BoxRec

oogiebe wrote: ↑08 Jan 2023, 18:39

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑08 Jan 2023, 18:25 huh?
And Ibeabuchi would have beat Johannson is not an argument either. I was just pointing out how silly that is.
I asked you a question. Besides Byrd, who else did Ibeabuchi stop that is worth mentioning?

So you think Ingo beats Ike? You think Floyd beats Ike? Please tell us how you come to this.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑08 Jan 2023, 19:23


I can't really imagine for instance that if Mike Tyson and Rocky Marciano would've fought that Mike Tyson wouldn't have absolutely battered the sh*t out of Marciano in a frankly one sided bludgeoning.

However, I rank Marciano over Tyson. Because he was the better Champion, had a more dominant run in his own era, and frankly has a better resume than Mike.

HomicideHenry wrote: ↑07 Jan 2023, 22:25 I don't necessarily like the argument that some people use saying that Johansson defeated the undisputed champion when really there was only one title back then so of course every champion was going to be undisputed.

The only concession I will make for those older eras is that it was typically harder to get to the top than it is today, but... Johansson was considered then as he is now as a one-trick pony who had a powerful right hand and very little else.

Yes he was a silver medalist. Yes he was the European heavyweight champion. Yes he holds a win over Eddie Machen, and he had one of the greatest trilogies in boxing history against Floyd Patterson. But his career was pretty short in comparison to most people in heavyweight history having only 28 fights as a pro. The only other noteworthy wins he had were against Henry Cooper and Brian London. One might throw in Joe Bygraves, also, but he was really British and Commonwealth level.

I don't know of that many people on The Forum over the years let alone other boxing sites whoever rated Johansson highly. There is generally a consensus among people that had Rocky Marciano unretired he may very well have been able to have beaten Johansson had the fight took place.

Now when it comes to Chris Byrd he had the misfortune of competing in one of the weaker era's in heavyweight history. Combined with his style of boxing which was boring he has been largely written off by many people when I think it is safe to say he was solidly number two behind Lennox Lewis when he was competing.

He was certainly better than the likes of John Ruiz, Sultan Ibragimov, Shannon Briggs, Ruslan Chagaev, Oleg Maskaev, and others who held different alphabet championships around the same time. While others treated their championship belts like a revolving door Byrd actually had multiple defenses. He won the vacant IBF title from Holyfield and defended it successfully against Oquendo, Golota, McCline, and Williamson before losing it to Vladimir Klitschko.

Byrd also had wins over David Tua, Jimmy Thunder, Jose Ribalta, Bert Cooper and Ross Puritty. His biggest win was against Vitali Klitschko, although it must be noted that he was losing the fight by a wide margin and only due to Klitschko retiring in his corner did he get the verdict.

Byrd started out his career at 169 pounds, being also a silver medalist in the 1992 games, and demonstrated that small and elusive men could make an awful lot of big men look silly. I think it's a foregone conclusion that Byrd could have defeated Johansson head-to-head, and I tend to think that he had the better all around resume. Maybe by not a lot but it is obviously better than what Johansson had going for him.

oogiebe wrote: ↑08 Jan 2023, 18:39

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑08 Jan 2023, 18:25 huh?
And Ibeabuchi would have beat Johannson is not an argument either. I was just pointing out how silly that is.
I asked you a question. Besides Byrd, who else did Ibeabuchi stop that is worth mentioning?

So you think Ingo beats Ike? You think Floyd beats Ike? Please tell us how you come to this.

Controversial wrote: ↑08 Jan 2023, 19:17 Why does it matter if someone hasn’t beaten a great fighter, does that mean they are incapable of beating fighters that have?

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 11:52

Controversial wrote: ↑08 Jan 2023, 19:17 Why does it matter if someone hasn’t beaten a great fighter, does that mean they are incapable of beating fighters that have?

Why does it matter?
Well if a fighter beats a great fighter, it proves that they can do. If you have proven that you can beat a great fighter, it makes it more likely that you are a great fighter yourself. Obviously the more great fighters that you beat, the better.

