Official hockeyfights.com All-Time Top 10

[2,5,10GameMatch]

Originally Posted by timetoshine

Thank you sir (or madam), I appreciate the compliment. Opinions are like a-holes; everybody has one. I've been called an "opinion" more times than I can remember, but my opinions are from watching for more than 35 years and, if my opinions haven't changed in that amount of time, they likely aren't going to change soon lol

I should clarify my original post -- I don't mean to sound like I'm knocking Bob Probert or don't like the man. One of my favourite memories was seeing him decimate that back-jumping Semenko (one of the only fights in memory where the linesmen weren't even required to break up a fight ) -- I just think there needs to be some consistency.

I've seen people knock Playfair because he lost to MacLellan and Rooney -- both when he was past his prime. I'll agree that you could truthfully question his chin or nose after some losses, but I actually question Probert's heart in some of his losses. It looked to me like he quit in his first fight with Dave Brown because he knew he couldn't win (you can't let a guy bitch-talk you at the end of a fight like that), and his loss to Ken Belanger all by itself was enough for me to knock him down from #5 to #6 all-time -- it was THAT bad. I have no idea what he was trying to do the first time Jim McKenzie wanted to fight him; also rather odd and unimpressive.

But I could be wrong; seems to me I was wrong once in 1977........

Past his prime?? How old was Playfair when he lost to McLellan?? 26?? How old was Probert when he lost to Belanger?? 34?? Proberts career lasted many years longer than Playfair's...he was still beating the monsters while at the same age Larry was sitting at a desk!!

Big guys usually break down earlier in life(need I list names???) the fact that Probert went through all he did and played as long as he did is AMAZING, his longevity and the fact that he could still beat the top fighters well into his late 30's should be recognized and commended by EVERYONE.

Belanger had a good night that time, 9 out of 10 Probert wins.

As far as the Wilson-Probert fight goes?? from what I recall? neither of them looked too enthusiastic about going toe to toe. it was also neither guy's prime when it went down.

[timetoshine]

Originally Posted by 2,5,10GameMatch

Past his prime?? How old was Playfair when he lost to McLellan?? 26?? How old was Probert when he lost to Belanger?? 34?? Proberts career lasted many years longer than Playfair's...he was still beating the monsters while at the same age Larry was sitting at a desk!!

Big guys usually break down earlier in life(need I list names???) the fact that Probert went through all he did and played as long as he did is AMAZING, his longevity and the fact that he could still beat the top fighters well into his late 30's should be recognized and commended by EVERYONE.

Belanger had a good night that time, 9 out of 10 Probert wins.

As far as the Wilson-Probert fight goes?? from what I recall? neither of them looked too enthusiastic about going toe to toe. it was also neither guy's prime when it went down.

Not to be condescending, but there is so much misinformation, bias, and assumption in your post I'll have to try and address it all:

1) Probert was losing as many or more fights as he was winning by late 1997 -- age 32. That isn't opinion, it's fact; all you need to do is research it

2) Comparing Probert's longevity with Playfair has nothing to do with fighting ability. Playfair never played more than 2/3 of a season by the time he was 28 due to the physical wear and tear of being a stay-at-home defenceman, clearing the front of the net, and being forechecked into the end boards repeatedly every game. If you don't understand that one of 5 or 6 defencemen on a team wears down sooner than one of 10-12 forwards (of which Probert was a 3rd line guy; wasn't a scorer or checker or penalty killer) then I have to assume you haven't played hockey

3) The Probert-Wilson fight was Feb of 1988. Wilson missed from March of 1986 to October 1987 with back surgery; a full year-and-a half. Wilson played his last hockey game 2 months later having to retire because of his back. Over that same time period Probert was in roughly 35 fights between the NHL and AHL. I think most people agree Wilson was no longer in his prime. Probert, at a little less than 23 yrs old -- he was in his prime

4) The Belanger-Probert fight. "Had a good night that time"??? I haven't read through this site to see if there is a "worst beatings" thread or not. If so, that one HAS TO BE on it. To say "Probert wins 9 out of 10" says more about the validity of your post than I could.

