What would have happened if Lennox Lewis had a rematch with Vitali Klitschko?

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

...because he was using the term in an overly pedantic (anyone disagrees = controversial) way, yes. hence, the irony of you calling out reading comprehension. congrats at butting into an (already stupid) argument you didn't even comprehend... and finding a way to make it even dumber.

wat

no, my conclusion is fine. i'm STILL mocking how moronic it is to go overly pedantic and render your own point moot (protip: if everything's controversial due to said moronic definition, being controversial is meaningless). congrats!

I publicly challenged you to pick a publication and you ran from me like a child about to get a spanking. That's what actually happened. Anyone can verify it themselves simply by scrolling up and reading the previous posts. What you still don't get is that public perception has remained the same since 2003. It'll be 20 years this June. You can't just pretend that something isn't real and tune out public opinion just because you disagree with the consensus. There's nothing retarded about anyone's logic except for your own.

 

[rob mafia]

publicly challenged you to pick a publication and you ran from me like a child about to get a spanking. That's what actually happened. Anyone can verify it themselves simply by scrolling up and reading the previous posts. What you still don't get is that public perception has remained the same since 2003. It'll be 20 years this June. You can't just pretend that something isn't real and tune out public opinion just because you disagree with the consensus. There's nothing retarded about anyone's logic except for your own.

lolz @ thinking you had some kind of gotcha there. why would i dig through publications from 20 years ago over this... especially after you rendered your own argument moot?

ffs. your argument was that it was controversial... and then you shat on it by declaring that "Anything that gives rise to debate can be considered controversial." - you have nothing left to argue. everything's controversial by your pedantics, so it being controversial is meaningless.

but yeah, i'm totally going to look up publications from 20 years ago, for no apparent reason. like i already said, TROLL SMARTER.

ffs x2

someone disagreeing hardly means it's a controversy.

and yet, 30 posts later. herp derp derr durr derp

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

lolz @ thinking you had some kind of gotcha there. why would i dig through publications from 20 years ago over this... especially after you rendered your own argument moot?

ffs. your argument was that it was controversial... and then you shat on it by declaring that "Anything that gives rise to debate can be considered controversial." - you have nothing left to argue. everything's controversial by your pedantics, so it being controversial is meaningless.

but yeah, i'm totally going to look up publications from 20 years ago, for no apparent reason. like i already said, TROLL SMARTER.

ffs x2



and yet, 30 posts later. herp derp derr durr derp

You're such a clown. It's funny because you don't even realize that I gave the Oxford dictionary definition of the word "controversial". Now dictionaries are wrong? LOL. I never asked you to dig through any publications. I offered to do it myself. You're making excuses because you know what would've happened. It would have proved you were in the minority which you are. You're just too scared to face the music.

con·tro·ver·sial
/ˌkäntrəˈvərSHəl,ˌkäntrəˈvərsēəl/

adjective

1. giving rise or likely to give rise to public disagreement.
   "years of wrangling over a controversial bypass"

 

[Kforcer]

Vitaly couldnt beat LL at his worst, LL would be better prepared and in better shape and outbox Vit if they fought a second time.

There is at least some truth to this; Lennox Lewis took on Klitschko on short-notice as a Kirk Johnson replacement. But, at the same time, Klitschko took on Lewis on short notice as well. I think you could argue that neither man was at their best. So who knows, really, what would happen with a full training camp focused on preparing for one another.

 

[rob mafia]

You're such a clown. It's funny because you don't even realize that I gave the Oxford dictionary definition of the word "controversial". Now dictionaries are wrong? LOL. I never asked you to dig through any publications. I offered to do it myself. You're making excuses because you know what would've happened. It would have proved you were in the minority which you are. You're just too scared to face the music.

lolz @ backpedaling now and citing oxford... which, funny enough, isn't the definition you gave, like you just claimed.

you're really hung up on "publications." no idea why. this is like me telling a stranger to cite old publications because he thought the 2003 super bowl was boring.

you insinuated that all cut stoppages are controversial. you moronically declared that "Anything that gives rise to debate can be considered controversial." so you btfio your own argument by mooting it (if everything is controversial, it's not a point) and here you are, wanting publications... to show something being controversial, after you declared that ~everything talked about is controversial. BIG BRAIN

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

lolz @ backpedaling now and citing oxford... which, funny enough, isn't the definition you gave, like you just claimed.

you're really hung up on "publications." no idea why. this is like me telling a stranger to cite old publications because he thought the 2003 super bowl was boring.

you insinuated that all cut stoppages are controversial. you moronically declared that "Anything that gives rise to debate can be considered controversial." so you btfio your own argument by mooting it (if everything is controversial, it's not a point) and here you are, wanting publications... to show something being controversial, after you declared that ~everything talked about is controversial. BIG BRAIN

Anything that gives rise to debate can be considered controversial.

