Youtube comments of Dylan Burston (@dylanburston7453).
-
165
-
77
-
41
-
29
-
29
-
25
-
24
-
21
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@alanwatt13 Yeah, so what.
Benn v mclelan, benn was ready to go several times, but gerald couldnt finish benn off.
Lewis v briggs,same thing.
A stoppage due to the damage done to your opponent via your punches is a legitimate win, whether its on cuts, KO, breaking orbital bones etc etc.
You can be ready to go as much as you like, but in the end if you cant finish,you dont automatically get the win
Lennox retired because he was coming up to 40 years old. His wife was threatning to divorce him if he didnt retire, and Lennox had watched his hero Ali box to the same age and get parkinsons.
Lennox retired because it was clear a new generaition was here, and hed beaten every man who didnt duck him in his era, and had beaten the next doinant champion whilst Lennox was in the worst shape of his career, and only had 2 weeks after a year out of the ring to prepare to fight one of the 3 or 4 opponents bigger than him.
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
The 296 is only 80 kilos more, with 130 more hp and 40 more torqes (obviously its more, because it has a horsie on it).
The 296 is the best in my opinion. Best looking, best power to weight, and its engine has won the 24hr of nurburgring/ class win at 24hours Daytona and won 24 hours le mans twice.
The artura is great, especially considering the cost, but is unreliable
And, like the revulto, the temerio is overpriced and overweight, and imo, as James may would put it, gopping
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@jammaschan Your arguing against yourself. I said Mclaren make too much in too short amount of time, not that they milked a single model.
And the Zonda was memed for the fact that there were 30 "last ones".
If a company has a confusing car, its usually just one car (911) or the company only makes one or two cars, like Zonda and buggati, so have to milk it. Mclaren has the issue for each one of its cars up and down the range.
Like, you had the 570s, which was the baby Mclaren, but then 30 seconds later they released the 540s, which was identical but cheaper but totally crap.
The 720s upgraded model was the called the 765LT, but its identical looking succesor is called the 750s.
So to anyone who knew nothing about cars would assume it goes 720>750>765 because thats how numbers work.
Then youve got the 540s, the 570, and the 600Lt, which was available at the same time as the 650s, but it was actually based on the sports series, which had the 5 designation befoehand, and wasnt in the super series with the 650s or 675lt. It made 590 horsepower, was based on the sports series cars that all had the 500 prefix, so why did they not just call it the 590.
And then they replaced all of that with the Artura (finally a name, hopefully they continue that if they keep releasing 600 new models a year).
You also have the GT having its own "series" and just being a drooling, jam licking unloved idiot in the background.
Its just a hoj poj of neatly identical looking cars and names, with a naming convention that trips over itself, up and down the line.
Its like the Hasburg family tree, a mess of too many models with too similar places in the range, with a confused and conflicted naming method.
The 540/70/600LT (see, makes no sense) all look the same, as does the Artura. The 720 looks identical to the 750s. Its own high performance model looks more like a different car than its replacement.
And the 650s, the car that looks the most differnt to the one it replaced, was the one that was the closest to a facelift rather than a new model.
And all the "ultimate series" cars do look different, but its the lineage thats confusing.
So, you start with the F1. Then Mclaren release the P1, alongside the other hypercar trinity.
Simple enough, goes F1>P1. Then, 4 years later, they release the Senna, which outperforms the P1 around a track in every single way. But apparently, this isnt the successor to the P1, its sort of off to one side, despite being the top level hypercar they make, and filling the same role in the range. Okay..... So surely the Speed-tail, a top speed focused, low drag car with a unique 1+2 central seating position, just like the F1 is with hybrid technology like the P1 is, right. Right? No, apparently that sits off to one side as well. Then they release the solus, sabre and elva at relativly the same time.
Oh, these are in the ultimate series as well.
And then Mclaren turn up 10 years after the P1, and say that the W1 is its succsesor, despite having 2 cars that did the same thing before.
And Yes, Mclarens a new company, but its about to turn 15 years, and its still a complete mess.
It has bedget issues because the cars dont have enough room to breathe, and the people who eventually get their head around the range, immedeatley dont buy a Mclaren and go back to a Ferrari, Porsche or Lamborghini, because it kept breaking down, and when they took it for a service, theyd found that Mclaren had actually just replaced the entire car around the faulty part, charged you elventymillionand400millionbillion £ for the pleasure, and told them to f off.
Also, they massivly oversupplied dealers, to the point that they are selling cars off at a massive lost, whilst being charged for cars they dont want and cant sell.
"For every Ferrari customer in the world, well produce one less car" . Thats why Ferrari is worth so much, despite having by far the biggest development costs out of the big 4 supercars companies, as they dont have the 1 engine 1 chassis philosophy of Mclaren, (Now they have 2 chassis and 2 engines!!)they dont have 600 cheaper versions of the 911, a saloon and 4 SUVs to sell like Porche, and they havent spent the last 2 decades drawing a cow on a Audi like Lamborghini
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@ShadowSonic2 The arab slave trade created a entire different race of people and a completely new language, long before Europe knew what a african slave looked like. Plenty of cultures created a slave race, intentionally or not.Ill admit the US almost industrialised the process, but to say the US, as much as i hate the place, was the first country to make a bred race of slaves is beyond ridiculous
Eygypt had slaves for well over 2000 years.
It was African kingdoms that were enslaving their own people, and selling them to Europeans for massive profit.
Most slaves sold were from inland africa, where no European set foot to capture slaves.
African nations would still be enslaving their neighbours if the British hadn't blockaded/patrolled the coast. the coast.
It was the British people, who very very few had anything to do with slavery, who shouldered the bill for ending the trans Atlantic slave trade. Infact, its one of the reasons the yanks had to "breed" their slaves, because for 30 years they couldnt get any new ones from africa.
What the US did to slaves was abhorrent.
But just because falcon is black, does not mean he is more of a slave than an actuall slave, just because his distant relatives were slaves 300 years ago
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@aviad4878 Because he was 40 years old, his wife was threatening to divorce him, he was planning on retiring before the fight, and he beat Klitschko in the worst shape of his career with 2 weeks to prepare. He had nothing to prove, and he was clever enough, not as ego driven or desperate for money for him to continue way past his best like he saw with his hero Ali, and his contemporises like Holmes, Evander and Mike. Do you think every fighter who wins a couple of rounds before a stoppage is entitled to a rematch? Bruno was up 7 rounds when Lennox turned it around with one punch, Briggs won just one round less than Vitali and it was stopped after 2 knockdowns and a slip.
Lennox ripped half of his face off, and was gaining momentum and Vitalis output had all but disappeared. The only thing different between this fight and bruno is that a different man stopped it.
Vitali was gassed and going to lose an eye due to the damage done by Lennoxs punches.
If it were a headbutt, then its a different story. But Lennox targeted that cut to force the stoppage, and had won rounds 4 and 5 and Klitchko was just standing there taking shots, most of them unanswered
It was a TKO stoppage due to the damage Lennox caused. I dont see how thats not a legitimate stop. The doctor stepped in to save Vitalis eye, just like how the ref would step in to save a fighter whos taking to much damage.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@TrangleC WTF are you on about?
Ferrari have built 3 mid engine, "mid range" supercars that directly compete with the hurrican and audi and McLaren since 2009, each with a special at the end of its production run. they've made 3 front engine v12 Gt cars, 3 v8 front engine convertibles, 2 shooting breaks and 2 hybrid hyper cars.
Hardly an exaustive list is it, for a decade plus period.
You want to talk about oversaturation, you talk about McLaren. How many cars are in their range, and how many models last more than 2 years? and to make it worse they all share a basic chassis and engine.
The 458 will be more iconic than either the the reps supercar, the reps supercar with a cow on the front ot whatever new McLaren bought out this week. The original R8 is more iconic than this one
You want to talk about production numbers.
There are twice the 458s as countaches, so i dont know what you mean by tiny numbers of Ferraris. The countache was iconic because every other car was an allegro.
Want to know how many countaches ive seen. 1. in a Ferrari showroom. I see many 458/488 every year. I saw 3 last week, and half a dozen DB11s on one journey. And to make it worse, thats 2000 countaches for nearly 30 years of production, not 6
You seem to have very little knowledge about supercars friend.
3
-
3
-
@jammaschan The 911 is one car tho. The rest of Porsche is fine. But Mclaren, the whole range feels like this. Same carbon tub, same v8, and very similar styling, so why is this one 4 times the price?
Add to that that Mclaren change their models in what seems half the time of Ferrari or Lambo, and the extremley top heavy nature of the releases (Theyre calling this the P1 succesor, but since then weve had the Senna, the speedtail, and about half a dozen others).
They oversaturate their own brand, with constant tiny evolutions that dont necesitate a whole new car. Like, why the 750s? Why couldnt it have just been a 720s evo, or even just a facelift with slightly better performance. Theres nothing wrong with that, as the R35 GTR has shown, having been on the market for nearly 20 years.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
Restricted Access They spent 2 weeks testing on lakes. And 3 weeks testing at sea, on the isle of wright.
So your comment is just wrong
B squad launched 19 tanks, with 15 making it. A squad launched 10 amphibiously, 7 made it
A squads remaining tanks, 5 landed on the beach directly, and 4 were destroyed by a seamine on the LCT, i beleive because the lead tank had issues that prevented its launch.
19+10=29 were launched amphibiously
15+7= 22 of said tanks were successfully landed
22/29 is 75.862%
Again, you should learn to read a source properly before quoting it
Many of the setbacks the US saw were due to incompetence mixed with bad weather. Most of the Airborne troops who were to relive pressure from the beach assaults went miles off course, many of them drowning in swamps.
The DD tanks, designed for waves of 1 foot, were launch 4 miles away from shore in rough seas, flooding them. If theyd been launched closer, the waves would have been far smaller, and less than 93% of them would have sank. The US navy refused to fire at the most heavily defended points, through fear of freindly fire, leaving the infantry facing the full might of German defences. If the naval bombardments actually targeted the defences, like the RN, instead of peppering the edge of the beach. There was some level of incompetence from every branch of the US armed forces that led to infantry facing the most heavily defended position with no air support, no naval bombardment and no armor.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@lunaticfringe896 The point is to show the difference between a insane super car and a insane hyper car. We all knew who was going to win, and that it wasnt going to be close.
Its the same reason early MMA had 600lbs guys going up against 140lbs guys. Because why the hell not? Theres a drag race between the Cadillac Vseries r (their Le mans hypercar),a 296, a 911 turbo s and something else (a 720/50 if im remembering correctly)
Regarding the price, i wasnt clear, but i was talking about the 296 compared to the turbo s, not the SF90. The price differnce beterrn the 296 and the 911 is "only" 60k, which given the reasons i listed for the price differnce, which makes them direct competitions. Nobodys choosing between a SF90 and a 911 if they can afford the sf90, but they would factor in the 296.
And the rimac is a bit of a one trick pony. Its a whale. Its slower round the Nurburgring than the 296, the 488 pista, the GT2 rs.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@TrangleC
You only think the countache is common because you uncle owned one. Most are in Brunei or in a garage leaking
Then your watching the wrong videos mate. IF you only watch videos on the special cars, its going to skew your whole veiw of the company. Ferrari have made 3 flagship cars since 2002, the F60, LaFerrari and the SF90.
Ferrari make a few custom cars now and then, but they never go into production and dont represent the company as a whole.
Ferrari, for relatively similar prices, offer far more than the Likes of McLaren or Lamborghini. Every single McLaren is almost identical, and The Audi and Lambo are VW parts bin supercars. Ferrari stil hand forge their engines, the only company to do so, and most of the car is hand built still as well. Id rather pay 280k for a hand built Ferrari than 260k for a VW with a cow on the front and hexogan switches or a 300k McLaren that has the same chassis and Engine as a 90k McLaren. And too the people who buy these cars, 20K isnt going to be a deciding factor
And why do you want an ordinary supercar?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jammaschan I understand the way it works. It only works in a vaccume if you ignore the rest of the range at the time, plus doesnt make any sense. The rest of the sports family is 5 ~~, why do 600, which is what the super series was using at the time.
The 765 is a modified 720. The full replacement should have a higher number because it is a newer model and released later, like how it went 650>675>720.
The LT designation is what shows it is a performance model, much like whatever italian suffix Ferrari decide to use, not the bigness of the number.
Its not like they have styling cues to differnciate either, they all look near identical.
You cant launch 3 identical looking cars so close together with such a confusing naming convention.
SEE SEE. Even you dont know what the f is going on.
Mclaren is split into 4 different series, Sport, GT, Super and Ultimate.
It should be 3, but the GT is such a little freak it gets its own series, the GT series, and a completely different naming convention.
The GT has more power thant the 570s, but its slower because its heavier, whilst eing the size of the super series car. It looks differnt (in a bad way).
Its just this freak that no one liked, asked for or bought and doesnt fit in. It might be the first car that actually has autisim. It looks like it does
The Artura is the replacement for the sport series, the 540/70 and 600LT. (even tho it looks nearly identical, it does have a hybrid v6 so it differntiates itself. Tho it has had to be re-released 3 differnt times)
Then they should name it acordingly, if its a facelift. Like the 991.2 is still a 991, the 720s is a whole new designation, and is being sold as a full on new model, rather than a facelift.
The Senna isnt based on the 650 or 720. The 675 or the 765LT are the track focused versions of those cars, the Senna was its own thing in the ultimate series, and replaced the P1 as Mclarens hypercar. It even got the same GTR treatment as the P1.
The problem with the sabre is that Mclaren treat it like its part of the range, not a one off for a customer. Ferrari makes the same sort of cars, but they are never listed. The Sabre is listed in the ultimate series alongside actual production cars.
The SF90 was stated from the start as not being the replacement for the La Ferrari.
The F80 is, and the SF90 has a replacement coming soon that will fill the gap between the 296 and f80, its just the SF90 launched when there wasnt a range topper to make it clear where it fit in.
The SP cars are in their own class, away from the main cars. Sp1 is one seat open cockpit, the SP2 is 2 seats open, and the SP3 is 2 seats closed cockpit. The P80C was a one off, hense why it isnt in any of the other series.
Roma is the replacement to the portafino.
F8 tributo was a mistake because it did what Mclaren do. It was a celbration of the 458 and 488, it literally disappeared after about 30 seconds, and was just a 488 facelift.
The 296 was the replacement for the 488.
The 12 cillindri is the replacement for the 812.
The GT4c was dicontinued ages ago, and was replaced by the purosangue, as the 4 seat Ferrari.
The thing is, other than the f8 tributo, Ferraris have a lifespan roughly double that of the Mclaren (which is half the trouble, Mclaren is just as complex in 15 years as Ferrari in 30) and different styling, as well as clear names, as well as traditional places in the range, with no autistic GT freak to ruin it.
It goes
Entry Level front engine
California>California T> Portafino>Roma
4 seat v12
612>FF>GT4c> Purosangue
2 seat top level GT v12
550>575>599>F12>812>12 cilindri
Base level mid engine
355>360>430>548>488⌄>296
FU for ruining it F8 tributo
The ibeetweener mid engine (only had one car so far)
SF90> whatever the SF90 replacement will be
The hypercar
288>f40>f50>Enzo(f60)>La Ferrari (f70)> F80
They all have the family they belong to, they all look significantly different, and they dont all release at the same time looking the same, with the same chasiss, same intereor and same engine.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@TTTT-oc4eb There were 2 ships either side of Biz that were better.
And over a third of PQ17 survived.
There were better battleships that made Bismark and tiptrits WW1 philosophy driven design outdated before it left production.
One U-boat would be more effective than tiptritz and Biz. It was U-boats that sunk convoys and military vessels. It was Bizmark and Tiptritz that sunk one outdated ship and got sunk by outdated planes, andthe other spent the entire war not firing a shot in a Fjord. They were a classic example of a german "super weapon" that did more harm than good.
Firstly, the German navy didnt have doctirine that revolved around battleships, so they were left without support fending for themselves.
Second, their guns were heavily oudated and bottom of the barrel when it came to stopping power. They were based off of bavaria class ship guns, and the shells they fired were very unreliable. Biz shot the prince of wales with 7 shots and not a single one exploded.
Second, its dome armour was susceptible to AP shells. Although the Armour belt was very thick, it was also very short. About 2 meters less than contempary ships.
The layout of its armour was inefficent, and although effective at close range, was less than stellar at ranges that battleships fought at.
The deck was unarmoured leaving them very weak to air attack as well.
Its AA capabilities led to a crowded deck, with poor weight distrabution and poor capability at actually shooting aircraft.
Bismark and Tiptrits were heavily flawed ships that the internet have decided were invincible. They are mid ships bought to legend due to a lucky shot against a weak opponent and being the only german battleships at the time.
Mid
2
-
2
-
@tedriddick3717 It does matter. I agree with him. The Mike Lennox fought had only a sliver left that wanted to win, and lennox beat it out of him that fight. Those last 2 fights of mikes he really did turn up just for a pay check.
Lennox wasn't in his prime either. hes older than mike, and he had a broken hand. He was far closer to his prime then mike, but he was also far from his own.
prime V prime Lennox still wins. He was just a better boxer, had a much longer reach, was more intelligent. at the end of the day, and there's no shame in that.
Lennox and Ali stand head and shoulders above the rest of Heavyweights in terms of pure boxing greatness
Both Lennox and Mike are my favourite HW boxers, and both are in my top 10 favourite boxers irregardless of weight class.
But as a boxer, Lennox is miles above Mike.
His resume is stacked with big names, weras Mikes is a bloated mess full of binmen with good names scattered in their ocaitionly
I dont take issue with people liking Mike. But to suggest he was better than Lewis, and that Lewis wasn't great is flat out wrong and disrespectfull.
Both men a firm friends today, and were as teenagers, and that's obvious in the post fight interview in their fight. You can see Mike let go of all his anger and regrets knowing hes finally fought Lewis, something Cus told him when they sparred over 20 years previously.
Both fighters are great and i like both, and both get my respect. But Lennox's resume eclipses Mikes.
They are both polar opposites yet they are both almost identical now.
Both are very similar in there outlook on life.
Both Met at 15, passionate about boxing
They went very different ways during their careers.
And now they are the same 15 years old boys who have fought each other and achieved thing very few men have.
Except now they have no hair and are fat
.
2
-
@tedriddick3717 If Tua didnt have such a big left hook, Lennox would hve been happy to just walk through him. And Lennox was only 2lbs heavier than tua. trying to fight Tua on the inside, and youve got to mauver 84 inches of arm around is scuicide.
Its called the sweet science. Lennox fought the guys who specialised on the inside from the end of his jab. He fought the Guys looking to outbox him with their jab with his superior power.
Lennox was just as likely to demolish you, as he did with Golata and Grant, Go to war, as he did with Briggs, Mercer and Klitchko,
Box well and take you out in the middle, as he did against Mike, Morrison and Rahman 2, Or masterfully box the distance as he did against Tua, Holyfeild and Zeijeko.
Its why he was so unbeatable. He had an answer to everyone, you didn't know what lennox you were going to get.
With Mike you knew exactly what you were getting. If you weren't scared, and tough and strong enough, you could pretty certainly create a gameplan to beat him, or at least make a fight of it.
Also, lennox didnt just clinch. He dealt a lot of punishment in the clinch, and often it was a 2 way thing. In his fight with mike, he held him for the first round, but after that, Mike was doing most of the holding
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@jansedlak8505 Im not. Im saying that the extra weight makes sense, weras on the Lambos it doesnt.
The Ferrari is 150kg heavier than the W1, and you can point to the awd and active suspension, and the fact less of its made from carbon, and tell thats where it got the wieght from.
But with the Lambos, comparing the revulto the the Sf90, it shouldnt have been 250kg heavier. It had a carbon tub compared to the SF90 which was aluminium, and the engine and hybrid are only a few kilos heavier than what was in the Sf90, so it raises the question, where did the weight come from?
Which is a question i dont have for the F80, i know
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Restricted Access My numbers for the 1st Hussars were exactly the same as yours, you numpty.
29 total tanks,8 losses from amphibious launches, 4 destroyed whilst still on the landing craft because it hit a mine.
And dont compare losing 8 tanks to losing 27. Also, your Utah beach factoid, you leave out that they launched late, caused massive cofusion for themselves and the infantry they were supposed to support and landed 2 miles away from their firing point.
Again, US incompetence
Im using the same scourses as you, ive just read it properly. Copy and pasting half a page of irrelevant information doesn't make you any less incorrect.
The solent straight is still the bloody sea. So your claim that the DD tanks were only tested on lakes is false.
Youve literally copied half a Wikipedia page, 95% of which is irrelevant. Why are you bringing up Caen, a ciry, when we are comparing beach landings, and the incompetence of the US navy led to unnecessary casualties.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@deeaction For the majority of their careers they weren't. Joe was super middle until his last couple of fights, roy started middle, then super, then settled at light heavy, before one fight to get the HW belt (which ultimately made him lose his edge as he put on, then lost, a load of muscle very quickly ) Joe fought roy at the respective "ends" of their careers . Joes hands broke early in his career, and they never really recovered. He did most of his fights with at least one broken hand, and he never really learnt how to punch in the first place cos his dad was a musician, not a boxer. Joe was in super middle when it was THE British weight class. He fought everybody he could, he fought B-Hop in just before his prime, because B-hop drank from the fountain of eternal youth apparently.