I'll play your game just to be fun and do a bit of speculating myself:

1) I'd take Belanger 7 out of 10 times vs Probert, given the age of the 2 fighters and the fact that Probert couldn't seem to defend either Belanger's left or right

2) Probert fights Wilson (each in their primes) Wilson wins 3 out of every 4 times. Better technical fighter, better chin, better power. I give Probert 1 out of every 4 because he'd altered his jersey to peel off, leaving his opponent nothing to grab onto

3) Playfair vs Probert in their primes? I won't break it down as W-L but it's a virtual certainty Probert wouldn't be standing at the end of 1/2 of them. Playfair punched a whole lot harder than Ewen or Chris Tamer, and TKO'd more guys than Probert did -- fighting only 1/3 of the time

My speculation is based on history and facts, but it is after all only speculation

[2,5,10GameMatch]

Originally Posted by timetoshine

Not to be condescending, but there is so much misinformation, bias, and assumption in your post I'll have to try and address it all:

1) Probert was losing as many or more fights as he was winning by late 1997 -- age 32. That isn't opinion, it's fact; all you need to do is research it

2) Comparing Probert's longevity with Playfair has nothing to do with fighting ability. Playfair never played more than 2/3 of a season by the time he was 28 due to the physical wear and tear of being a stay-at-home defenceman, clearing the front of the net, and being forechecked into the end boards repeatedly every game. If you don't understand that one of 5 or 6 defencemen on a team wears down sooner than one of 10-12 forwards (of which Probert was a 3rd line guy; wasn't a scorer or checker or penalty killer) then I have to assume you haven't played hockey

3) The Probert-Wilson fight was Feb of 1988. Wilson missed from March of 1986 to October 1987 with back surgery; a full year-and-a half. Wilson played his last hockey game 2 months later having to retire because of his back. Over that same time period Probert was in roughly 35 fights between the NHL and AHL. I think most people agree Wilson was no longer in his prime. Probert, at a little less than 23 yrs old -- he was in his prime

4) The Belanger-Probert fight. "Had a good night that time"??? I haven't read through this site to see if there is a "worst beatings" thread or not. If so, that one HAS TO BE on it. To say "Probert wins 9 out of 10" says more about the validity of your post than I could.

I'll play your game just to be fun and do a bit of speculating myself:

1) I'd take Belanger 7 out of 10 times vs Probert, given the age of the 2 fighters and the fact that Probert couldn't seem to defend either Belanger's left or right

2) Probert fights Wilson (each in their primes) Wilson wins 3 out of every 4 times. Better technical fighter, better chin, better power. I give Probert 1 out of every 4 because he'd altered his jersey to peel off, leaving his opponent nothing to grab onto

3) Playfair vs Probert in their primes? I won't break it down as W-L but it's a virtual certainty Probert wouldn't be standing at the end of 1/2 of them. Playfair punched a whole lot harder than Ewen or Chris Tamer, and TKO'd more guys than Probert did -- fighting only 1/3 of the time

My speculation is based on history and facts, but it is after all only speculation

Where you getting these "facts" from regarding Proberts won-lost record?? if its DYG?? that wont suffice.....

Lots of defence men had longer careers that big Larry, he lost the drive to fight by 29 years of age, this makes Probert so remarkable because he had it in him til the very end, while guys like Semenko, Playfair, etc were toast by 30....

You make Playfair out to be the hockey equivilent of Ernie Shavers, to say Probert "wouldnt be standing after half of them" tells me you think Chris Nilan was a better fighter with a better chin than Probert becuase Larry never KO'ed Nilan in about 8 fights vs....

I have no problem with you placing Wilson ahead of Probert, I actually have Behn at #1 alltime myself but its VERY CLOSE to me....

And the Belanger taking "7 out of 10" from Probert just well......befuddles me!! you must be related to him because I would bet Ken himself would never say something like that.

[srehm1]

Originally Posted by timetoshine

1) Probert was losing as many or more fights as he was winning by late 1997 -- age 32. That isn't opinion, it's fact; all you need to do is research it

Absolutely incorrect. Watch the fights from that time frame. He was still a legit HW and a top-10 caliber fighter at that time. Good won-loss, good card, good fights... He was not the champ anymore but was still one of the best fighters in the game. All you have to do is watch the fights. Almost every one he was involved in from the time frame you're referencing is on tape/dvd and most can probably be seen on youtube or in the video archives here.

He did lose some but no way was he as bad as you're making him out to be.

[bruiser11]

Point is that Probert had more fights than almost anyone, Probert fought heavies in the 80's, 90's and early 2000's. Probert always stuck his neck out there even late in his career. He won his share of fights on Chicago.

[bruiser11]

All the up and comers wanted a piece of Probie! Probert fought several genertaions of tough guys. He was bound to take some big losses as well as some big wins for as much as he fought.

