What are your five hardest hitting Welterweights?

[Bronson66]

so either Langford was over 200 lbs or Bill tate was much lighter then?

Edited

[Bronson66]

what difference does it make, last time I posted a screen shot and page of a book and you STILL said I was wrong!!! and making things up!!!

I used copilot and chat gpt. took the info. it was right about the other bouts and I mistakenly didn't check the last one. making me look like a liar. It seems it doesn't know much about langford. as does the internet.

For the record though, he does have about 400 fights unaccounted for and this happens all the time with Langford. so give me a break

It doesn't matter anyways I admit I was wrong and thats it

Edited

[them_apples]

If you think posting BS is okay that's on you,just don't expect us to take anything you say seriously again.

you make me source everything anyways. which I end up doing. You did just now. don't act like you expose me on the daily. I corrected myself within an hour. you have done the same exact thing.

[them_apples]

Langford was 205 lbs a month previously to fight Jack Thompson.

and if you type this on google, or any search engine. or any gpt engine. it will say Langford scaled at 185 at his highest.

So stop acting like this isn't a special case with Langford. I've never heard anyone speak of Langford at 205. not saying it isn't true, but I have never heard this.

[Bronson66]

and if you type this on google, or any search engine. or any gpt engine. it will say Langford scaled at 185 at his highest.

So stop acting like this isn't a special case with Langford. I've never heard anyone speak of Langford at 205. not saying it isn't true, but I have never heard this.

Edited

[them_apples]

Langford's weight was all over the place he was rarely in condition, if you don't know this you don't know anything about him!
When you do you can come on here and maybe, just maybe, we will take you seriously, until then you can be lumped with
Queensbury Fool.Dr Z and Monkey Man.
Here , educate yourself!
Sam's weight.the date and opponent
199 1/2 .Jeannette 1913
200 .Bill Watkins 1914
200 Jim Johnson1914
204 Jim Johnson 204
199 1/2 Jeannette 1914
200 Gunboat Smith 1914
195 Jim Johnson 1915
192 Jim Johnson 1915
206 Sam Mcvey1915
195 Wills1915
193 Sam McVey1916
195 Wills1916
202 Sam McVey1916
204 Wills 1916
198 Jeannette1916
198 Tate1916
205 JackThompson1917
206 Andre Anderson1917
198 Jeannette1917
198 Wills 1917
196 Wills 1917
199 Billy Hooper 1919
No special case. Just one poster having done some research and the other ,too lazy to do so.

nah thats a foolish take.

you got me this time, but it doesn’t scale around the board. Sad to see you act so childish actually. Its like you won a game of cards and now your gonna beat me at chess. Let’s be rational here. If this was you, you wouldn’t be admitting anything. Like the marciano sparring debate. I dug up the book, the page, the source and you still find a way to fixate on some minute detail and found a way out instead of saying of damn - Marciano DID put Ali out, not just down but out (he refused to continue after being dropped) And previously to that you said he didn’t even DROP him. So you turned the debate into “how long was he out”.

In this scenario, I used chat gpt which gave me a few correct answers that can be sourced. One of my answers was wrong and I quickly admitted it with 0 argument whatsoever because I am here to discuss boxing. Instead of you congratulating me on being so rational - you spin around and grind your knuckles into my back like a child. Which is irritating.

Now every response from you for the next month will have some type of agitating remark

[Anomalocaris]

Tommy is still number one for me, Ray's defence was so good he actually never took a full leverage right totally flush.

[alice5]

My choices include:
Errol Spence Jr
Terence Crawford
Keith Thurman
Shawn Porter
Yordenis Ug�s

The same choice with me.

[Bronson66]

nah thats a foolish take.

you got me this time, but it doesn���¢��������t scale around the board. Sad to see you act so childish actually. Its like you won a game of cards and now your gonna beat me at chess. Let���¢��������s be rational here. If this was you, you wouldn���¢��������t be admitting anything. Like the marciano sparring debate. I dug up the book, the page, the source and you still find a way to fixate on some minute detail and found a way out instead of saying of damn - Marciano DID put Ali out, not just down but out (he refused to continue after being dropped) And previously to that you said he didn���¢��������t even DROP him. So you turned the debate into ���¢��������how long was he out���¢��������.

In this scenario, I used chat gpt which gave me a few correct answers that can be sourced. One of my answers was wrong and I quickly admitted it with 0 argument whatsoever because I am here to discuss boxing. Instead of you congratulating me on being so rational - you spin around and grind your knuckles into my back like a child. Which is irritating.

Now every response from you for the next month will have some type of agitating remark

Edited.

[Anomalocaris]

The same choice with me.

I meant all-time.