Joe never really had a prime. By the time his skills were good, his hands were F*cked. He had a great engine tho. During his fight with Lacey, who the US called a mini tyson, his trainers said he could keep up his work rate. they were right. by the 12th, joe was throwing about three less punches than he had in the first
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@F1ll1nTh3Blanks Its about bloody time F1 teams and drivers have to try harder to achieve victory. Other than in changeable conditions and new tracks, all a team has to do is pick one of (usually) 2 strategies. Everyone moans about how the cars were piss easy to drive, and couldn't follow. These cars are hard to drive, hard to set up, and can follow. The only thing i don't like is the simplified suspension. TBH merc ( and their fans) deserve the crap i throw at them, all last year saying "were focusing on next years car" I told people then that merc has been gutted by Red Bull, and that Newey would bring something that worked well, and that Ferrari would be strong because they sacrificed all but 2 years to build the F1-75. Still best part of a second off the pace, all creamed themselves last week when they nearly beat a damaged Ferrari and Red Bull and a RB on a shit strategy. And they still only gained a tenth on the pace they had in quail. I cant wait for the inevitable 3 hours of sky asking weather merc is back every bloody weekend, instead of focusing on, i don't know, the championship battle, 2 minnow teams becoming the leading midfielders, The continued failure of AM and Williams etc
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ICookMaxdihriders In any sort of race, 0-100 is much more important. Also, the 0-200 stat is based on the perfect launch in the Mclaren, which would be very,very hard to get consistently.
Also, the F80s battery is over twice as big, so its going to be able to go at full power for longer or for more of a lap or more laps
If you watch Bsport, thats probabaly where you saw the figures, as he calculated the hyper cars to the same speed of 155mph, tho it isnt concrete as the way companys state downforce is weird.
The main thing tho is going to be the AWD and the fully active suspension, which is just going to give it huge lumps of mechanical grip and ride bumps much better, whilst keeping the ground effect part perfectly happy
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@deacon6221 They did. The UK has had 4 mass shootings in 22 years. 4.
Ill speak on the UK the most, as its the country i know, But Australia to my knowledge had a gun culture, but has all but disappeared since 1996
The UK has had 30 homicides by shooting, in a year span from 2019 to 2020 (and this statistic includes air rifles, as far as i know)
The police have fatally shot one person.
I have never seen a gun in the UK, except when i went to a shooting range with my air rifle, and when i saw a farmer in wales come back from hunting a fox. Both times were double barrelled shotguns.
Other than farmers, who need them to kill the genocide machines called foxes, and hunters, who keep deer population under control, and toffs who hunt pheasants and live in 1952, nobody leally owns guns in the UK. Of course, you'd bring up criminals getting illegal firearms, but this is quite difficult in the UK, so the type of criminals are not the sort of people to threaten random people on the street.
And please don't call it a gun culture. It makes it seem something innocent and creative, like the car culture. What it is is paranoid idiots with firearms
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Euripides Feldman III I agree with most of your points, TBH. But the only reason you NEED guns in the US is because the government didn't tackle the problem as soon as it arose, and now the nation is addicted to them. Somebody should not be forced to have to own a weapon to ensure their and there families safety from other humans like its the 13th century.
The only people who truly need guns are Farmers, Hunters, and the people who like to shit in the woods with bears. The rest are all the cause and symptom of a society that refuses to move on, and would rather put a 250 year old squiggly bit of ink over the safety of its citizens. The main problem, other than the vast amounts of money Guns make, is the fact that guns specifically designed to kill large amounts of people in the shortest period of time (you may argue this is every new gun in history, but im talking about fully auto rifles here.
The thing that pisses me off the most is the people who give up and say it wont work without even attempting anything.
We didn't map the world, get to the south pole, climb Everest, land on the moon, break the sound barrier because "it wouldn't work"
I don't expect there to be vast changes overnight, but there has to be some sort of change, just smaller things over time.
The story of the NHS s one that i wis h more of you yanks paid attention too, because not only is your healthcare fed for one, but it shows how even massive overnight changes in the way a country runs a major part of itself can go mostly smoothly. I just hope your nation can sort something out, because its honestly tiring hearing about another shooting every few weeks.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@pioneer2321 Dont make me laugh.
Lennoxs beat opponent was vitali, who was in his prime and bigger than Lennox.
Lennox dominated Evander. Landed 3 times the punches. Out of 24 rounds fought, Evander won a max of 5 of them.
Ike fought absolute nobodies. 20 fights, only 2 decent guys on his record. This belief that he would have stopped Lennox is completely unfounded.
So he Koed some bums. So what
So he barley beat tua so what
So he "beat" chris bird
He has zero resume, less power than Lennox, 10 inch or so less reach, hes less technical.
Lewis beat better fighters than Ike before he was even in the top 10.
Lennox more than trebled the landed shots against Holyfield and Tua.
Ibe only landed at a 33% connect rate against tua.
Lennox landed just as many punches against Evander, a much better fighter than Tua, and threw less
Lennox was more technical, bigger, stronger tougher, more accurate than ibeabuchi. Youd have to be as delusional as ike to beleive he stood a chance.
His whole legacy is based on narrowly beating a decent cotender, who never won a title, and getting a stoppage after missing punches against chris byrd.
And byrd was battered all night by vitali klitchko, who retired with a blown shoulder.
The same vitali klitchko who had his face ripped off by a more than a year inactive, trained for a different man, overweight and 40 year old Lennox.
Lennox would fuck ike up. Out of prime, which is when the fight would happen, he would fuck ike up.
In prime, it isnt even worth thinking about
1
-
@d.b.cooper1 The rules were finalised in 2019. I beleive at COTA.
And they could start whenever.
Its only for this new reg change (2026) that they stopped teams developing next years car, which they have only just started doing.
Before, however, you could start whenever you wanted. The 2022 regs got delayed a bit because of Covid, as did all car development but some very early concept laying would have happened before even the finalised rules.
Mike Elliot was a scapegoat. The W14 was the only car on the grid that fought for podiums from Bahrain to AD (other than the RB obviously) weras Ferrari, AM and Mclaren all had at least 9 races where the car was naff.
Then they brought in James Allison back as TD in April, after the W14B came out in Monaco. And from then on, they started launching major upgrades that did nothing, like a further sidepod revesion in Belgium and a floor upgrade in COTA, both of which didnt move the car fowards.
And on to 2024, where the W15 was a inconsistent twitchy mess. Mercedes only beat their 2023 standings in 2024 because of Vegas, where they won without understanding how, and because Imola was cancelled in 2023 due to flooding.
And the shitty upgrades continued, including Fing up the suspension in pre season, having to abandon several new floors in the first half of the year, and the clusterfuck that was the COTA upgrade
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TrangleC the R8 is driven by dicks as well, just not dicks with as much money.
My original point was that Ferrari have had the same timeless, screenless interior in their cars for over a decade.Everyone is praising AUDI, but all theyve done is ripped the screen off an interior of an audi A3.
As ive said the Ferrari range is far from a 1 in 100 thing. Sure there are a few, but they are very special. I went to the 70th anniversary celebration in 2017 and saw the LaFerrari aperta. It was parked next to a enzo and f40, but 10 meters away there was an old 360. Ferraris are not collectors items for 95% of their range.
Ferrari are the most cultural and iconic car manufacturer in the world, and has several times the character of Lambo or Mclaren.
The only car officially recognised as art is a Ferrari, and Ferrari road cars only existed to make Enzo enough money to race.
Lambo and McLaren are pure money making enterprises. Its imposible for me to love the v10 R8 and the Huracan because they take away from each other. The Audi is just a lambo but uglier, and the lambo is just a Audi with a 100k pay rise. If i wanted all the thrill of a 4WD supercar i would have bought a GTR, which is more bespoke, and before 2018 facelift, half the price of the R8 has double the seats, twice the looks (imo)
twice the practicality and is considerably quicker.
Ferrari is the only manufacture of to still hand forge their engine blocks. AMG say they do, but its just fritz welding his nameplate to an engine from a production line.(im assuming you meant AMG, not AMR)
The GTRs v6 is also hand made, but the components still built by machines, and its just like a jigsaw put together by hand
Ferrari hand builds a mould from resin sand, Before melting aluminium alloy which is moved in a VAT by a man in a forklift and then that gets pored into the moulds, before being visually inspected. Those parts are then put together by hand.
Its the only manufacturer left with a foundry. They are the only engines that do not see a single autonomous machine from raw materials to a running Engine
The only thing that isnt fully hand built is the chassis which gets formed and wielded by a machine, but finishing touches are done by hand and the paint, which the base coats are done autonomously, before the final few are done, again by hand.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@LaStOnE_leFt Search for the channel office hancho boxing. he has a loads of videos, and most have one or two stories/boxers from asia in them, who can go into more detail than i can, if youre intrested
As for my personal picks, you have pac man, as youve already mentioned, inoue, as someone else has.
Shinsuke Yamanaka had 12 title defences at bantamweight just over a decade ago.
Yoko Gushiken has 13 title defences at light fly.
Myong Woo-Yuh has 17 title defences light flyweight as well. a WR
Basically, from 1970is to the late 90s, alot of long title reighns were happening in the lower weight classes and alot of records were being broken.
We just never see any of the fights in such low weight classes over here in the west, so the fighters never enter the public eye much.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jay7949 I dont think he needed to retire. just give his body time to recover instead of putting on and losing 30lbs of pure muscle in less than a year. Once he moved back to LH his fast twitch muscles had been affected, so he didn't have the stupid fast reflexes he used to. If he'd let his body get to the right weight more slowly and given it more time to recover and adjust, he could have had a few more years instead of getting KOd by tarver.
The Calzaghe fight is one of my favourites in all of boxing history, but its sad to see roy get out worked so bad by a fighter who had broken hands and was roughly the same age, despite being a huge Calzaghe fan myself. Sky did a interview with the world champions of the golden age of super middle (Calzhagie, Rjj, Eubank, Collins and some other bloke) and roy was speaking to joe about the fact joe was undefeated, and the whole reason roy went to get HW is because he was no longer undefeated due to his DQ loss and wanted a record, so went after the HW title. It wast a carefully planned career move, but a attempt to cement himself in the record books for hs drive to becoe great.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SealofPerfection You need to do your research "buddy".
All the metal components are all poured into sand casts, and then said components are put together by hand. The only thing computerised is a robot that puts the lubricant in the cylinder, and a final test done by a robot (after its been checked by a human) Everything else is done with nothing more than a drill and a couple of spanners
They are the only car manufacturer that still has a forge.
The Ferrari engine is truly hand made, not just a big lego set where other than screwing it together all the work was done by a machine.
Short of shooting the cow for leather and digging ore out of the ground, everything is done by Ferrari, and most of that is done by hand.
The engines at Ferrari are another level of Handmade, which everywhere but Ferrari is now extinct, and the car as a whole is much more handmade than any vette.
And in terms of Nat asp v8s, Chevy has only just started putting out Ferrari numbers from 15-20 years ago, and with an extra 1-2 litres of displacement.
The Zo6, even with an extra %60 more displacement and two more cylinders is still less power than the 296s v6 by itself, disregarding the hybrid.
Corvette have moved away from a indirect competition with the mid- rear engine spors/ super car market into direct competition, and almost every company makes a car as good if not better than the c8, that are in direct competition.
