Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
User Profile
Collapse
-
Funny enough this thread is talking about the top heavyweights of each era, not the contenders when comparing them. A troll poster i encountered in NSB kept mentioning contenders as if they matter when discussing different eras. Big or Small are define by the Best Fighters of each era....
-
Lol You're creating argument on your own mouth. Not once i said getting a title means you are great. I'm only discussing the top fighters who won titles. I didn't even mentioned Zhang and other fighters in the HW division and you keep adding them in the discussions. And no i don't consider them the...
Leave a comment:
-
Not sure why you called that good points, when he was arguing fighters who failed to get titles and at the same time calling them Top Heavyweights. It doesn't make sense. Dude is high on HW of the 90s
Also this was the 90s with plenty of World titles to pick up. Not getting title means...
Leave a comment:
-
You are the one clearly handicapped here and very biased too. They didn't won titles because they are not as good as you think they were, which is a Fact. Only in your head they are all top fighters. You are delusional and that's who you really are.
I already explained to you an Era is...
Leave a comment:
-
Hypothetically lets say Wlad and Vitali fought at their primes in the 90s and dominated along with Lennox Lewis, and removing the likes of Tyson and Holyfield in the 90s, then this era i will consider as one of the biggest Heavyweights era of all time. The top fighter who wins most of the fights are...
Leave a comment:
-
Tons of big heavyweights in the 90s does not mean Better Fighters. Contenders and no hoper do not define the era. Really not that hard to understand or being clueless yourself lol
Edit: I was talking about Top Heavyweights being bigger this era. Again and i will repeat, Top Heavyweights...Last edited by gamesworn; 12-22-2024, 02:20 AM.
Leave a comment:
-
I will give you another example how to define an era. Leonard and Hearns WW was an era of bigger welterweight fighters in comparison to Pac and Mayweather WW era, which was considered small by fans. We define the era based on the top fighters of the time, not based on contenders and lower ranked fighters....
Leave a comment:
-
Actual World Champions >> Contenders. You can add more contenders you want, but that doesn't change the FACT they are still contenders and not the Top Champions of their time.
You are way too fixated on Usyk's win against Fury. Fury is only part of Usyk career. He doesn't define...
Leave a comment:
-
WBO wasn't fully recognize as major title until the 2000s but try again. Insulting "Current" big fighters who won titles while trying to prop up "Old" big fighters who were only contenders is a nice way to show your bias with old fighters.
Vitali and Wlad are both big...
Leave a comment:
-
Looks like you are the one not reading properly here. Not once i did mentioned Fury was ATG. In fact i mentioned he is not an ATG win for Usyk. lmao
What level of fighters were these big heavyweight during that era you were talking about? Obviously when i said "Era of Big Heavyweights"...
Leave a comment:
-
Adding more Judges is probably the better way to lessen robberies than this AI thing. Make it 5 Judges scoring fights
Leave a comment:
-
It is a great win for Usyk because of Size difference but Fury himself isn't an ATG.
I didn't say Usyk don't have great resume. Not sure where you read that
Usyk is All Time Great because of what he achieved in Cruiserweight and winning in Era of Huge Heavyweights. Usyk is...
Leave a comment:
-
Lets not pretend that Fury is an atg win. Fury is a very good fighter but sadly lacks dicipline. Both Usyk and Fury aren't their primes either.
I will say Usyk is the best fighter since Floyd and Pac. Usyk is 100% ATG, i don't think anyone can argue this. He is not on Floyd and Pac range...
Leave a comment:
No activity results to display
Show More
Leave a comment: