What was the “cryptonite” to your favorites?

[srehm1]

Originally Posted by battleship25

Wilson was a one armed bandit ?? Yes. Brown never used his right either ..both one armed bandits . Probert's left was thrown awkwardly and was only used when the right was too busted up or it was tied up.
As far as HW from BW era with few losses...all mentioned had bad losses:

Jonathan TKO/KO to Gillies
Wensink speedbagged by Nystrom, beat up by LP
Playfair with a handful of tko/Ko losses
Fotiu beat up by Jack Mac, shut out by Nystrom, and beat up by Gord Lane
Nystrom dropped by Schoenfeld and badly bloodied by Hutchison
Gillies was beat up by TO(ONCE), and BW , possibly tk'd by Paradise although I 've seen LP and Gillies in people top 5 .

Again these were clear cut losses, some very bad..these didn't happen with Big Behn. Why?? It was his style...he was very strong, very technical, had a great chin, powerful punch, and was a mean warrior. It's a bad combination. It doesn't matter the era , but yes in the tougher era he'd of had more losses but I still think his record would've been slightly better than Probies.

What used to drive me nuts about Probie is how he would jump in and hold onto a guy (Ewen 3 -4, Kevin Mac, Grimson, Crowder,etc) and allow them to pound away( or try) and then open up . Of course this strategy backfired a few times when he couldn't over come the bad start. I asked him point blank about that Ewen 3 fight "Why did you get in close?" He said " I didn't wanna get caught early" . It almost seemed like he had to get mad.. and then start to fight..but clearly the first Ewen fight had an effect on his confidence..but I told him if he didn't put his chin out there ..he'd never been KO'd EVER !! But he loved to use his reach and keep his face away from the other guy..problem with that is chin is wide open .

I agree with Spider' bad losses can't be erased. But had BW had any horrible losses he would've avenged them IMO. It was just near impossible to beat him like that..in any era. BW era was the same era as Playfair and LP had some pretty bad losses

If I was asked who achieved more in their careers fight wise it's obviously Probert, but when asked who the best pure fighter I say Behn Wilson. It's all hypothetical but that's how I see it.

Great post here battleship and good to see you posting more often. We need ya!

I did think Wilson was a one armed bandit. He only threw rights=one armed bandit. when he did throw a left-the only one I recall-he lost to fotiu because of it. never saw him throw one again. Brown was a lefty and we all know how great pure south paws can be and how much of an advantage it gives them. With right handers-not so much, although wilson's uppercuts and overhands helped him to mix up his attack.

i thought Probert's left could be good at times and agree that he threw it awkward right out of the gate. I still remember him trading lefts with fighters -the gaetz fight, mcgill tko, maguire domi plett, roberge-thought he stung plett with a left a dropped maguire with a flurry of lefts. he used it and it helped take attention off his right.

I think Probert felt he had an advantage in fights that were longer in duration. You'd see some extra determination if he caught a few early. when he got going... look out! I thought he used his reach well and he was more open and on the offense than wilson.

Physically I wouldn't argue Wilson's attributes as you have pointed out. he had good power, good chin could tie you up well strength and balance nice uppercut laden attack. I have no problem agreeing with you that he is a great or even the greatest pure fighter from a physical/ability standpoint.

He had a great career for himself from beginning to end-no clear losses. Probert was champ by the time wilson called it a career-this is while wilson was still playing and was such a great fighter with no losses and never had a drop off in performance! their only fight was a crappy draw-he was there the night probie tuned up cochrane, he was already worried! Probie was a young lion who had already fought as much in his first 3 years as wilson had in his entire career! Wilson playfair fotiu and gillies stood bewildered at this new beast of a fighter coming up the ranks programmed like a t-1000 Terminator-fighting and fighting and fighting. Fight totals were staggering. Fight cards were getting hefty-these once proud legends stood infinitesimally small in comparison! They were surpassed in their own time- replaced- by the very gods of war who would hold sway for nearly twenty years! Wilson playfair fotiu and gillies stood on the ice, leaning on their sticks watching the carnage taking place before them. Once they were the very greats who patrolled this league-they still had that fire. It was deeper than it once was but it was still there. "Should we get into this?" Fotiu asked, balling up his fists. An eery silence befell these 4 horseman of a bygone apocolypse. "No," Wilson said. "These guys aren't fukkin' around!"

Excellent thoughts and debate guys.

[spiderarms]

Originally Posted by BaddaBing Badda Boom

I would call the Wilson/Semenko affair a non-fight- Obviously Semenko was hurting - you give the same grace to Wilson when he engaged Bob Probert

When the mitts come off your fair game. You gotta call a win-loss-draw.
This is what they would expect and want. I give Wilson the edge in this one with Semenko.
It wasn't going to make or break either one's career.

[spiderarms]

Originally Posted by battleship25

Wilson was a one armed bandit ?? Yes. Brown never used his right either ..both one armed bandits . Probert's left was thrown awkwardly and was only used when the right was too busted up or it was tied up.
As far as HW from BW era with few losses...all mentioned had bad losses:

Jonathan TKO/KO to Gillies
Wensink speedbagged by Nystrom, beat up by LP
Playfair with a handful of tko/Ko losses
Fotiu beat up by Jack Mac, shut out by Nystrom, and beat up by Gord Lane
Nystrom dropped by Schoenfeld and badly bloodied by Hutchison
Gillies was beat up by TO(ONCE), and BW , possibly tk'd by Paradise although I 've seen LP and Gillies in people top 5 .

Again these were clear cut losses, some very bad..these didn't happen with Big Behn. Why?? It was his style...he was very strong, very technical, had a great chin, powerful punch, and was a mean warrior. It's a bad combination. It doesn't matter the era , but yes in the tougher era he'd of had more losses but I still think his record would've been slightly better than Probies.

What used to drive me nuts about Probie is how he would jump in and hold onto a guy (Ewen 3 -4, Kevin Mac, Grimson, Crowder,etc) and allow them to pound away( or try) and then open up . Of course this strategy backfired a few times when he couldn't over come the bad start. I asked him point blank about that Ewen 3 fight "Why did you get in close?" He said " I didn't wanna get caught early" . It almost seemed like he had to get mad.. and then start to fight..but clearly the first Ewen fight had an effect on his confidence..but I told him if he didn't put his chin out there ..he'd never been KO'd EVER !! But he loved to use his reach and keep his face away from the other guy..problem with that is chin is wide open .

I agree with Spider' bad losses can't be erased. But had BW had any horrible losses he would've avenged them IMO. It was just near impossible to beat him like that..in any era. BW era was the same era as Playfair and LP had some pretty bad losses

If I was asked who achieved more in their careers fight wise it's obviously Probert, but when asked who the best pure fighter I say Behn Wilson. It's all hypothetical but that's how I see it.

Right on the money with your comments, your a mind reader!

I might also add that Wensink had an additonal tough loss to Harvey Bennet (didn't throw a punch-14 unanswered punches, just hugged)

Nick Fotiu lost to Jack Mac twice, one closer than the other and also to Joe Paterson, though Paterson did pull his hair but still landed a barrage of punches.

Jonathan loss to Gillies was a defining moment in his ranking for me. It was not pretty and as I've mentioned before, Jonathan was one of my all-time favorites. The guy loved to fight and I loved the way he switched hands.

Nystrom didn't fair to well with Cochrane either, especially in one of their fights.

Gillies lost two fights to O'Reilly, clearly. Danny Gare landed pretty well with uppercuts (Gillies was dropping his head again) that was a close decision to Gare. He also lost one late in his career to Lyndon Byers with Buffalo.

With regards to Behn Wilson, I couldn't agree more. His skill would will out in any ERA, he had no bad loses and never would have. His defense was too good, he had a great chin and his strength was very underated. One thing that is not discussed enough is his punching power. The man hit like a tank. Ask Terry O'Reily, Willi Plett, John Hilworth (One of the most devestating knockouts ever)

As far as being a "one armed bandit", it was the best arm in hockey for fighting. You got it in two flavors and they both hurt big time. He used his left for balance and posturing his opponents but nobody could stop that right hand even if they knew it was coming. If he had played another 7 years like Probert, I'm sure he would have had a few more loses, none bad though and I don't think he would have had as many fights as Probert had because he wasn't playing with as much of an edge as Probert. I think he would have ended up with maybe 200 career fights.

With regards to Probert, yes he was a slow starter and this would have hurt him against Wilson. He tried to get the jersey off to get his arms loose, no button down. If that jaw was out there with Wilson, he was going to the moon with a right uppercut.

In both his fights with Dave Brown, it appeared that he didn't want to fight or was trying to draw a penalty. He did this a few times in his career and to be honest, it was the only thing I didn't like about Probert.

I will say this about the "Holy Trinity", only two of them could play in any era because they could really play hockey and no, one of them is not Dave Brown!

[spiderarms]

Originally Posted by srehm1

Semenko gave probert a beating in their first fight?? Sammy mugged probert and was about to get what was coming to him had Gallant not jumped in! Way to spin that one.

Nilan beat probert?? a draw in a sh!t fight!

Wilson beat clark twice?? I had him in a draw in a great fight and an edge to wilson in round two.

I had a huge post all set to go but the site froze on me.

Oh well...

Again spider if you want to downplay how great probert was in his prime-by all means do. If you read my post CORRERCTLY i stated probert avenged his losses in HIS FIRST 9 SEASONS. I was comparing their first 9 years because wilson only played 9 season yet some on this site seem so focused on probert's losses in his 15 or 16th season. So using probert's first 9 seasons, or his entire time with detroit, would level the playing field a bit. probert was obviously past his prime in chicago and you can tell because he would shrug off a loss and at times wouldn't fare well in rematches. he wasn't the SAME fighter, yet some expect him to be this unfailing titan for 16 seasons!

Wilson was a great fighter but like i mentioned before he has always been the junior partner of my holy trinity with the weakest grip on his spot. I think he was a great fighter with a great uppercut although kind of a one armed bandit. I just think his era was weaker or less competitive than probert's. strength of opposition goes a long way with me and probert has wilson beat by far in that regard as well as outdistancing him in other categories as well (in my eyes). He had few losses and this does him credit. again that era was known for having fighters who finshed their careers with few losses as i mentioned before yet you'll never hear jonathan's name as #1 all-time or gillies or fotiu or wensink-all with relatively low fight and loss totals. Both wilson and probert jumped out at me as being geat fighters when i first got into this hobby. they were the first two i really looked at as being the best and i sort of gravitated towards them as favorites. However there was no doubt in my mind who was the better of the two. nice debate. good to hear both sides. what was this thread about again?

With regards to Probert-Semenko, its a NO SPIN zone here. Just mentioned there was an additional fight and yes Semenko was pounding on him, that is a fact. You are correct, it was a jump job but that's what Semenko was all about. I could list many other incidents but I know you know him as well as I do!

I wouldn't argue the Nilan fight or the Clark fight with you, its just a matter of conjecture. I mentioned Nilan because you brought up avenging all fights and YES YOU ARE CORRECT, I should have read your post better even though it was in the wee hours of the morning, you said avenging in the first 9 seasons.

I also hear you on the freezing thing. It has happened to me several times and its frustrating, especially when you want to word things the same way and your writing a war and peace novel.

With regards to Bob Probert, as I've said MANY times, he is one of my all-time favorites. I would never down play his prime. This debate is about two very EXCEPTIONAL fighters. Bob Probert's prime is LEGENDARY. He will always be looked at by me in this light, I regret having to knit pick to make my points against a favorite over a fighter that I don't like. But I guess that's life and I think it important to tell it like it is.

So that being said, LET'S MAKE A DEAL.

I'll forget Bob Probert's last 7 years in the NHL and you forget Behn Wilson's ROOKIE season when he lost to John Wensink and Nick Fotiu.

Sound Good?

Unfortunately that's not the reality of the situation. It didn't happen that way and everything is accountable when you drop the gloves.

But wouldn't it be fair to say judging a ROOKIE's first season is a tough way to go vs a guy who was 30 years old when his career started to decline a bit?

30 years old could be argued to be PRIME, couldn't it? That's how old he was in Chicago. That is when he suffered some big loses not just at the end of his career.

How about the fact that Behn Wilson, right out of the OHL comes in and gives John Wensink and Nick Fotiu all they can handle. That should tell you how really great a fighter he is.

By the way, in Probert's rookie year, he lost 5 fights. He was TKO'd by Ewen, lost twice to Craig Berube, lost to Wendel Clark and lost badly to Curt Fraser.

I do agree with you fair or not, Probert was put up on a huge pedestal and was expected to be invinceable. When you say everyone has him at number one all-time, how many of these posters have watched ALL of his videos? How many have watched ALL of Behn Wilson's? I know you, B25 and I have. But how many posters just watch the ones that are hyped and entertaining or just the ones that others refer them too?

I brought up the common opponents to show Wilson's adaptability to the same competition that Probert had in a different ERA. That's because you keep on stressing a better card for Probert.

Now I'm going to ask you a few of questions:

Do you think Behn Wilson would have been TKO'd by Dave Morrisette?
Do you think Behn Wilson would have been TKO'd by Chris Tamer?
Do you think Behn Wilson would have been TKO'd by Todd Ewen?

My answer to that is NO. Wilson was known for his chin and defense.

In a Ten fight series, Wilson wins. He is my Number#1 All-Time Fighter.

[srehm1]

Originally Posted by spiderarms

With regards to Probert-Semenko, its a NO SPIN zone here. Just mentioned there was an additional fight and yes Semenko was pounding on him, that is a fact. You are correct, it was a jump job but that's what Semenko was all about. I could list many other incidents but I know you know him as well as I do!

I wouldn't argue the Nilan fight or the Clark fight with you, its just a matter of conjecture. I mentioned Nilan because you brought up avenging all fights and YES YOU ARE CORRECT, I should have read your post better even though it was in the wee hours of the morning, you said avenging in the first 9 seasons.

I also hear you on the freezing thing. It has happened to me several times and its frustrating, especially when you want to word things the same way and your writing a war and peace novel.

With regards to Bob Probert, as I've said MANY times, he is one of my all-time favorites. I would never down play his prime. This debate is about two very EXCEPTIONAL fighters. Bob Probert's prime is LEGENDARY. He will always be looked at by me in this light, I regret having to knit pick to make my points against a favorite over a fighter that I don't like. But I guess that's life and I think it important to tell it like it is.

So that being said, LET'S MAKE A DEAL.

I'll forget Bob Probert's last 7 years in the NHL and you forget Behn Wilson's ROOKIE season when he lost to John Wensink and Nick Fotiu.

Sound Good?

Unfortunately that's not the reality of the situation. It didn't happen that way and everything is accountable when you drop the gloves.

But wouldn't it be fair to say judging a ROOKIE's first season is a tough way to go vs a guy who was 30 years old when his career started to decline a bit?

30 years old could be argued to be PRIME, couldn't it? That's how old he was in Chicago. That is when he suffered some big loses not just at the end of his career.

How about the fact that Behn Wilson, right out of the OHL comes in and gives John Wensink and Nick Fotiu all they can handle. That should tell you how really great a fighter he is.

By the way, in Probert's rookie year, he lost 5 fights. He was TKO'd by Ewen, lost twice to Craig Berube, lost to Wendel Clark and lost badly to Curt Fraser.

I do agree with you fair or not, Probert was put up on a huge pedestal and was expected to be invinceable. When you say everyone has him at number one all-time, how many of these posters have watched ALL of his videos? How many have watched ALL of Behn Wilson's? I know you, B25 and I have. But how many posters just watch the ones that are hyped and entertaining or just the ones that others refer them too?