Every single Ferrari is closer to the rivals next step up car in their range (eg 296 is much closer in terms of speed and handling to a 675Lt )
The 296 is offering figures (and the technology) of the hybrid hyper car trilogy for a quarter of the price.
The c8 offers absolutely nothing.
It offers less than the c7, which was unique, looked better.
Now, Corvette just make a cheap looking car with the performance of a 2 generation old Ferrari
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SealofPerfection Oh, the corvette is reliable is it? then why in consumer reports is it in the top 10 least reliable cars.
And i mentioned that GM founded the foundry (at least in the comment i was writing before i clicked off). Its still outscoursing to a different factory, its still more automated than the Ferrari system.
Who gives a shit if its American made?
American cars are shite, its why you dont see a singe one outside of america in any category of car, other than a couple of mustangs, the odd vete, and some inbred halfwit with a massive F150.
99% of the performance? its a good 25% down on power and at least one girthy gentleman heavier.
Upgrade it? Why would i need (or want) to upgrade a 100k + sports car?
They are not 2 different markets. Not for the ZO6. They are both in the same class of car, and they know they will be competing for sales. The c7 corvette was never in the same market, but the c8 is, so they are being compared.
Yes, a Ferrari should outrun a Vette. But your missing the point. The Ferrari it lost to is 10 years old, based on a 15 year old car, regardless of cost, especially when that car is not some hypercar, but the "baby" (admittedly speciale) Ferrari of the range.
Corvette charge nearly the same as the European manufactures, besides Ferrari, for a car thats a good 10 years behind the times, and offers nothing unique for a global market.
The C8 vette lost the individuality and put it in direct competition with Ferrari, Lambo and Porsche.
I think the c8s alright. But the fact corvette is using a 15 year old Ferrari as its benchmark shows you just how far behind it really is.
Id rather have - and could for the price- said 15 year old Ferrari 2nd hand than the vette.
It looks better, sounds better, is iconic, it has a moustache.
I just dont think a car being on par with a 15 year old car in the same class is impressive.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Guinea54 Tyson ducked Lewis at least twice before their fight. Cant give you exact dates off the top of my head, but Tyson paid Lewis 4 mil to step aside in 1996 to fight Bruce Seldon, promising Lennox a fight after. But he vacated the WBC, where Lennox was his mandatory and fought (and ate) Evander Holyfield instead. Tyson had the worlds best (worst in hindsight) promoter in the sport, and was the most popular fighter on the planet. He had full control over who he fought. He ducked Lennox for near 6 years. He sparred Lennox as teenagers, when Lennox wasn't even a full on heavyweight yet, and within a few rounds Lennox had him figured out.
He beat Ruddock in 5 minutes, something that took Mike 2 nights work to properly do.
Lewis took care of his body, Mike didn't.
Lennox surrounded himself with friends and the greatest trainer.
Mike surrounded himself with yes men and Don King.
Lennox Beat Evander twice
Mike did not.
The only top HW's Lewis didn't fight were Bowe, and that wasnt his fault, and George Foreman.
Its Tyson's Fault he wasn't at his best.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@User-dd2xv Size zero was to do with the engine cover, not the sidepods.
The first car with small sidepod inlets was the 2017 Ferrari, which had smaller sidepods than many of the later cars, because it had another inlet on top.
The 2018 Ferrari had even smaller inlets, i would say about fist or palm size, smaller than the 22/23 merc
The difference with them is they were up high, which meant that the bargeboard area was unobstructed.
The Mercedes sidepod opeings sit on the floor of the car, where the bargeboard would sit, so the bargeboard would have to be alot smaller, or non existent, and the sidepod would effect the airflow and not get as much air into the PU.
And they cant raise it of the floor, because to get the radiators to fit, merceded fitted them round the crash structure, and that cannot be moved much at all without risking failing saftey.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@perfectman3077 The JOTA Porsche got a commanding lead with a well timed pitstop, and started pulling away from the Ferrari consistently, before ye binned it.
That was in the dry.
The Porsche was there or there abouts on pace, and it was only its inferior reliability that caused it big issues, for all the penske cars.
The Porsche pace was good, it just spent most of the race with some sort of issue.
The Peugeot was the best in the rain and improved massively at night.
The Reason the Ferrari and Toyota was so much better was because they both ran (near) perfect races with no strategy errors, they kept out of trouble, they adapted best to the changing conditions, and they had relentless pace.
It was the inherent strengths and weaknesses of the cars, the skills of the drivers and the running by the teams that determined the Le Mans result, not the BOP, which is what has happened since Monza
1
-
@perfectman3077 The Toyota lightly grazed a wall, necessitating a rear panel change, which was a 30 second job.
The Porsches had constant engine/hybrid issues, break issues, punctures, minor collisions. All of which cost them well over an hour in the pits, not the 2 minutes of the toyota. The best places Porsche spent 20 munuites in the pits. The Toyota and Ferrari 51 never had any long issues like that
As ive already said, the JOTA Porsche, which was by far the best run Porsche, had a commanding lead, and was pulling away before it had a huge crash.And that wasnt over a couple of laps, that was for a good chunk of time under green flag running.
The only cars that was slow the non-hybrid cars (which are hard to balance because you cant just give them more energy) and the Peugeot in the dry/day (which is hard to balance because its a mutated french freak)
Every BOP since Le Mans/Monza has heavily favoured a single car, and has eliminated the inherent strenghts of cars, meaning its no longer a exercise in engineering and driver skill, but having the smallest BOP ballast
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Mike didn't beat anybody when he was, and this shows how little you know about boxing history, "kid dynamite".
For 40 fights mike fought binmen and pensioners. He even lost to one of the binmen. It was only when he faced ruddock,his 42nd fight, that he fought an opponent who was all there, not 40 years old and could bang. This was 7 years into his career, and it took him 19 rounds and a dodgy stoppage from the ref to beat him.
A year later, Lennox destroyed the same man with half the ring experience, and only 3 years into his career, in under 4 minuites.
Lennox did beat alot of good boxers in their prime.
The only ones who were truly out of it were Morrison, Weaver and Tyson.
He beat, in their prime
Bruno
Briggs
Golata
Grant
At 38, he beat the best of the next generation in Klitschko
Rahman
Tua
Botha
Ruddock
And Evander is only 4 years older than Lennox. And Lennox dominated him like no man has ever done.
Evander was winning championships at 50. Admittedly, he got robbed, but still.
Beat every man he ever faced. Beat every man who was man enough to face him.
Was ducked by Bowe and Tyson.
One of his Fellow champions and one of the true greats at the time said he was the greatest HW ever in George foreman.
One of 2 men to beat him said Tyson could never touch Lennox ever.
Beat Tyson with a broken hand
Olympic gold medallist
3 time champion of the world
Ruler of the 90s HW division.
Commander of the empire
Chess master
Last undisputed HW champ.
WTF did you ever do?
1
-
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Yes i can.
Me.
gerge foreman
that other bloke in these comments
Emmanuel steward
Hassim Rahman
All he did was jab? No. He had the biggest right hand of the 90s. He was a master boxer, one of the few heavyweights of his size who went to the body. He was an expert at guard manipulation and breaking, was an expert at range management, and could fight inside very well considering his height and reach
44 wins. 32 by KO.
Almost exactly the same KO ratio as Tyson, a good 40% higher than Holyfield
He went 5 years never going past the 5th round against number one contenders.
He was ducked by Bowe, Foreman, Tyson and Moorer
He beat 2 of those guys on your "better than" list, one of them twice.
Ali would have lost, and George foreman said he wanted no part of LL whilst commentating on his fights, whilst holding belts and the lineal championship.
Your a clown, whos opinion on boxing skill is actually based on celebrity, not what happened in the ring.
You dont even know who Lennox fought.
Your opinion isnt a opinion, its straight up wrong. I dont know why any
I dont need to say no to dope. I can already see its reduced your brain to the size of a peanut, and made you as intelligent as my cat
1
-
@tedriddick3717 You have Know idea what youre on about do you? Absolutely no clue.
Bowe, very publicly and very famously, threw his WBC belt in the bin to avoid fighting Lewis when Lewis beat Ruddock in a 4 man tournament for the Belts. Its probably the most cowardly and disrespectful duck in all of boxing history
Lennox was Mikes mandatory twice in 1996. The first time, Mike paid 4 Million dollars for Lennox to step aside to fight Bruce Seldon for his WBA belt. He promised Lennox his next fight. Immediately after this, Mike Vacated the WBC belt, which Lennox was his mandatory for. Instead, he spent all of 1997 losing to Evander, and was then suspended for 2 years for being a cannibal. Lennox spent all of 99 having to fight Evander because he was robbed, and Lennox spent all of 2001 fighting Rahman.
Hell, they could have fought in 92-93 if Mike didn't rape someone.
Due to Mikes lack of self control and his lack of balls to fight Lewis ASAP, we had to wait 6 years for the fight to happen.
Lennox then beat Mike Tyson in 2002 with a broken hand.
Foreman publicly, whilst commentating on HBO, said he wanted no part of Lewis on several occaitions. They're all available on YouTube. Foreman was at least man enough to admit it, and at 45+ i dont blame him
Yeah he got Kod by Rahman. What happened in the rematch? sorry cant hear you over the sound of one of the greatest 1 2s in boxing History.
Mike got KOd by
Douglas- Half the fighter Rahman or McCall were
Evander- Mike is a KO victim of Holyfeild who has a less that 50% KO ratio.
Danny Williams- Bum
Kevin Mcsomething or other- Bum
He beat every man of his era who had the balls to face him. 70% of them were in there prime against an ageing Lewis.
YOU are the one who has exhibited a blatant lack of Knowledge on the subject of which we speak.
No Knowledge of context of the HW scene, you created fights that never happened in your head, and then built an argument over that bout that never happened.
Ted, take your meds. Your clearly a batshit crazy skitsofrenic with no observational skills or boxing Knowledge, who argues that a man who beat the people you think were better than him, somehow makes him worse than them. You haven't even gone into any detail as to why Lennox wasnt great. Youve just siad Lennox didnt fight anyone in their prime (which is factually untrue) and that he was boring, which is A) a personal opinion and B) a personal Fucking opinion, with no relevance to greatness.
1
-
1
-
@tedriddick3717 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tWr80Rb0xmA
Fucking clown
LEARN YOUR BOXING HISTORY.
You fuckin thought LL fought foreman. You are an absolute joke with negative credibility
Ive already given you
A 2 time HW champion who says Lennox is the best HW
The GTOAT who says Lennox was his best
Rahman, one of 2 men to beat Lewis, says hes the Greatest HW ever.
MIke Tyson- " i could never beat Lennox"
Ali let Lennox carry his coffin to his grave.
Mike was there as well. Mike was a close friend of Ali. Lennox wasnt.
Lennox got to carry Alis coffin on pure boxing clout.
You are an embarrassment. An absolute joke. You have no idea of the 90s HW scene, no idea of boxing historically.
Again, your list is based on celebrity, not boxing.