If someone has not beaten a great fighter, does that mean he was incapable? Not automatically. However, they didn't actually do it. You can't give them credit for something that they have not actually done. You have to give credit for someone who has actually done it.

Think of it in current terms.
Lets say everyone considers Fighter A as the best in the world.
Then he fights Fighter B and Fighter B beats him.

Fighter C has never fought either one of them. Fighter B and fighter C have no common opponents. There is nothing else that supports either B or Fighter C.
Who would everyone rater higher, Fighter B or Fighter C? Fighter B.

Jaywheel wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 12:44 It's HW's we are talking about. Everyone but Zuri Lawrence has a punchers chance. The fact that Bert Cooper never beat anyone great is relevant because the odds of him landing that punch on Marciano are what? 1%-2%?

Cooper fought Foreman, Mercer, Bowe, Holyfield, Moorer, Byrd and couldn't beat them. Why would he ko Marciano? Because Marciano is smaller? Moorer is a blown up LHW. Cooper couldn't finish him.

Jaywheel wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 12:44 It's HW's we are talking about. Everyone but Zuri Lawrence has a punchers chance. The fact that Bert Cooper never beat anyone great is relevant because the odds of him landing that punch on Marciano are what? 1%-2%?

Cooper fought Foreman, Mercer, Bowe, Holyfield, Moorer, Byrd and couldn't beat them. Why would he ko Marciano? Because Marciano is smaller? Moorer is a blown up LHW. Cooper couldn't finish him.

keithmoonhangover wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 13:00

Jaywheel wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 12:44 It's HW's we are talking about. Everyone but Zuri Lawrence has a punchers chance. The fact that Bert Cooper never beat anyone great is relevant because the odds of him landing that punch on Marciano are what? 1%-2%?

Cooper fought Foreman, Mercer, Bowe, Holyfield, Moorer, Byrd and couldn't beat them. Why would he ko Marciano? Because Marciano is smaller? Moorer is a blown up LHW. Cooper couldn't finish him.

I'm not being funny, but what has Bert Cooper got to do with Ingemar Johansson and Chris Byrd?

Controversial wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 12:25

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 11:52

Controversial wrote: ↑08 Jan 2023, 19:17 Why does it matter if someone hasn’t beaten a great fighter, does that mean they are incapable of beating fighters that have?

Why does it matter?
Well if a fighter beats a great fighter, it proves that they can do. If you have proven that you can beat a great fighter, it makes it more likely that you are a great fighter yourself. Obviously the more great fighters that you beat, the better.

If someone has not beaten a great fighter, does that mean he was incapable? Not automatically. However, they didn't actually do it. You can't give them credit for something that they have not actually done. You have to give credit for someone who has actually done it.

Think of it in current terms.
Lets say everyone considers Fighter A as the best in the world.
Then he fights Fighter B and Fighter B beats him.

Fighter C has never fought either one of them. Fighter B and fighter C have no common opponents. There is nothing else that supports either B or Fighter C.
Who would everyone rater higher, Fighter B or Fighter C? Fighter B.

My point was in terms of different eras and fantasy fights. I’d give Bert Cooper a punchers chance with Marciano, the fact Cooper never beat anyone great is irrelevant.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 16:59

Controversial wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 12:25

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 11:52

Why does it matter?
Well if a fighter beats a great fighter, it proves that they can do. If you have proven that you can beat a great fighter, it makes it more likely that you are a great fighter yourself. Obviously the more great fighters that you beat, the better.

If someone has not beaten a great fighter, does that mean he was incapable? Not automatically. However, they didn't actually do it. You can't give them credit for something that they have not actually done. You have to give credit for someone who has actually done it.

Think of it in current terms.
Lets say everyone considers Fighter A as the best in the world.
Then he fights Fighter B and Fighter B beats him.

