BoxRec

DMA1987 wrote:Ketchel did very well for me, far over achieved my expectations. I threw him to the wolves a little towards the end but I was proud of my little virtual man.

RJJ was dogshit.

Ketchel definitely did great this season....though he was 0-2 against my boy Joey Maxim.

In all fairness to you though, those were probably my best wins of the season for Maxim...those two and the wins over Bernard Hopkins and Billy Conn.

gilgamesh wrote:

HomicideHenry wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:
The only HOF candidates from this season are Tommy Gibbons and Ezzard Charles. Nobody else is in the running I don't think. This season was dominated for the most part by those two fighters.

And what an honor it is. I think in all fairness, these two men were 'equal' in accomplishments. So, maybe, there should be a dual entry into the HOF for this season. Charles/Gibbons both should be entered into the HOF for the LHW season.

You weren't equal Gibbons was THE MAN this season IMO, your man Charles was very close though. They're the only two possible HOF entrants from this season in my mind.

Charles was, for the lack of a better word, champion for almost 20 weeks. Charles had to of had the most successful title defenses of anyone on the entire sim. Outside of Gibbons, all other losses were avenged. Charles won three alphabet titles during his entire run: IBF (2x's) and WBC, and held on to the Lonsdale belt for a brief time as well. Altogether, I think the accomplishments are equal.

gilgamesh wrote:The only HOF candidates from this season are Tommy Gibbons and Ezzard Charles. Nobody else is in the running I don't think. This season was dominated for the most part by those two fighters.

Agreed.

Though Charles didn't manage to maintain his from going into the late 20s - 30s weeks. Whereas Gibbons did. Though it could be argued that Charles had the more difficult title defence streak.

My stable struggled throughout the season. I was glad to see Tommy Burns lift an IBO Title - but Hopkins was disappointing for me. He had a few title shots but he was enver able to beat the big boys... AT least he can say that he fought the VERY best.

Crease wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:The only HOF candidates from this season are Tommy Gibbons and Ezzard Charles. Nobody else is in the running I don't think. This season was dominated for the most part by those two fighters.

Agreed.

Though Charles didn't manage to maintain his from going into the late 20s - 30s weeks. Whereas Gibbons did. Though it could be argued that Charles had the more difficult title defence streak.

the fights between Charles and Gibbons were see saw until the end, when there was one UD right? This in Gibbons favor.

And although Charles may have had the tougher title run, I don't think he had any tougher slate over the entire season.

The super six, was a pure luck outcome IMHO. Anything could have happened. In Fact Ezz did about what you would expect, Gibbons a bit better than expected as with Bivins. Fitz and Tunney might have been underperformers. Over a thousand fights, they would have rose to the top Me thinks.

Too bad NO TITLE was assigned to the super six, but my fighters have always been better than any titles. So it's fitting Gibbons ended up a maverick who was rated highly but with no trappings.


Kid Norfolk was the dirtiest fighter, and took his toll on the group perhaps more than any other fighter in the pool.
We are proud of his performance, especially how he just crushed the jewels of the bottom feeder he fought in Turkey week. No Muss no fuss, just destroyed the man....though he "lost" the fight.

Crease wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:The only HOF candidates from this season are Tommy Gibbons and Ezzard Charles. Nobody else is in the running I don't think. This season was dominated for the most part by those two fighters.

Agreed.

Though Charles didn't manage to maintain his from going into the late 20s - 30s weeks. Whereas Gibbons did. Though it could be argued that Charles had the more difficult title defence streak.

When you figure Charles defended the title against Fitzsimmons, Tunney, Spinks, Langford, etc. it goes without saying who fought the harder fights--- which ultimately (and probably) was the reason for Charles decline in the later weeks between 25-35. It took too much out of him. While Gibbons on the other hand defended the title mainly against fringe contenders.

BoxBuzz wrote:Too bad NO TITLE was assigned to the super six, but my fighters have always been better than any titles. So it's fitting Gibbons ended up a maverick who was rated highly but with no trappings.

The IBF Title was in the Super Six. The thing problem is that with the scheduling there is no guarantee that the guy who finishes at the top will hold the belt at the end of the final week.

But realistically, there is nothing we can do about it because no-one can predict how the fights will go and who will bring the belt into their next fight with them.

HomicideHenry wrote:When you figure Charles defended the title against Fitzsimmons, Tunney, Spinks, Langford, etc. it goes without saying who fought the harder fights--- which ultimately (and probably) was the reason for Charles decline in the later weeks between 25-35. It took too much out of him. While Gibbons on the other hand defended the title mainly against fringe contenders.

I will draw up both of their completed records and Managers can judge who has the better record for themselves. It's really the only way to settle this dispute.