Oxford dictionary definition of the word:

con·tro·ver·sial
/ˌkäntrəˈvərSHəl,ˌkäntrəˈvərsēəl/

adjective

1. giving rise or likely to give rise to public disagreement.

Sounds essentially identical. Moronic? You're the moron for even attempting to debate this in the first place. You lose, pal.

 

[rob mafia]

Oxford dictionary definition of the word:

con·tro·ver·sial
/ˌkäntrəˈvərSHəl,ˌkäntrəˈvərsēəl/

adjective

1. giving rise or likely to give rise to public disagreement.

Sounds essentially identical. Moronic? You're the moron for even attempting to debate this in the first place. You lose, pal.

...because any debate is controversial, amirite? so everything on here is controversial... making it mundane and common. oh, wait. that was already my response. congrats at yet again arguing yourself into the same moot point. it's almost impressive to see such idiocy.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

...because any debate is controversial, amirite? so everything on here is controversial... making it mundane and common. oh, wait. that was already my response. congrats at yet again arguing yourself into the same moot point. it's almost impressive to see such idiocy.

I just gave you the word's definition per the Oxford dictionary. Now you're moving the goalposts pretending that everything is controversial. Except it isn't because, remember, you said there was no controversy attached to this fight. You can't have it both ways. Admit that you're a clown and move on. I'm getting tired of slapping you around with "retarded" logic by now.

 

[defjaam]

...because any debate is controversial, amirite? so everything on here is controversial... making it mundane and common. oh, wait. that was already my response. congrats at yet again arguing yourself into the same moot point. it's almost impressive to see such idiocy.

He has given you his definition though. How about you give yours now?

I guess people attach something scandalous to the word controversy, which by definition is not the case.
Ray Leonard's win over Marvin Hagler was also legit, but it's generally perceived as a controversial fight. The main component is the exchange of arguments among people though.
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

 

[rob mafia]

I just gave you the word's definition per the Oxford dictionary. Now you're moving the goalposts pretending that everything is controversial. Except it isn't because, remember, you said there was no controversy attached to this fight. You can't have it both ways. Admit that you're a clown and move on. I'm getting tired of slapping you around with "retarded" logic by now.

wat. yeah, that was MY point. and STILL is, hence why i'm mocking your reliance on pedantics - which rekt your own and only point. ffs, none of this should be hard to follow. when YOUR argument is that 'everything is controversial,' being controversial has no meaning/point. derp.

He has given you his definition though. How about you give yours now?

I guess people attach something scandalous to the word controversy, which by definition is not the case.
Ray Leonard's win over Marvin Hagler was also legit, but it's generally perceived as a controversial fight. The main component is the exchange of arguments among people though.
If a tree falls in a forest and no one is around to hear it, does it make a sound?

lolwut? first, i'm supposed to provide "publications," and now definitions? why? if he had a point to stand on, maybe. since his own definition renders his only point moot...

reading is haaaaaard, amirite?

ffs, 1+1=2 is a "controversial" statement, according to that retard logic. as long as someone disagrees, and with enough people, that's a guarantee. ffs, i could troll every poll/thread like that and *boom* controversial.

clownery.

 

[defjaam]

wat. yeah, that was MY point. and STILL is, hence why i'm mocking your reliance on pedantics - which rekt your own and only point. ffs, none of this should be hard to follow. when YOUR argument is that 'everything is controversial,' being controversial has no meaning/point. derp.




lolwut? first, i'm supposed to provide "publications," and now definitions? why? if he had a point to stand on, maybe. since his own definition renders his only point moot...

reading is haaaaaard, amirite?

ffs, 1+1=2 is a "controversial" statement, according to that retard logic. as long as someone disagrees, and with enough people, that's a guarantee. ffs, i could troll every poll/thread like that and *boom* controversial.

clownery.

At least we're keeping our cool like grown men. Judging by your orthography, you seem to be in a state of panic anxiety.

What happened? Your female supervisor harassing you again? Talk to us, son.

 

[rob mafia]

At least we're keeping our cool like grown men. Judging by your orthography, you seem to be in a state of panic anxiety.

What happened? Your female supervisor harassing you again? Talk to us, son.

so cool you resorted to ad-hom ~10 posts ago.