The people you will be asking are presumably yanks. So theyll tell you all about the B list yanks, but not the brit who ruled HW from 1992 to 2004 or the Ukrainians who ruled it from 2004-2014
Mike Tyson and Evander Holyfield are contently appearing in TV and movies, so the public are constantly aware of them.
Foreman too has kept himself in the public eye, from TV appearances to his commentary. Just this morning i made a cheese toastie on a grille with his name on it.
The HW you mentioned were loudmouths, who were constantly on the news for raping/drugs/bankruptcy/brawling.
That makes them more known to a filthy casual. whilst they were on the news 24/7 for being POS or stupid with money, Lennox was on a Jamaican beach with no cameras, just enjoying his life and keeping it to himself.
Fucking Tyson above Lennox lol.
A- He Ducked Lennox
B- He lost to Lennox
C- His first 40 fights were against bums and old men
D- He lost to Holyfield
E- He never avenged any of his 6 losses.
Mate, i could do this all day. Every single interaction will be the same.
You cant win this argument.
Because
A) you have 0 knowledge of the fights LL or MT fought in
B) You have no knowledge of the political goings on at the time.
C) you have no knowledge of the sweet science
D) Your a Idiot
E) Your ranking people on how famous they are
F) im ranking them on how good they were as boxers
Cmon. Make another stupid comment i can debunk within 3 seconds
1
-
1
-
@tedriddick3717 He asked Lewis to carry it.
🤣🤣🤣.
You really think Lennox just rolled up to the funeral uninvited and threw ali into a hole? Lol fucking made my day with that one mate
Tyson did duck Lewis. Its all recorded, they went to court over it.
The HBO team talked about in non stop
Its common knowledge
Tyson did duck Lewis. Its undeniable.
In 1996, Mike Tyson was the WBC champion
In 1997, lewis was WBC champion.
How could this be unless Mike vacated his belt to avoid Lennox
I take all comers. Except anyone with a half decent record. Morrison- nah. Mercer- nah Moorer- nah Foreman- cus told me personaly to stay the fuck away from him
I know, i reckon i could take that cruiserweight bloke- ah shit hes pretty good, better conveniently get injured 3 times every time were about to fight and pull out.
Never ducked anyone.
He ducked absolutely everyone mate
Ohh yes, the list. anone can make a fucking list you donut
https://shortboxing.com/top-15-heavyweight-boxers-of-all-time/
Heres one with Lennox at 7.
Hes only one of 2 HW to beat every man he ever faced.
Again, your basing your argument on popularity not boxing
Ive already debunked the fact that Lennox was far more than a jab. He hit harder than any HW of his era, with the possible exception of foreman.
Again, plenty of people want to see Lennox fight. A few years ago ruddock finally challenged him.
And people dont want to see mike fight now they witnessed it. That fight with RJJ was, and this seems to be very impotant to you, boring.
Funny How Lennox beat or was ducked (i know, lennox never thought foreman no matter what you think) by every man on that list who fought whilst he was active.
If all your going to do is excrete shit about popularity and talk about my cat, just go away. Boxing greatness- Het this, this is fucking mind blowing_ is based on boxing.
Not whos appeared in a trilogy of comedey films, not number of rapes commited, not how much debt they are in. Just boxing.
You claim you are a fight fan. Clearly, you are not. You are a clout chaser
Back up your claims with facts, trivia or actual basic boxing knowledge, or shut up.
You are making yourselff look like a massive colossal cutasaurus.
Youve already made it clear your a tool with no boxing knowledge.
Keep feedig me with your conveyor belt of BS, and popularity. I will always refute you and come out on top because at the end of the day, im right and use what happened to form my opinions, and your wrong, and let the voices in your head and your hard on for tyson form your opinions
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Mate. It as a fucking tournament. Bowe knew ahead of time, if he beat Evander, he would face the winner of Lewis Ruddock, ordered by the WBC.
Lennox had already beat the shit out of bowe in the Olympics. He was shit scared, and threw the belt which was forcing hum to fight Lennox in the bin. In front of millions.
Bro, i can't even understand what bowe is saying cuz he got brain damage from Lennox and Evander .Hes not a reliable source, is he mate? OFC hes going to say he wasnt scared.
Sure, his management was a driving force behind it, but at the end of the day, only Bowe himself could vacate the title.
he went along with it, and as a result, he ducked lewis
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tedriddick3717 I know mike was quick AF.
But lennox wasn't slow. Mikes biggest weapon was fear. The guys he Fought were terrified and not thinking straight, throwing lazy jabs.
Guys who weren't scared of Mike had no issue connecting.
That Mike was beatable. Just everyone who could beat him was at the Olympics or a cruiserweight.
Believe it or not, Tyrell biggs probably had the best blueprint for fighting Mike.
He stayed outside and was just as fast as mike, and Mike couldn't touch him.
Bruno wobbled Mike, but then decided to fight southpaw for the first time in his career, which resulted in him getting KOd.
Bruno was a big puncher, but he was pretty slow and His stamina was non existent after the 6th. he was actually beating Lennox, then Lennox hit him with one big Left at the very start of the 7th round then jumped on him.
Ruddock and Bruno Were Mikes best opponents
lennoxs inside work is massively underrated as well. obviously hes nowhere near as good as mike inside, but for someone with arms that long, he can still KO you in a clinch. Just look what he did to grant, and he almost took Klitschko's head off from a clich uppercut. Lennox really worked on fighting on the inside and from the clinch. he only fought taller guys 3 times in his career.
Lennox also had a jab designed especially for fighters who ducked Like Mike.
He fired it from his hip like Alis, and guys would almost always walk onto it or have there guard split.
A great reference for a younger Mike VS Lennox would be Lennox Tua.
obviously and absolute peak mike would be more Competitve, but ts the closest thing we have
Ali and Mikes speed are totally different. Alis speed was lateral, for circling and creating openings. He wasnt as fast in a pure speed sense because he was moving in in a curve, whereas Mike moved in a straight Line then pivoted once he was in range.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=cus+and+ali+fighting&view=detail&mid=43BC9A0C77C522A0451B43BC9A0C77C522A0451B&FORM=VIRE
that's Cus and Ali pissing about, with Cus using peekaboo at the end.
Remember, Mike and Lennox sparred at 15.
Over 3 days, they essentially fought to a draw. https://www.sportingexcitement.com/boxing/lennox-lewis-reveals-15-year-old-mike-tyson-was-a-giant-and-knocking-people-out-easy-after-meeting-rival-in-sparring/
I think a fight in both their primes, Mike with Cus or Rooney and Lennox with Steward or Davenport, and you have one of the best HW fights ever. Both gave a punchers chance, But i think Lennoxs low jab and kronk blinding jab twinned with his big right win him the theoretical fight.
1
-
@tedriddick3717 That isn't how boxing works tho.
Styles make fights, and unless they fought we cant say.
Yes Mike was very fast, But he couldn't move back from punishment, and Lennox had a toolset that would cause Mike alot of trouble.
Hand speed is only slightly in Mikes favour and only once he can get inside
Foot speed is all but irrelevant for this style match up.
Power. Lennoxs right hand is the biggest single punch, but mike has power in both hands
Quickness is just the foot and hand speed combined. Again, Lennox isnt that much slower than Mike, just outside boxers rotate in circles so they appear much slower than tysons straight line dash
Defence is equal. Lennox had could longarm Tyson at distance and grapple and push him away at any time. Mikes defence relied on his peekaboo style, which serves the Krok jab perfenctly.
Mike on a surface level on paper has lennox beat, but once you annalyse there actual toolset specificly, you realise the fight goes significantly in Lennoxs favour
I don't think you realise just how Good Lennox's jab was.
He had a 5 world class jabs.
Standard straight jabs from his guard
Stiff jab from the hip which broke through opponents guards and hit them if they tried to duck
A jab that went over the top to pull down there guard
A looping hook that became a jab that Lennox tapped there arm with to move there guard.
lennox was also very good at blinding you with his jab. kronk Fighters leave there jab extended for a fraction of a second over there opponets gap in the guard or lead eye, which blinds them so they never see the pucnh coming.
Loma does something very similar, except he rotates around a fighter whilst they are blinded.
It really isnt as simple as looking at there stats on fight night and coming to a conclusion. You have too go through every tool in there box, and you realise of the big 4 of that era (LL, RB, MT and EH), Mike is the easiest for Lennox, Bowe is his hardest, with evander in the middle.
For Mike, its the opposite, with Bowe being the easiest due to his willingness to trade.
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Thats the thing about Mike. When he turned pro there was literally one other decent prosect, and that was Biggs.
And he was shite as a pro.
All the worlds attention at HW was on mike and Mike alone. Most guys Mike fought in his prime were at least 8 years older than him.Mike came in at a really bad time for HW boxing. Usually, there are good journeymen, gatekeepers and fellow prospects around, but the latter half of the 80s were almost completely void of that.
As i mentioned earlier, biggs was the only true prospect i can think of at that time, and guys like bone crusher smith, who are like whyte or Chisora. Good but not great.
i dotn think Larry holes was scared, just twice tysons age
Yes, Mike had power, but those who were not scared, and could take a step back every now and then, Mike struggled with alot more.
He either steamrolled you, caught you with one big punch, or had to go to war.
Razor Ruddock and Bruno were quality fighters. I think Bruno was scared, he went to get hypnotised before the fight, but Ruddock wasn't. Ruddck was good, fighter, who had a very decent skillset and one monster punch.
I just wish mike either came along 4 years later than he did, or kept his focus and stayed with Rooeny so we could actually asses him, because he dominated such a weak era its hard to quantify.
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Tyson fought better competitions in the 2 years proceeding and following his jail time than the rest of his career combined.
Spinks was pretty close to his prime, but id say it was an "off night". He was wearing knee supports, and hadn't fought in over a year, and was visibly terrified. Mike still beat the crap out of him like only a great could do.
Im tlaking about Mike becoming pro purely froma an analytical standpoint. By the time the HW division was stacked again, he was already at 80%. Obviously what he did was record breaking, but purely from a fanatasy persepctive i want to see how a prime mike would be percieved in a stacked era rather than a dead one.
1985-1989 were probably the weakest years for HW. Mabey 2015-2018 were worse because of Furys absence actually.
It was a gerational shift going on then.
During his Reighn at the end of the 80s, other than Tyrell Biggs, most of the ranked fighters were 8-20 years older than Mike was. There were a couple of nobodies he beat his age, but he didnt really start fighting guys his own age until 89-92, when alot of Guys became pro from the 88 Olympics.
Mike has transcended his own record
His resume is good but not great, but it was the way he destroyed nobodies and fought that drew in a casual crowd. When he was out his prime people came to watch because he was like a car crash, and people were drawn in.
It was the perfect storm to draw in a casual audience. He had an exciting style, an engaging personality, and the only other up and comer was Tyrell biggs who was boring and shit.