Fighter C has never fought either one of them. Fighter B and fighter C have no common opponents. There is nothing else that supports either B or Fighter C.
Who would everyone rater higher, Fighter B or Fighter C? Fighter B.

My point was in terms of different eras and fantasy fights. I’d give Bert Cooper a punchers chance with Marciano, the fact Cooper never beat anyone great is irrelevant.

We aren't talking about fantasy fights. That is in another Forum where people can pick their favorites to magically win fights that they really wouldn't.
This forum is for what actually happened in real life.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑09 Jan 2023, 11:40

oogiebe wrote: ↑08 Jan 2023, 18:39

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑08 Jan 2023, 18:25 huh?
And Ibeabuchi would have beat Johannson is not an argument either. I was just pointing out how silly that is.
I asked you a question. Besides Byrd, who else did Ibeabuchi stop that is worth mentioning?

So you think Ingo beats Ike? You think Floyd beats Ike? Please tell us how you come to this.

I will answer your question after ytou ask the one that I already asked you twice.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑10 Jan 2023, 17:05 Would Johannson and Patterson be allowed to throw punches as well?

Jaywheel wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 11:17 We talking about the same Tua that went life and death with almighty David Izon before getting a KO in the 12th? Ingo and Patterson would never be able to figure out that kind of boxing wizardry. Float like a Samoian, sting like a bee.

Jaywheel wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 11:17 We talking about the same Tua that went life and death with almighty David Izon before getting a KO in the 12th? Ingo and Patterson would never be able to figure out that kind of boxing wizardry. Float like a Samoian, sting like a bee.

Jaywheel wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 11:17 We talking about the same Tua that went life and death with almighty David Izon before getting a KO in the 12th? Ingo and Patterson would never be able to figure out that kind of boxing wizardry. Float like a Samoian, sting like a bee.

oogiebe wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 18:48

Jaywheel wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 11:17 We talking about the same Tua that went life and death with almighty David Izon before getting a KO in the 12th? Ingo and Patterson would never be able to figure out that kind of boxing wizardry. Float like a Samoian, sting like a bee.

Yeah, that's the guy. Like we talk about Ali, who many say lost (including the AP) to that grand master Doug Jones.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑12 Jan 2023, 02:21

Jaywheel wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 11:17 We talking about the same Tua that went life and death with almighty David Izon before getting a KO in the 12th? Ingo and Patterson would never be able to figure out that kind of boxing wizardry. Float like a Samoian, sting like a bee.

There's no doubt in my mind that Tua would beat the ever loving sh*t out of Ingo. Patterson would've been a harder challenge.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑12 Jan 2023, 12:10

gilgamesh wrote: ↑12 Jan 2023, 02:21

Jaywheel wrote: ↑11 Jan 2023, 11:17 We talking about the same Tua that went life and death with almighty David Izon before getting a KO in the 12th? Ingo and Patterson would never be able to figure out that kind of boxing wizardry. Float like a Samoian, sting like a bee.

There's no doubt in my mind that Tua would beat the ever loving sh*t out of Ingo. Patterson would've been a harder challenge.

You are entitled to your opinion. However you should not factor that in when rating them because it didn't actually happen. Ibeabuchi actually did stop Byrd.
If you are going to factor in what would have happened, then you have to go with Tyson over Klitschko because glass jaw wouldn't have lasted too long in that one.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑12 Jan 2023, 12:52

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑12 Jan 2023, 12:10

gilgamesh wrote: ↑12 Jan 2023, 02:21

There's no doubt in my mind that Tua would beat the ever loving sh*t out of Ingo. Patterson would've been a harder challenge.

You are entitled to your opinion. However you should not factor that in when rating them because it didn't actually happen. Ibeabuchi actually did stop Byrd.
If you are going to factor in what would have happened, then you have to go with Tyson over Klitschko because glass jaw wouldn't have lasted too long in that one.

I've established that I don't rate guys on who I think would win a Mythical Fight. Which you'd know if you could comprehend simple points.