Tito and Tszyu: will they come back

[The Surgeon]

If the old timers lose 20+ times, it means nothing to thier legacies. However if the new guys like roy or tito lose once or twice, the gay ass historians diss them. This sport is greatly affected by old school blindness. I can't wait till those old guys like merchant and bert sugar finally go away.

Go away? U mean die! lol Evil!

[K-DOGG]

If the old timers lose 20+ times, it means nothing to thier legacies. However if the new guys like roy or tito lose once or twice, the gay ass historians diss them. This sport is greatly affected by old school blindness. I can't wait till those old guys like merchant and bert sugar finally go away.

Once again you exaggerate; but whatever makes you feel better.

[brownpimp88]

Once again you exaggerate; but whatever makes you feel better.

Ezzard's 25 losses have no impact on his legacy, he is considered top 15 of all times p4p. Kid gavilan lost 30 times and it has no impact on his legacy. Willie Pep fought 250 times and he only lost 12 times, so those guys have no excuses. Even though i hold ezzard in a high regard cuz he beat great fighters, gavilan was never that great.

[K-DOGG]

Ezzard's 25 losses have no impact on his legacy, he is considered top 15 of all times p4p. Kid gavilan lost 30 times and it has no impact on his legacy. Willie Pep fought 250 times and he only lost 12 times, so those guys have no excuses. Even though i hold ezzard in a high regard cuz he beat great fighters, gavilan was never that great.

It's about perspective. When did those losses occur, why did those losses occur, and to whom.

Some modern fans are overly impressed with the "0" in the loss colum; but fail to realize it doesn't mean **** if you didn't take on all of the best. If Tito were 34 or 35 when he lost to Hopkins, then that's excuseable...he would be past his best. Hell, his loss to Hopkins is excusable to an extent because of how great Hopkins is; but his retirement right after is not. Instead of trying to show that he could learn from his mistakes and overcome his loss, he quit......then came back, got beat up again.....and quit again.

[brownpimp88]

It's about perspective. When did those losses occur, why did those losses occur, and to whom.

Some modern fans are overly impressed with the "0" in the loss colum; but fail to realize it doesn't mean **** if you didn't take on all of the best. If Tito were 34 or 35 when he lost to Hopkins, then that's excuseable...he would be past his best. Hell, his loss to Hopkins is excusable to an extent because of how great Hopkins is; but his retirement right after is not. Instead of trying to show that he could learn from his mistakes and overcome his loss, he quit......then came back, got beat up again.....and quit again.

He was a smaller man than hopkins, the guy was a world champ for 8 years. Tito Trinidad easily surpassed wilfred benitez when it came to accomplishments. Roy Jones Jr was 35 when he lost to tarver. He was named fighter of the year 5 different times, and pound for pound fighter of the decade. Roy Jones Jr was a champ for 11 straight years at 160, 168 and 175 combined. Yet kid gavilan and fighting harada get rated higher than him by ring ****zine, what a joke!

Dempsey's losses to tunney shouldnt be excuseable cuz he was still doing exhibitions, he wasnt old and he beat a prime sharkey inbetween. The fact that he got outboxed by a smaller man for 19/20 rounds in total is embarassing.

[K-DOGG]

He was a smaller man than hopkins, the guy was a world champ for 8 years. Tito Trinidad easily surpassed wilfred benitez when it came to accomplishments. Roy Jones Jr was 35 when he lost to tarver. He was named fighter of the year 5 different times, and pound for pound fighter of the decade. Roy Jones Jr was a champ for 11 straight years at 160, 168 and 175 combined. Yet kid gavilan and fighting harada get rated higher than him by ring ****zine, what a joke!

Dempsey's losses to tunney shouldnt be excuseable cuz he was still doing exhibitions, he wasnt old and he beat a prime sharkey inbetween. The fact that he got outboxed by a smaller man for 19/20 rounds in total is embarassing.

I think it's a legitimate arguement concerning Trinidad and Benitez....that comparison's worth examining, I'll agree.

Jones, on the other hand, never unified any division he won a title in and NEVER beat the REAL Light-Heavyweight Champ....that hurts him; he also never cleaned out any of the divisions he fought in....that hurts him too. Could he have? Probably; but he didn't.

Depsey was inactive for 3 years when he fought and lost to Tunney, was past his best because he was a shorter-aggressive fighter like Frazier, Marciano, and Tyson. They age faster.

Also, Sharkey was winning before getting ****** and taking his eyes off Dempsey, leaving himself open for the hook. Just because Dempsey, at 32, wa better than Sharkey, it doesn't mean he was as good as he was at 27......and you keep discrediting Tunney, who retired with a record of 51-1, which makes no sense at all.

[brownpimp88]

I think it's a legitimate arguement concerning Trinidad and Benitez....that comparison's worth examining, I'll agree.

Jones, on the other hand, never unified any division he won a title in and NEVER beat the REAL Light-Heavyweight Champ....that hurts him; he also never cleaned out any of the divisions he fought in....that hurts him too. Could he have? Probably; but he didn't.

Depsey was inactive for 3 years when he fought and lost to Tunney, was past his best because he was a shorter-aggressive fighter like Frazier, Marciano, and Tyson. They age faster.

Also, Sharkey was winning before getting ****** and taking his eyes off Dempsey, leaving himself open for the hook. Just because Dempsey, at 32, wa better than Sharkey, it doesn't mean he was as good as he was at 27......and you keep discrediting Tunney, who retired with a record of 51-1, which makes no sense at all.

Gene tunney is actually in my top 10 for light heavyweights, but i dont praise him the way bert sugar does and put him in top 5 at heavyweight, thats ridiculous.

Roy and Darius ducked each other, the DM guy never wanted to fight outside of europe. If roy went thier he would have to get the (t)ko or get robbed of a decision against those biased judges.

Roy beat toney for the 168 belt and i believe toney was the #2 p4p fighter at the time. He has beat many good/great fighters, but either way roy is better than Fighting Harada and Kid gavilan. You can argue spinks and foster are better than roy, but gavilan and kid chocolate, i dont think so.

[brownpimp88]

Jack Dempsey never fought harry wills or other top black contenders and that will hurt him.

[K-DOGG]

Jack Dempsey never fought harry wills or other top black contenders and that will hurt him.

Given the circumstances of the times, I don't thinks so. Many people were killed following Johnson-Jeffries in mass riots. Transporting fight films across state lines was outlawed for like 30 years, give or take, after that. No promoter with a lick of common sense would give a Black contender a shot at the title. Joe Louis had to orchestrate his public personality and sign over future earnings to Jim Braddock just to secure a title shot. It took Joe Louis to bring down the colour bar.....Harry Willis or George Godfrey couldn't do it, it was too close to the race riots from the Johnson-Jeffries fight.

You can't hold that against Dempsey.

[K-DOGG]

Gene tunney is actually in my top 10 for light heavyweights, but i dont praise him the way bert sugar does and put him in top 5 at heavyweight, thats ridiculous.

Roy and Darius ducked each other, the DM guy never wanted to fight outside of europe. If roy went thier he would have to get the (t)ko or get robbed of a decision against those biased judges.

Roy beat toney for the 168 belt and i believe toney was the #2 p4p fighter at the time. He has beat many good/great fighters, but either way roy is better than Fighting Harada and Kid gavilan. You can argue spinks and foster are better than roy, but gavilan and kid chocolate, i dont think so.

I agree with you on what happened between RJ and DM; but still think Roy should have shot dice and gone after him....but that's my opinion.


Concerning Roy vs Gavilan and Harada, no arguement from me; but I ain't Bert Sugar.