Really, in his first 37 fights, about 10-15 ( i reckon 12) were decent ,to good boxers, Irregardless of age.After the Douglas loss he fought semi decent to decent boxers alot more often. You had 3 good boxers in the 2 years after douglas, then he fought the biggest HW bum, peter McNealy, right out of prison (which somehow got him a title shot over Lewis who had beaten Morrison and Mercer), then 3 good fighters, then 2 losses with evander who well put as great
Following his suspension, form 99 to his retirement its pretty much about 5 decent boxers, 2 good ones, one great and 2 bums.
1
-
@tedriddick3717 i get Mcnealy was a tune up fight, but he is literally the most fabricated man in Boxing, he was 35-1 when he fought Tyson, and when i say he beat nothing but binmen i mean it.Literaly binmen. And firemen. He lost to a man fighting for, Mot a major world title, not a minor world title, not a region/continental title, not a national title, but a state title. His management built up his record so he could be cashed in against Tyson.
Its not really a gripe with Tyson but with don king, that after beating 2 nobodies he wormed his way into a title and Lennox beat what at the time were the best good not great boxers.
Thats part of the Fantasy situation. A prime Mike with cus, Prime Lennox kronk trained from day one, How would they go through he division and eventually fight.
I prefer to use Joe Calzaghe as a fighter who retired undefeated rather than Floyd.
Floyd should have at least one loss and one draw on his record, but Joe shouldn't and doesnt. He also fought champs and ranked contenders, and fought B-hop and RJJ as his last fights, not an 0-0 MMA fighter and a youtuber.
I have sympathy for Mike in the loss of cus. he was a farther figure to mike, and he had no controll over how it turned out.
But everything after that, mike has to take some responsibility for.
Firing Rooney, who was a great trainer and cared for mike was his first mistake, and letting Don King and his yeas men stay around for over a decade.
Lennox is a great example of how a boxer should manage the people around him.
His first trainer, jhon davenpoort was a great armature coash, but lennox wanted a pro coach.
From Ruddock to McCall 1 he was trained by pepe correa, who trained ray lenord for a long time. He tried to teach lennox to be flashy like lennord, but t just made lennox off balance, full of holes and rigt hand reliant. Lennox was already planning to fire him after the McCall fight, but the loss made it concrete, and before the result had been announced, his manager hired manny steward
1
-
@tedriddick3717 No, No fighter has only fought great fighters, But Mike got a too much credit for the resume he does have.
You have 3 sorts of boxing resumes
Ones like Lennoxs and Alis, beating the best of the generaition before, there own generaition and a couple from the next generaition.
Then you have Guys like Mike and Tyson. Tysons is an extreme example, but they have some incredible names on their records, but it isnt just big name after big name fight after fight.This is the most common sort of resume for most champions.
Then you have records like wilders, where hes literaly fought no one, only 3 guys es fought were top 10 and he lost to one of them 3 times
The reason i say tyson got wormed into a title fight is that there were far more deserving people at the time. Lennox was one, Evander another, and you had guys like moorer as well.
Its more due to don king. He was a puppet master for boxing. When mike fought Seldon for the WBA, which is the fight he ducked Lennox for, Mike literally had nothing to lose. His title was not on the line, but seldons was
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Mike t didnt only fight Bums. He just fought alot more bums that the fighters hes compared to. From 17-0, or 1992 onwards Lennox pretty much fought nothing but champs and number 1 contenders his own age or younger. Mike was much more spotty, and the champs and contenders he did beat were twice his age. Bruno and Ruddock were his first properly decent opponents that were not 10 years mikes senior.
Tyson is only considered the best HW by casuals and casuals only. Ask any trainer, commentator, boxer, or passionate boxing fan and none will have tyson as there greatest HW ever. Favourite maybe, but not best.
Polls mean nothing. Tyson has appeared in several major films, has had countless games, including this weird gambling one thats just launched and hosts in own podcast. Hes constantly on peoples screen, even if theyve never watched a boxing match in their life.
Lennox on the other hand lives in jamaca up a bloody mountain and only comes down once or twice a year to pop up at the end of a boxing match congratulating someone, some charity work or a podcast.
Again, thsi list you bring up is nothing more than a popularity contest, not a measurement of greatness.
The fact of the matter is Lennox fought more top 10 opponents than mike, beat every man he faced, and pretty much beat every fighter of the 90s.
At the end of the day, Lewis, Tyson, Holyfield and Bowe are akin to the 4 kings.
They were all top 15 HW of all time, all fighting at the same time, all with different styles in and out of the ring. Well never have guys like them again. But only one man beat every other name on that list as a boxer. And his name is Lennox Lewis
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Evander is only 4 years older than Lennox. Hes only had 4 more fights in his career than Lennox at this point. Lennox won every round of their fight, he landed 3 times the punches. Evander would go on to fight until he was almost 50. He should have been a 5 time champion of the world at 46, but was robbed of a decision.
Evander was not bankrupt until 2008.
Lennox did beat Mike Tyson. Was it a prime Mike Tyson? no. But whos fault was that.
Mikes. Because Mike got arrested, the fight couldn't happen in 93-94, and Mike ducked Lennox twice in 96. He spent all of 97 losing to Holyfield, had his licence suspended until 99, got DQd from fights and failed drug tests.
Lennox beat Bowe at the Olympics. And he won by KO. First punch he threw in the second. Mate, seriously, where do you get this shit from? Almost everything youve said is wrong
Yes, he lost to Mikes sparring partner.
But he made him cry in the rematch.
McCall is twice the fighter douglas was, and Mike never avenged his losses
Again, Lewis caved his face in in the rematch. HE BEAT EVERY MAN HE FACED.
you literally cant do more than that.
Lewis is not in this ONE top 10. It isnt THE top ten. Ive supplied you with several trainers and boxers, and other lists that rank Lennox as the highest ranked modern HW.
Ive explained it many times. Mike and Lennox have discussed it on podcasts together. Mike wants to be in the limelight. He wants people to know him, to recognise him and to ask for his autograph.
Lennox doesn't. He was content to lie on a beach all alone in between fights, and thats what hes mostly done since retiring.
Why would he not use a jab? You are criticising a tall man for fighting tall. and mastering the most important punch
Its like criticising a NASCAR driver for turning left.OFC he doesn't fight like mike.
He physically cant
For the last time, Lennox broke his hand when he fought tyson. Its why he was dominating mike with both hands then stopped jis right in round 6-7. He needed to soften up and wear doen mike, cuz he only had one proper shoot with his right.
mate, your arguments are delusional, its just a roundabout of non facts excuses and a popularity contest. Not once have you given an example of why mike is a better boxer, not once have you explained why mikes record is better. if you are not going to talk boxing, why watch it in the first place?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tedriddick3717
1- No, he isnt.
2-Yes, he is.
3-Yes. But so is Lennox
4-Yes. But that speed was a flash in the pan thing
5-Yes,he is.He so explosive his prime lasted about 30 seconds, weras Lennoxs was a almost a decade
6-Tyson was far from dominating the 90s mate. In the 90s, made 2 title defences. He lost both of them.He had 40 days as undisputed champ in the 90s, before losing them to a bum. He Held the WBC belt for 4 months before vacating it to avoid Lewis.
He only had any belt for 6 months.
He held a belt for 7 and a bit months in the 90s. Thats hardly dominating.
Lennox, by comparison, had a belt for 1year and 4 months in his first tilte Reighn. Thats more than Mikes whole time as champ in the 90s. Lennox would go on to defend at least one belt for 6 years and 4 months.
So, ill be generous and even throw in mikes original reighn in the 80s.
Mikes original title reign was almost 3 years to the day.His second reighn was 6 months.
Mike defended his title for 3 years 6 months.
Lennoxs Reighn was a combined 8 years.
More than double Mikes.
I know twats and casuals will always say tyson. But they dont deal in facts. they deal in opinions.
Lets nd this shit right now.
Mike Tyson.
1981 Carolina gold medallist
1982 Tennessee gold medallist
1984 golden gloves
Pro record 50-6 2 NC 44 KO %88 KO
Title Reighn combined 3 years 6 months
Successful Title defences-9
2 time champion
0 avenged losses
0 robberies
Lennox Lewis
1983 Junior world championships gold Medallist
1985 World cup silver medallist
1985 North American championship gold medallist
1986 commonwealth games gold medallist
1987 pan American silver medallist
1987 north American gold medallist
1988 Olympic gold medallist
Pro record 41-2-1 32 KO 79% KO
Title Reighn combined 8 Years
Successful title defences- 14
3 time champion
2 avenged losses
1 robbery
Mike doesnt even compare
AND FOR THE LAST FUCKING TIME LENNOXS RIGHT WAS BROKEN.
Break your hand and tell me if you want to punch something with it.
If your going to respond to this using Yank sheeples nostalgia and feeling rather than facts, i will know for a fact you are not a boxing fan
I deal in facts only.
I do not accept any major tyson excuses
i do not accept nostalgia
Give me some cold hard facts soon or illjust block you.
But then i suspect you wont.
Because you dont have any
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Its not all about speed, you donut. Amir Kahn was faster than all his opponent's. Still got beat by several of them. Once an intelligent fighter gets mikes timing down, takes a step back or steps forward with a well timed uppercut
(2 things Lennox was awesome at) its pretty much game over for Mike.
You are also forgetting that Lennox sparred a 15 year old mike who was twice as fast as he was when they fought, and cus was forced to stop the sparr.
You are not breaking down their styles, just you might as well just be saying their stats on fight night. Lewis had the single biggest right hand in boxing history until wilder came along. Hes essetialy wilder who can actually box
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fVlHaDGzkqc
2 Im going to list all the fighters hey shared, and the times they beat them in.
Mike never fought ray mercer.
Again, another ridiculous mistake on your part.
Tyrel Biggs. Mike TKO-7 Lennox-TKO 3
Bruno- Mike TKO-5 and TKO-3 Lennox TKO 7
Ruddock Mike TKO-9 (seen as an early stoppage by the masses decussating a rematch) and UD 12 Lennox- TKO-2
Tony tucker- Both UD 12, tho Lennox knocked him down, the first man to do so.
Golata- Mike- TKO 3, later NC cu mike failed a drug test. Lennox- TKO- 1
Botha- Mike- KO-5 Lennox TKO-2
Evander- Mike- Loss-KO-11 and Loss-DQ-3
Lennox- Draw- Seen as a robbery by the public and every media outlet, Lennox landed 3 times more punches than Evander.
and Win-UD-12
Only one man Tyson beat quicker than Lewis.
Your argument that Mike is better than Lennox is now, not only revolving around fights that never happened, Lennox v Foreman or Mike v Mercer, its now revolving around the fact that Mike beat up a 40 year old man and a crippled light heavyweight.
The reason Lennox fought Better opposition is because in-between the names they share, Mike fought Binmen men like Mcneely and Lennox fought the man with the most first round KOs, 7ft giants and the best fighter of the next generation and fellow super champ Vitali Klitschko, who would have dominated Boxing if not for a shoulder injury.
Mike Fought Bums through his career
Lennox just fought bums in the standard first 15 fights or so. He would only face one bum from beating Ruddock to retiring.
Lennox fought a man with only 8 fights? Yeah he did. But so did Mike. People Like that are who you start off beating. Not continue to fight until you retire like Mike.