 

[Zarathustra611]

I don't even think "pedantics" is even a word, yet the rest of us are supposed to sit here and watch you morons both use it like it is?

 

[Cariñito]

Imagine being a guest interested in joining Sherdog and you click on this thread.

 

[Jonny Ninja]

At least we're keeping our cool like grown men. Judging by your orthography, you seem to be in a state of panic anxiety.

What happened? Your female supervisor harassing you again? Talk to us, son.

Lol

 

[rob mafia]

I don't even think "pedantics" is even a word, yet the rest of us are supposed to sit here and watch you morons both use it like it is?

ah, using semantics with pedantics...

 

[tank666]

A more cautious Lewis would have won a more boring decision.

 

[SandisLL]

There is at least some truth to this; Lennox Lewis took on Klitschko on short-notice as a Kirk Johnson replacement. But, at the same time, Klitschko took on Lewis on short notice as well. .

on shorter notice as away corner lad vs tickets seller and A side guy backuped by event's promoter.
A side guys are excepted to win and matchmaking too usually is done with this intent... if A side lad is excepted continue to bring in good money for businesses...


This is reason why pro boxing isn't sport and never was sport. Never will be...
Cos this we don't see entertaining fights enough. More than 90% in pro boxing are too predictable result....

Also usually don't see greatest in divisions prime per prime and with decent notice etc.

One example: Terence vs prime Errol Spence Jr we never will see. Errol ia over the hill and for Terence father time is ticking his clock....tick tack....


In no case Lewis had been able to win rematch....
If he had did rematch he had been get stopped in distance.

While 1 st fight he maybe might had won on cards even without cuts.
Cos fight was short and he maybe had managed to score more points....

If about KO cos punch on chin/ jaw....sorry.... Vitaly like Valuev were not humans.

Vitaly wasn't like guys called Ali ( sorry ) , Patterson, Mike etc....or prime Wlad.
You couldn't dream to deal with this men by attempting to hit his chin/ jaw....

He like Valuev was defeateble and not ideal ofc...
While if they had fought like prime best shape Wlad vs in really good condition Vitaly....I think Vitaly had won via KO.

Vitaly had true ATG level chin and core ...
Despite yeah, for a lot of guys posting here EE origin guys always should be worse, bad, used as B side guys ( btw for this reality as true reason pro boxing career does have low popularity even in continental europe not alone EE... mainly is considered as useless.... ).

 

[Kforcer]

on shorter notice as away corner lad vs tickets seller and A side guy backuped by event's promoter.
A side guys are excepted to win and matchmaking too usually is done with this intent... if A side lad is excepted continue to bring in good money for businesses...


This is reason why pro boxing isn't sport and never was sport. Never will be...
Cos this we don't see entertaining fights enough. More than 90% in pro boxing are too predictable result....

Also usually don't see greatest in divisions prime per prime and with decent notice etc.

One example: Terence vs prime Errol Spence Jr we never will see. Errol ia over the hill and for Terence father time is ticking his clock....tick tack....


In no case Lewis had been able to win rematch....
If he had did rematch he had been get stopped in distance.

While 1 st fight he maybe might had won on cards even without cuts.
Cos fight was short and he maybe had managed to score more points....

If about KO cos punch on chin/ jaw....sorry.... Vitaly like Valuev were not humans.

Vitaly wasn't like guys called Ali ( sorry ) , Patterson, Mike etc....or prime Wlad.
You couldn't dream to deal with this men by attempting to hit his chin/ jaw....

He like Valuev was defeateble and not ideal ofc...
While if they had fought like prime best shape Wlad vs in really good condition Vitaly....I think Vitaly had won via KO.

Vitaly had true ATG level chin and core ...
Despite yeah, for a lot of guys posting here EE origin guys always should be worse, bad, used as B side guys ( btw for this reality as true reason pro boxing career does have low popularity even in continental europe not alone EE... mainly is considered as useless.... ).

Ali definitely had an iron chin, man. I'd say Mike Tyson did as well, actually. Patterson did not, of course, though he might have been a lot more durable at his natural weight of 175.

 

[Edmond_Dantes]

it depends which Lennox Lewis, if it's the same Lewis we saw against michael Grant, Golata, the Holyfield fights, David Tua, then I lean towards Lennox Lewis.

if it's the same Lewis we saw against Vitali, or the first Rahman fight,

or even the brazen against Briggs where he was willing to trade and stand right in front of his opponent

then I gotta go with Vitali.

Lewis looked legit tired at some points in this fight.

Vitali demonstrated he could take the best shots by Lewis and still stand.