[timetoshine]

again, I don't want to turn the discussion into an anti-Probert thing; I do have him at or around top 5 all-time so obviously there's a lot more great than bad about his ability. My bias is I think the best fighters are the guys who never/seldom lose, rather than the guys who fight a ton and win most.

That's the reason I'll always think of Marciano or Joe Louis as champion before Ali -- and GSP as a better fighter than Chuck Lidell or Rampage

[battleship25]

Originally Posted by timetoshine

again, I don't want to turn the discussion into an anti-Probert thing; I do have him at or around top 5 all-time so obviously there's a lot more great than bad about his ability. My bias is I think the best fighters are the guys who never/seldom lose, rather than the guys who fight a ton and win most.

That's the reason I'll always think of Marciano or Joe Louis as champion before Ali -- and GSP as a better fighter than Chuck Lidell or Rampage

Timeto' I really appreciate the spark you've added to the Rem.When. Questioning Probie 's throne is healthy...there's been a really good debate here.
I don't want to get this into a boxing discussion but my quick take on Ali as the greatest - he won fights that NO ONE thought he'd win ( Liston, Foreman ) -he had only 2 more losses than Louis ( although the Jersey Joe Walcott fight was a mismatch and Louis was given the decision- in fact he left the ring before the decision was announced in disgust of his performance) . Louis lost fights EVERYONE thought he was gonna win ( Walcott, Charles, Schmeling 1, etc)
- his bum of the month club(Godoy, Galento, B.Baer, etc ) makes for a lot of wins and long title reign but these guys were mostly bums.
- light heavies that moved (Farr, Conn) made him look mechanical and slow - Conn was winning going away 'till he got stupid and slugged it out with the HW Louis.
- Louis wasn't a great fighter in my eyes - he was a great combination puncher, and possibly the best finisher of all times...but he was slow, uncreative, and had a less-than granite chin.

As for Rocky- name one guy he beat that was great, that was a HW, and or wasn't over the hill when Rocky fought them. Again Rocky had an superhuman will to win, granite chin and a good punch...but he was sloppy as any fighter I ever saw( I have many of his fights on tape) , easy to hit and usually missed his punches by several feet at times....he just was in great shape , threw tons of punches but and would wear his opp. down. He himself admitted it was time to get out when he saw the likes of Sonny Liston coming up the ranks...this wasn't a 185 Charles, or a 38 yr old Louis..but a mean power punching 215 Liston.

Now as for Probie- I used to wrestle with the idea ( for me it was 2 guys Probert and Wilson ..I used to think - I can't put Probie #1 cause I 'd be considered a homer ( I met Wilson only a couple of times -but knew Probie pretty well). But the point you bring up is one that resonates for me : I look at the Belanger fight and say "This can't be my #1 guy !!", or the Simon fight, or the Grimson inLA fight were Probie did little fighting while getting pounded.
I ask myself "Can you imagine Wilson losing like that?..the answer for me is NO WAY !! While Wilson didn't have the dominant wins over top level guys he never EVER got beat up. Had his career lasted as long as Probert's , my opinion is that Wilson would've had a better record than Probert. It's just hypothetical but that's how I see it. I also think Brash and Laraque might've had better records as well but the way they'd win is much less impressive ..to me.
As for the Wilson Probert fight...it was nothing but to me Wilson seemed to want to punch more than Probie..but it was crap.
In the head to head :

Stamina edge Probert
Power edge Wilson
Chin edge Wilson
Balance Wilson
Strength edge Wilson
Defense edge Wilson ( kept his chin tucked in -Ewen was happy Bob didn't)
Technique Probert -just because he'd switch hands very well

It's all fun conjecture . Keep it up boys.

[srehm1]

Originally Posted by battleship25

In the head to head :

Stamina edge Probert
Power edge Wilson
Chin edge Wilson
Balance Wilson
Strength edge Wilson
Defense edge Wilson ( kept his chin tucked in -Ewen was happy Bob didn't)
Technique Probert -just because he'd switch hands very well

It's all fun conjecture . Keep it up boys.

sell me on wilson's power over probert, battleship. Probert had 3 times the amount of KO's/TKO's/KD's/damage done as Wilson had in roughly the same amount of time (Wilson's entire career vs. probert's DET years). I'm not suggesting he wasn't a hard puncher with good power-but wouldn't the power category go to probert? I can put together a nice list for probert, but I can only think of a select few cases for wilson (Babych broken face, Hilworth Ko, Magnuson Kd). are there any others?

[smashem]

Originally Posted by srehm1

sell me on wilson's power over probert, battleship. Probert had 3 times the amount of KO's/TKO's/KD's/damage done as Wilson had in roughly the same amount of time (Wilson's entire career vs. probert's DET years). I'm not suggesting he wasn't a hard puncher with good power-but wouldn't the power category go to probert? I can put together a nice list for probert, but I can only think of a select few cases for wilson (Babych broken face, Hilworth Ko, Magnuson Kd). are there any others?

Hilworth bottom line was an AHL tough guy everyone remembers that and think of that with Wilson

[timetoshine]

Originally Posted by battleship25

Timeto' I really appreciate the spark you've added to the Rem.When. Questioning Probie 's throne is healthy...there's been a really good debate here.
I don't want to get this into a boxing discussion but my quick take on Ali as the greatest - he won fights that NO ONE thought he'd win ( Liston, Foreman ) -he had only 2 more losses than Louis ( although the Jersey Joe Walcott fight was a mismatch and Louis was given the decision- in fact he left the ring before the decision was announced in disgust of his performance) . Louis lost fights EVERYONE thought he was gonna win ( Walcott, Charles, Schmeling 1, etc)
- his bum of the month club(Godoy, Galento, B.Baer, etc ) makes for a lot of wins and long title reign but these guys were mostly bums.
- light heavies that moved (Farr, Conn) made him look mechanical and slow - Conn was winning going away 'till he got stupid and slugged it out with the HW Louis.
- Louis wasn't a great fighter in my eyes - he was a great combination puncher, and possibly the best finisher of all times...but he was slow, uncreative, and had a less-than granite chin.

As for Rocky- name one guy he beat that was great, that was a HW, and or wasn't over the hill when Rocky fought them. Again Rocky had an superhuman will to win, granite chin and a good punch...but he was sloppy as any fighter I ever saw( I have many of his fights on tape) , easy to hit and usually missed his punches by several feet at times....he just was in great shape , threw tons of punches but and would wear his opp. down. He himself admitted it was time to get out when he saw the likes of Sonny Liston coming up the ranks...this wasn't a 185 Charles, or a 38 yr old Louis..but a mean power punching 215 Liston.

Now as for Probie- I used to wrestle with the idea ( for me it was 2 guys Probert and Wilson ..I used to think - I can't put Probie #1 cause I 'd be considered a homer ( I met Wilson only a couple of times -but knew Probie pretty well). But the point you bring up is one that resonates for me : I look at the Belanger fight and say "This can't be my #1 guy !!", or the Simon fight, or the Grimson inLA fight were Probie did little fighting while getting pounded.
I ask myself "Can you imagine Wilson losing like that?..the answer for me is NO WAY !! While Wilson didn't have the dominant wins over top level guys he never EVER got beat up. Had his career lasted as long as Probert's , my opinion is that Wilson would've had a better record than Probert. It's just hypothetical but that's how I see it. I also think Brash and Laraque might've had better records as well but the way they'd win is much less impressive ..to me.
As for the Wilson Probert fight...it was nothing but to me Wilson seemed to want to punch more than Probie..but it was crap.
In the head to head :

Stamina edge Probert
Power edge Wilson
Chin edge Wilson
Balance Wilson
Strength edge Wilson
Defense edge Wilson ( kept his chin tucked in -Ewen was happy Bob didn't)
Technique Probert -just because he'd switch hands very well

It's all fun conjecture . Keep it up boys.

I'll defer to your boxing knowledge Battleship; a lot of people probably laugh that I have Probert at #6, but the fights you referenced is pretty much the exact reason I have him down past #5, not just down to #2. You mentioned Wilson would never get beat like that; I agree. Gillies only lost decisively like that on very rare occasions to Wilson, O'Reilly, and MAYBE Paradise.

Also on the subject of avenging losses I'll again point out that Wilson was a hockey player first and enforcer second. He was a dirty and tough player for sure, but still a player first. I doubt it mattered to him one bit that he lost as a 20-yr-old to Nick Fotiu and John Wensink; I think it bothered him more that he wasted the time and energy to fight 2 guys who could barely carry their sticks properly, much less shoot or stickhandle. Wilson would have won most re-matches vs Fotiu because he'd have been smart enough not to engage again in a boxing match on skates with a golden-gloves boxer lol

As far as what Wilson's career record would have been had he played to 35 without back surgery? He'd have had some trouble vs Dave Brown or perhaps Tim Hunter, but he'd have still won at least 8 times out of every 10 -- and he'd probably have patterned himself after Gillies and said at some point he wasn't going to fight anymore. Gillies fought very seldom after breaking Ed Hospodar's face.

[battleship25]

Originally Posted by srehm1

sell me on wilson's power over probert, battleship. Probert had 3 times the amount of KO's/TKO's/KD's/damage done as Wilson had in roughly the same amount of time (Wilson's entire career vs. probert's DET years). I'm not suggesting he wasn't a hard puncher with good power-but wouldn't the power category go to probert? I can put together a nice list for probert, but I can only think of a select few cases for wilson (Babych broken face, Hilworth Ko, Magnuson Kd). are there any others?

Srehm, Probie landed probably 10 times more punches on his opponents than Wilson. A lot of times Probie didn't even throw his punches properly, sometimes he'd flail and they be arm punches or even slap-like shots using his palms ( ie : Ewen 2 fight) , he clearly got into longer better fights - but Probie landed so many punches on so many guys without ever even bothering them. So out of the huge amount of fights he had relatively few tko/kos. Much like Twist & JK has very few KO/TKO it's because they landed a small amount of punches per fight..but when they did ...look out they did damage. Again Wilson with only an edge in power, not dramatic, but an edge IMO when he landed he seemed to do a little more damage. The Hilworth punch was more technique and timing rather than brute force, and the Babych fight was short destructive , educated punches. When I think of Probert unloading at will vs Kimble without hurting him and then Cam Russell drops Kimble with one punch, Kimble wasn't the most durable guy. Probie KO's Nylund - not really a KO -as far as being out , but seemed to catch Nylund on the nose with a shot he didn't see.
I recall Wilson dropping Burke, Bourne, O'Reilly, Plett, (other than Hilworth and Babych) off the top of my head but again he landed many fewer punches than did Probert (per fight). That's my .02 srehm. Impossible to prove , but ..what the hell...that's part of the fun , right?.

[srehm1]

Originally Posted by battleship25

Srehm, Probie landed probably 10 times more punches on his opponents than Wilson. A lot of times Probie didn't even throw his punches properly, sometimes he'd flail and they be arm punches or even slap-like shots using his palms ( ie : Ewen 2 fight) , he clearly got into longer better fights - but Probie landed so many punches on so many guys without ever even bothering them. So out of the huge amount of fights he had relatively few tko/kos. Much like Twist & JK has very few KO/TKO it's because they landed a small amount of punches per fight..but when they did ...look out they did damage. Again Wilson with only an edge in power, not dramatic, but an edge IMO when he landed he seemed to do a little more damage. The Hilworth punch was more technique and timing rather than brute force, and the Babych fight was short destructive , educated punches. When I think of Probert unloading at will vs Kimble without hurting him and then Cam Russell drops Kimble with one punch, Kimble wasn't the most durable guy. Probie KO's Nylund - not really a KO -as far as being out , but seemed to catch Nylund on the nose with a shot he didn't see.
I recall Wilson dropping Burke, Bourne, O'Reilly, Plett, (other than Hilworth and Babych) off the top of my head but again he landed many fewer punches than did Probert (per fight). That's my .02 srehm. Impossible to prove , but ..what the hell...that's part of the fun , right?.

Of course Wilson didn't need a lot of punches to take out Bourne, babych, Magnuson, Hilworth, burke (smyrke?) &tc. Some world renowned chins right there. The O'Reilly fight-O'Reilly was off balance and doing the copter-more a testament to O'Reilly's poor balance than wilson's power. Plett-I'd also call that a KD and a good name to have in the win column.

Kimble was indeed hurt in that fight. It was an absolute beating and the linesmen had to get in there and save him from probert. Probert beat him good in that one. He stopped punching after Probert started to land and hung on for dear life. Years later, Probert would drop Kimble in a wild fight.

On a similar note-if probert not "hurting" Kimble is a measuring stick to what kind of power he had-what about Wilson-McGill? McGill of course had a great chin and Wilson couldn't drop him-despite hitting him with everything but the kitchen sink. That's fine, no problem there, but no one floored McGill the way Probert did in '91. McGill was a warrior with a great chin who was dropped a scant few times in his career.