Ive already sent you a link to Lewis KOing Bowe. Just type in Lennox v Bowe 1988 if you cant work the internet properly.
Youve proven time and time again, that you do not know boxing, at all. Not once have you offers a detailed breakdown of styles.
All youve one is say mike is faster and make up fights that never happened
Facts MF. DO YOU SPEAK THEM.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tedriddick3717
WTF would i surrender to a fool and his insane ramblings.
There are fights Tyson won without KO his opponents. Mike didn't outbox them beautifully. he went to war and traded with them, with them winning rounds as well.
Some were less than dominant.
With he exception of mitch green who he was toying with, the reason mike couldnt Knock those guys out wasnt because he was trying to go the distance, but because he was incpable of KO them.
My comment on Mercer was because mike was scared of Him. Morison was cut from the same cloth as mike. And Morrison did what Mike would have to do. Which is land bombs, gas cuz mercer was a tank, and then get brutally Kod.
Foreman was lineal champ. He held the IBF and the ring belts for a long time. He beat guys at 40 Mike would struggle against. He went the distance with Evander, something mike could only dream of. Mike was terrified of anyone who could outbox outthink and and punch as well.
Funny how he could fight a 40 year old larry holmes and not a 40 year old foreman isnt it?
He always took the easiest rout.
He always took the smaller man, the one who posed less of a threat.
Thats where Evander and Lennox dwarf Mike. They went after the boogeymen of the division, they went after each other.
If Lennox was Evander's mandatory in 96, the fight would happen in 96. He wouldn't pay lennox 4 mil to go away, then vacate his title.
Oh BTW, Mike failed his drug test in the Golata fight. NC.
The point as was trying to prove is Lennox beat the same men quicker.
What's faster
less than a minute or
6 minuites.
You tell me. Actually, you'll probably try and say Mikes minutes are actually shorter, or some BS like that
You are embarrassing yourself. You are the biggest C*nt ive ever had the displeasure of dealing with. You Lie, tell half truths, ignore facts, gaslight and make shit up.
Youve presented no facts.
Youve presented no Knowledge
Youve only presented BS and excuses on behalf of the angry midget rapist.
Piss off, learn boxing, learn your facts, stop making excuses, stop lying, stop gaslighting, Accept the facts as they are and take your meds. You are unstable
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tedriddick3717
Wow. He was 37-0 Before he lost to a bum
let me correct you
He bounced right back. No he didn't. Bouncing right back is challenging Douglas to an immediate rematch and dominating him. Not spending the next 6 years fighting 2 decent fighters and bums, and spending 3 years incarcerated for raping someone.
Yes, he got the WBC and WBA belts back.But he vacated the WBC immediately to duck Lewis, and lost the WBA in his first defence against Evander.
Divorces, taxes, don king.
Irrelevant. Evander had many of those issues, yet he never blamed them for his losses. These are not facts. They are excuses. Mike is partly responsible for all of them.
These facts don't prove mike is better than Lennox. Hey are just facts about Mikes career.
In terms of former, current and future champion boxers beat, title Reighn length, title defences, avenged losses, win percentage, amateur pedigree, ranked contenders beat. In all relevant fields Lennox dwarfs mike.
The only things Mike has is youngest HW champ and a slightly higher KO ratio.
No, there will never be a fighter like Tyson again. There will never be such a overrated ruler of a dead era of HW, there will never be a public figure who gets off so lightly for rape and attempted cannibalism, there will never be a fanbase so casual and stupid as mikes. There will never be more excuses (the LDBC has come close). There will never be a HW champion who beat 85% bums and old men and still considered great. There will never be a boxer who is ruined at 23 years old, especially a HW.
There will never be a mid fighter lifted to greatness by delusion like Mike
1
-
@tedriddick3717 I asked for facts. We are arguing about the relative greatness of Lennox and Tyson.Youve given me facts that relate to tyson, not to his comparative greatness.
You have Yet to provide one fact that proves Mike is a greater fighter than Lennox. The only metric hes better in is a slightly better KO ratio.
In Lennox was champ longer against higher level opposition. In every metric, lennox is the greater champion
5 of the 6 men they both fought, Lennox beat them faster, or beat him outright wears Tyson did not in the case of Holyfield.
Who is joe Rogan. What has he done in terms of boxing?
Hes a commentator for a completely different sport whos off his face half the time.
Every fellow champion, trainer, whatever say lennox is better, and a ATG
Every Boxing magazine, historian, and record keeping outlet rates Lennox higher than Tyson.
So a off his face podcast host who used to commentate for UFC says mike is better.
So what.
Box rec, Ring Magazine, Emmanuel steward, George Foreman, Hassim Rahman, Evander Holyfield, HBO. that bloke with the fedora-
ALL of them have Lennox as the best modern Heavyweight.
Most do not even have Mike in the top 10.
Most hes barley top 15
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Lennox did hold 3 Belts.
Thats what makes him the last unified champion.
So, lets add that to your made up fights, messed up timeline and ridiculous BS, to show that you dont know what you are on about.
As ive proven many times already, Lennox was the more dominant fighter. Hes the 2nd most unbeatable HW champ in history.
He beat better opposition thorouoghht his career. Mike was only unbeatable because he was in a dead era, a lost generation of Boxing.
Mike fought them first. So what? Bruno went in against Tyson under hypnosis with no gameplan, He couldn't stop Ruddock without a corrupt ref, Biggs was shit.
Mike fought ruddock less than a year before Lennox. He was still the same man Mike had to take the distance, and Lennox did it in less than 2 rounds
Lennox handed Golata his first Loss that wasn't a DQ. He didn't last 60 seconds
Lennox handed Klitschko his first loss that wasnt caused by Vitali retiring due to injury.
He needed 60 stitches.
Lennox was the first man to beat Grant.
He lasted 2 rounds
Lennox was the first man to knock tucker down
Oh believe i forgot to add botha to the list of fighters both fought. Lennox beat him faster.
Yes fighters have off nights. But 6 men dont have off nights jsut because youre trying to prove a point. Evander, Ruddock,Bruno,
Botha. All these men were on point. They just lost to Lennox
Golata was probably a bit out f shape when fighting both Lennox and Mike, but thats hard to quantifiy
Tucker aged between fighting Mike and Lennox
Biggs was just crap.
Yes Styles make fights. Lennox Lewis style is superior. Its why he dominated Holyfield, smashed Ruddock and Golata, put Botha away in 3 and dropped tucker, and beat bruno.
Lennox had 2 weights. Pre emmanuel he was 220-230 lbs.
Under emmanuel he went up to 240-260
Mike was 220 ish. He was 235 when he fought Lennox.
One Lennox weighed almost the same as mike at one point.
Some boxers are never the same once they get knocked out Meldrick taylor is a great example . But Ruddock went on to win the WBU or WBO (one of the minor titles) from tommy Morrison, and would become the Candinan champ at 50.
Bruno had been stopped before guys like tyson and Lennox. He won the WBC belt after getting stopped by both. He got stopped by mike again after tho.
Golata was first KOd by Lennox
Botha fought to his 50s.
Biggs was shit when he faced tyson and still shit when he fought Lennox.
I consider Floyd a great.
But he shouldt be considered 50-0.
He lost at least one fight, and his last fight was aginst an 0-0 guy.
Joe Calzaghe was 46-0. He was a great fighter who had broken hands in most of his fights.
Hes a great.
Again, weve got to talk about Primes and age. Both Lennox and Mike were ut of heir primes when they fought, mike more so.
Holmes beat a 40 year old parkinsons riddled Ali. But Mike beat a 40 year old Holmes. See thats the problem with you, and most other Tyson fans. Mike being out of his prime is a valid excuse for him, but not the men he beat.
How does he have a greater resume?
He beat Less champions (11 to Lennox's 15) Beat less number 1 contenders, Beat less top 10 fighters, lost 3 times as much as lennox, avenged none of those losses.
Lennox reigned for twice as long, made more title defences and was undisputed for longer.
Lennox won pretty much everything as an amature, including the Olympics, where mike only has a golden gloves and a junior olympics win.
Skill set? Both were different because of different styles. Lennox and Mike hit just as hard, their hand speed was the same, Foot speed is irrelevant Cuz one Lennox step is like 5 mike steps. Mike was out of ideas if he couldnt get inside.
Lennox was the far better outside boxer, had the best jab and sraight right combo of all time, had monster uppercuts and hooks.
Lennox was 20 times better than mike outside, and against taller men, almost as good inside. I could recreate Mikes skillset in about 30 seconds.I wouldn't be very good at it, but i could do it. It would take me decades to learn evey little trick Lennox used. Lennoxs jab alone is a skillset unt itself. He had 5 styles of jab. Most guys have 1. He could pull down guards, break them, catch ducking fighters, manipulate guards, blind you, all with his jab.
Lennox has twice the resume of mike, twice the armature pedigree, twice the skills of mike. Mikes a good fighter, in the grand scheme of things. Lennox is a great fighter.
Top 3.
1
-
@tedriddick3717
The difference being the vast majority of the ones mike did that to were binmen.
Obviously there was spinks.
And Lennox avenged that Loss. As soon as that fight was over, lennox saw nelson mandela, then pretty much took rahman to court to honour the rematch clause as soon as he got home. Tyson never did that to douglas. Admitidley he did it with Holyfield, but then wasted it trying to eat him.
Lennox was not taller than everyone he fought. Most of the guys he fought were 6,3-6,5. Akinwnade is 6,9, him v lennox was the biggest combines height in history, Grant was taller and Klitchko was taller.
Mike fought rabilta who was just as tall as lennox.
You complained about Lennox fighting Inside. Im not complaining aout Mike fighting Inside. its that if he couldn't get inside,he was fed. He couldt fight on the back foot at all, just like wilder.
Lennox could keep you all night at the end of his jab, or he could step in and destroy you. He was almost as comfortable inside as he was outside.
yes Mike has more wins. thats why we use ratios and percentages. A guy with 100 wins and 95 losses has more wins than a 12-0 guy.
Mike has a 88% win rate
Lennox has a 95% win rate.
It should be higher if not for the holyfeild robbery.
Homes was 40. Stop splitting hairs. He was 10 years past his prime at any rate.
Who has the higher win rate- Lennox
Who beat every man he faced- lennox
Who held belts for longer- Lennox
Who was undisputed for longer-Lennox
Who made more title defences- Lennox
Who beat more champions- Lennox
Who beat more number 1 contenders-Lennox
Who is an Olympic (and almost every other Am tournament) gold medalist- Lennox
Literally, the only stat that you use to measure gratness that Mike beats Lennox in is KO ratio.
Thats it. That one little stat which mike is better than Lennox in.
Yeah, they make movies about mike, That isnt a good thing. They make movies about mike because he was a unstable phycobpath who raped people, swore at reporters, ate peoples ears and surrounded himself with scum, and took drugs constantly.
A movie about Lennox would be 2 and a half hours long. 2 hours would be spent watching him play chess on a beach, 15 minutes would be training, and the fight would be 5 minuites.
