete than either of the Klitshckos, but that doesn't take intangibles associated with the sport into account obviously. All combat sports are very specific in that sense, I know a couple of guys who were half decent martial artists from a young age who were absolutely useless when it came to so much as catching or throwing a ball etc, but they would beat the hell out of guys who were very multi talented in team sports etc. Just a dumb arguement really.


The title of the thread is "Why do people think any good NBA/NFL athlete can beat the Klit bros?" It's not "Do you think if NBA/NFL athletes had taken up boxing from the very beginning, could they beat the Klitschkos?" I wish people would stick to the original arguments, instead of twisting it into something else. And given that the title is the former, I maintain that it's ludicruous to think that a Lebron James, a Shaq, or any other NBA'er or NFL'er for that matter could beat the Klits.

So either stick to the original argument, or make up your own new thread.