Probert dropped a number of great fighters in his career. Wilson-not so much. Wilson never dropped a Fotiu or wensink or jonathan or clark.... Probert dropped (KO/TKO/KD) Brown, Crowder, Domi, Grimson, Curran, Simpson, Parker (how many punches did he need to do that??), Odgers, McGill, Maguire &tc. I guess with that kind of competition, I'm willing to give Probert a pass if he dropped them with more punches in longer fights.

What "great" fighters did Wilson drop in his era? Gillies rd. 2 is too contraversial a fight to be included in my eyes. Plett? is that it?? Ca'mon now.

Good to see some healthy debate on one of my favortie topics. Nice back and forth.

[Costanza]

Battleship, i think you are one of the better posters in the remember when forum, but i have to strongly disagree with some of the things in your last post.

Kimble wasnt durable? He stood there trading bombs with Crowder and Brown and scored kd wins man! Just because Probert didnt drop him doesnt mean he wasnt hurt. He looked out on his feet to me.

Russell caught him on the chin and he went down, it happens. Everybody that fights wide open is gonna get kd'ed now and then.

[battleship25]

Originally Posted by srehm1

Of course Wilson didn't need a lot of punches to take out Bourne, babych, Magnuson, Hilworth, burke (smyrke?) &tc. Some world renowned chins right there. The O'Reilly fight-O'Reilly was off balance and doing the copter-more a testament to O'Reilly's poor balance than wilson's power. Plett-I'd also call that a KD and a good name to have in the win column.

Kimble was indeed hurt in that fight. It was an absolute beating and the linesmen had to get in there and save him from probert. Probert beat him good in that one. He stopped punching after Probert started to land and hung on for dear life. Years later, Probert would drop Kimble in a wild fight.

On a similar note-if probert not "hurting" Kimble is a measuring stick to what kind of power he had-what about Wilson-McGill? McGill of course had a great chin and Wilson couldn't drop him-despite hitting him with everything but the kitchen sink. That's fine, no problem there, but no one floored McGill the way Probert did in '91. McGill was a warrior with a great chin who was dropped a scant few times in his career.

Probert dropped a number of great fighters in his career. Wilson-not so much. Wilson never dropped a Fotiu or wensink or jonathan or clark.... Probert dropped (KO/TKO/KD) Brown, Crowder, Domi, Grimson, Curran, Simpson, Parker (how many punches did he need to do that??), Odgers, McGill, Maguire &tc. I guess with that kind of competition, I'm willing to give Probert a pass if he dropped them with more punches in longer fights.

What "great" fighters did Wilson drop in his era? Gillies rd. 2 is too contraversial a fight to be included in my eyes. Plett? is that it?? Ca'mon now.

Good to see some healthy debate on one of my favortie topics. Nice back and forth.

Excellent rebuttal srhem, I expected no less. I agree the list on Wilson is pretty weak, and yes Probie does have a few good names on his card. However as Probert told me personally..in their fight during the brawl he headbutted McGill because his hands were sore punching McGill's face... it was a VERY long fight with a lot of punches landing according to Probie. The Wilson fight with McGill saw Wilson's punches not landing with full force ( McGill had him tied up pretty well , then Wilson got a little slack and was able to land, but still they were hardly super flush big swings.
Very good points but the reality is Wilson ended 2 careers( Babych played but was never the same fighter) whereas Probert did not end any or severely injured a player the way Wilson did - and Wilson did that in almost 3 times fewer time. Again , not a huge edge in power and I wouldn't disagree with someone who thought it was even- neither guy was a TT or JK..that's for sure. It's speculation but had Wilson been in as many T2T wars with really open fighters ..he'd of had a lot of tko/KOs. That's the beauty of Probie coming up when he did, there were so many gunslingers looking to take down the top gun. In Wilson's time guys were much less interested in a T2T wild war as they did with Probie. Wilson fought in a more controlled manner - he was a much better RING GENERAL than Probie...always looked in control whereas Probie many times seemed off balance or lost ( Ewen 3, Kevin Mac, Plett, Crowder, etc and many more examples. But it's speculation.

Constans, I think my wording was flawed, I wouldn't say he wasn't durable...but he wouldn't be anywhere on my most durable list. I'd have to watch the Crowder and Brown fights again -but I don't recall Kimble getting hit a lot in those fights, or taking huge bombs and coming back- I thought his head was down vs Crowder , I could be wrong , but I'll go watch it right now. Good debate.