But we are not arguing whos appeared in the most films are we? We are talking about why was the better boxer.
Or is judy dench the best boxer in the world.
Because according to your metric, she is
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Yes Leiws fought Bums. but only for the first 15 fights or so.
After that, it was all national champions, top contenders, former champs, current champ or future champs.
Mike fought Bums constantly and consistently through his career. For every decent fighter, there were 4 bums.
Every other boxer has a chunk of 15-20 fights of bums. There might be one or 2 amateur or domestic rivals, but for the most part its just bums. You look at Mikes record, and there's 15 bums. then 15 bums with 2 decent boxers. Then against 2 champs. With every other HW at the time, once they got the inital resume builders, binmen and journeymen done with, it was all champs and high level contenders.
Mike is the only one who constantly goes back to the guys our supposed to beat in your first couple of years
You should be lucky Draws don't count.
Firstly, it shouldn't have been a draw. Lewis was robbed against Holyfield.
Secondly, Mike has 2 no contests which i did not include as losses, which i could have done.
Mike and Lennox had very similar childhoods. Grew up in rough areas until they were 12 ish. Both had struggling mothers. Lennox was left in England when his Mother went to Canada with her abusive Freind for 3 or so years. He was chased through the streets naked. He only ever saw his dad once for 30 seconds outside his house. He was passed around boarding schools and put in the system, before moving to canda at 12
Both found closure and father figures in their Boxing coaches. Ultimately tho, in hindsight, cus probably took are of Mike too much and made him reliant on him, and thats why mike flew off the rails.
Mike is partially responsible for all the troubles that haunted him. He could of cut the people out of his life, but chose to stay with them.
Mike became reliant on Don King. Don King was promoting every other fighter in the 90s, and none of them were as close to him as mike. Mike would go t interviews with don king and tell him he loved him.
The only time his other fighters saw him was when he waved those silly little flags at weigh ins.
Mike and mike alone has to take responsibility to what happened to him once he was an adult. Sure, his conditions were not ideal, but he created many of those conditions.
Both came from similar situations, but dealt with it so very differently. Both initialy took their anger and focused it on boxing. Its just Mike stopped and started lashing out, and Lennox continued to focus
1
-
@tedriddick3717 He had 44 fights.
Its only 31%
15 fighters is pretty much the standard. Almost every boxer, unless they are like a 400+ with 1 loss as an amateur like loma, or theres a muay thai champ, who both got title shots in their 2nd fight.
The standard career for a boxer in the west in 15-20 fights over 2 or 3 years fighting journeymen and bums before moving to fellow contenders, or fighting for the belts.
Whilst fighting these bums, they have a fight every 2-3 months, and once in the top 10, its usually 2-3 fights a year.
Lennoxs 15th fight was against gary mason.
He was 35-0.
He has beaten Many of the same men as Mike, including Biggs and Tillis, and Donny long (is back)
Lennoxs 15th fight was with a 35-0 33KO British and European champion, who went to the same gym as Bruno, He was 10th in ring magazines rankings of 1989
Mikes first notable opponent was James tillis,at 20-0 whod already lost to Biggs and marvin frazier, and some other mid level fighters. Hed failed to get the North American title twice. Mike would not fight anyone in the top 10 until his 28th fight.
the top 10 lists from 1989 to 1998, Lennox beat every man on them, who stayed in them other than bowe, foreman and moorer
No other "great" fighter has fought that many bums. Mikes record is so bloated with them ,im surprised i isn't a registered soup kitchen.
Nearly 60% of the men Mike fought were complete Bums, who made zero impact on boxing before or after fighting Mike.
Mike has twice as many bums on record than most fighters. Now we often see record building. Every boxer is going to have a non stop list of bums at the start of their record. But Mike has them running throught his career. Hed fight a couple of good boxers, then go back to absolute bums again. More often than not he wasn't even fighting guys in the top 10.
Scrutinize Mikes record on even the most basic level and you realise how overrated he is. Go even a little bit deeper and its frankly ridiculous hes considered as good as he is
1
-
@tedriddick3717 They fought 6 guys the same. Of them, Mike faced 3 guys twice, Lennox one. Mike had to fight Ruddock again because the public wanted to see the fight because they all thought it was stopped early.
Mikes rematch with Bruno was years later,
Mikes rematch with Evander was because he lost.
Of those 6 men they both faced, lennox beat all but Bruno faster.
Mike couldn't stop ruddock properly in 19 rounds. Lennox did it in under 2.
Mike couldn't beat Evander. Lennox could.
2. Ill go through the names on Lennox's list
Evander x2
Briggs (most first round KOs)
Grant (7ft tall, beat Golata, seen as heir to the championship, until he met Lennox)
Vitali (6,9, future dominant champ, beaten by a 40 year Lennox)
Tua
Mercer
Ruddock
Mason
Bruno
Tyson
Akinwande (6,9ft tall)
Tucker
Bowe (O 88)
3. Marvis Frazier wasn't legendary. He rode his daddys name and achieved nothing in the pros.
You mentioned spinks twice, but ill let that slide, ive probably repeated names Lennocx beat in previous comments.
Other than that, the List is alright. Holmes needs an asterix, but other than that your list is fine.
Mike is by no means a bad fighter. But he doesn't have the resume that's just stacked like Lennox or Evander's.
For 90s HW, you got
Lennox & Evander- Beat every name in HW from 89-04, the ones Lennox didint get evander did and vice versa
Bowe and Tyson- Had some good names on there list, but not to the level of LL and EH. Both didnt have the longevity
Foreman- He was just a old man KOing guys, pretty much doing his own thing and only making brief cameos in true top fights.
Bruno, Ruddock, Morrison, Mercer, Golata, Tua, Akinwande
Minor champions/ top contenders who would have been very good in any other era, all had one major flaw (Cardio, Reliance on power, Unfocused and AIDS, Started Late, Crotch combos,Unactive, Afraid of big punchers)
Guys like Briggs grant and Klitschko belong in the 2000s more than the 90s.
Tyson is greatt.But hes far from the greatest. He was the 3rd or 4th best fighter of his era. There's no shame in that
The 90s was so stacked, being in the top 10 of the era is a hall of fame worthy feat.
There was never, and never will be an era as talent rich of the 90s. Being top 5 in it? Thats top 10% of HW boxers ever.
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Lennox didnt struggle against tua. Tua landed 3 proper punches the whole fight. it was almost a shutout on the cards. Tua won 2 rounds at best. i gave him 1
Lennox out landed Tua 300 to 110. Lennox landed, and this is some rough maths, 50% and Tua 30%.
If were taking Lennoxs win against Mike off, weve got to take Mikes Homes win as well.
I admit that Mike wasn't at his best, but he still had power.
Ive never once, and never will claim(ed) That lennox beat a prime Mike.
All im arguing in that Lennox was the better fighter with he better legacy and resume.
At the end of the day, when we remove the excuses and what ifs from both sides of the argument, that's the case. As it happened, Lennox dominated his era, and has one of, if not the most stacked resume in boxing history.
We should just be grateful that we had 4 of the most skilled, powerful and toughest HW in history all fighting at the same time.
You had the Youngest, Oldest, Most Dominant, and Most entertaining HW champions ever.
And they all fought the best group of contenders weve ever had.
The only thing i think we can both agree on, you put a 90s HW fight on, your guaranteed entertainment. If its a war, a boxing lesson, controversy, a picture perfect KO, shit like the fan man... We should just be glad we can watch these fights and not fling shit at eachother lie a bunch of apes.
1
-
@tedriddick3717 Look, were never going to see eye to eye on this.
Lennox is the Greater as a Boxer.Tyson is the Greater icon.
Lennoxs record being better is undeniable.
But the impact Mike had outside a hardcore boxing fanbase is also undeniable.
We can mention skill sets, etc etc. But none of that is provable. They were stylistically completely different, they used they're natural gifts completely differently.
If we actually measured there punching power and hand speed, it would be almost identical. But there styles are so different, we perceived Mikes as being superior.
Mike was an aggressive pressure counter puncher. He relied on his raw explosive speed to go in a straight line and use short hooks to get through gaps in the opponents guard.
Lennox was a boxer puncher, and then transitioned into much more outboxer style under emmanuel.
Early Lennox would fight mid range and jab and throw straights. Once he found an opening and was ready to get his man out of there, he would move in and throw bombs in much the same way as Mike did.
Later Lennox would jab through, around, pull down and manipulate a opponets guard with his jab, as well as blind them, and Land big right straights they never saw.
He would Land monster uppercuts, weave out of the way of punches, and go to the body.
Michal Jordan is considered the GOAT in basketball because he did what both Lennox and Mike did. He dominated Like Lennox, but Was an icon like Mike.
Forgot to do this earlier, so its out of place.
With the exception of Biggs and Tucker, Lennox fought the same men when they were still as good as when they fought Tyson.
Ruddock was in the same year.
Evander was still the same man despite the 2 year gap
Lennox beat bruno in-between the two tyson fights, and honestly dont think bruno ages at all. He still looks the same as he did back then today.
Lennox fought Golata first
Lennox fought Botha literally 1 day under a year after mike.
1
-
@rnosibZ57 Why would they do that? The revulto can barley beat a 296, which uses the same engine, but making only 800 hp.
The revulto gets trounced by the sf90, a 5 year old car that the f80 is above in its place in the range.
The 488 had no characteristic, cirtainly less than the 296 that replaced it, and nowhere near the performance.
The reasons you dont like the v6 is because of the exhaust, not the engine itself. Also, your numberist.
The flagship Ferrari has had a every engine under the sun, that reflected the companies motosport philosophy at the time.
This v6 has won the big 3 endurance races (24 hours of le mans overall x2, 24 hour nurburgring overall, 24 hour daytona class win, and it would have won the 24 hours of spa if not for the pitlane exit being closed for its final pitstop)
It sounds really good from the cockpit, even when stock because thats where most of the noise goes. It sounds really good full stop when the exaust is upgraded.
Its more powerful, more efficient, lighter and smaller, and the only negative is that it doest have as many cylinders.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ Yes, it does. Thats why they all have the BNR code .
The R33 is called BCNR33, thats because when it was produced, not all Attesa 4wd had HICAS, and the C was to differentiate that it did, which was not necessary with the 32 and the 34, as all Attesa cars had HICAS when they were in production. So, as all GTR R33s had HICAS, their chassis code was BCNR33, but its still a BNR. The reason the R33 GTR is longer and wider is becasue unlike the other 2, the coupe also used the Sedan chassis (wears the R32 and R34 had shortened ones for the Coupe)
All a platform is is the very, very basic underpinnings,like the floor, engine compartment and underbody reinforcement.
It is a very, very, very loose term, unlike Chassis.
Most platforms usually have fixed variables, and some unfixed ones.
Depending on what is and isnt a fixed variable, 2 cars could be massively different and still share a platform.
A car could only share a engine compartment and wheel centre line, and still be considered the same platform.
1
-
1
-
1