I brought up the common opponents to show Wilson's adaptability to the same competition that Probert had in a different ERA. That's because you keep on stressing a better card for Probert.

Now I'm going to ask you a few of questions:

Do you think Behn Wilson would have been TKO'd by Dave Morrisette?
Do you think Behn Wilson would have been TKO'd by Chris Tamer?
Do you think Behn Wilson would have been TKO'd by Todd Ewen?

My answer to that is NO. Wilson was known for his chin and defense.

In a Ten fight series, Wilson wins. He is my Number#1 All-Time Fighter.

You can tell a fighters prime by watching the fights. Sometimes they start off slow like grimson or ray and sometimes they're great right off the bat like mccarthy or laraque. Age doesn't factor in as far as being a prime fighter goes. we can argue about the average age of fighters in their primes but it's the fights that count and how well they perform that tell me if a fighters is in his prime. Probert was in his prime from about 87-94 or so. He missed a whole year in 94-95 then came back in 95-96 and you could just tell that he was slowing down and not the same fighter.

It's funny but when people compare fighters from today and yesterday-probert always seems to be the measuring stick. It isn't behn wilson. it isn't gillies or fotiu. interesting.

I also remember you a few years back saying probert was your #1 all-time fighter, not wilson. what has changed spider?

I'm not sure what you mean by probert losing 5 fights as a rookie? I don't recall him losing any fights that year.

This idea that wilson wouldn't get knocked out by so and so is just speculation on your part. He may have had he played more than 9 years and had more than 98 fights in an era of player -first types. just speculation.

I have seen some very knowledgable people on this site make cases for probert being #1 all-time. these are people who have SEEN the fights and watched the video. lets not try to insult their intelligence by making some claim that they haven't seen all the fights and only watch the probert wins. i think this is a very telling statement by you. I have great respect for the knowledge of the people in this forum and would never make a generalization like that. i could easily say all those who have wilson at #1 probably stopped watching fights in 1988 and have never updated their all time lists and judge probie off what he did as a grizzled veteran in his 14th 15th or 16th season. I would never do that becacuse i respect the posters who come on this forum and drop gold on an almost daily basis. I see some of your fight calls on probie fights and I wonder if you have actually seen them. semenko gave probert a beating? did you watch the fight spider? nilan beat probert? on dyg maybe. lost 5 fights in his rookie year? never happened. he lost to fraser, berube, ewen-in his second year. i think some of those guys who have probie ahead of wilson all-time that haven't seen all the fights would have known that too.

[spiderarms]

Originally Posted by srehm1

You can tell a fighters prime by watching the fights. Sometimes they start off slow like grimson or ray and sometimes they're great right off the bat like mccarthy or laraque. Age doesn't factor in as far as being a prime fighter goes. we can argue about the average age of fighters in their primes but it's the fights that count and how well they perform that tell me if a fighters is in his prime. Probert was in his prime from about 87-94 or so. He missed a whole year in 94-95 then came back in 95-96 and you could just tell that he was slowing down and not the same fighter.

It's funny but when people compare fighters from today and yesterday-probert always seems to be the measuring stick. It isn't behn wilson. it isn't gillies or fotiu. interesting.

I also remember you a few years back saying probert was your #1 all-time fighter, not wilson. what has changed spider?

I'm not sure what you mean by probert losing 5 fights as a rookie? I don't recall him losing any fights that year.

This idea that wilson wouldn't get knocked out by so and so is just speculation on your part. He may have had he played more than 9 years and had more than 98 fights in an era of player -first types. just speculation.

I have seen some very knowledgable people on this site make cases for probert being #1 all-time. these are people who have SEEN the fights and watched the video. lets not try to insult their intelligence by making some claim that they haven't seen all the fights and only watch the probert wins. i think this is a very telling statement by you. I have great respect for the knowledge of the people in this forum and would never make a generalization like that. i could easily say all those who have wilson at #1 probably stopped watching fights in 1988 and have never updated their all time lists and judge probie off what he did as a grizzled veteran in his 14th 15th or 16th season. I would never do that becacuse i respect the posters who come on this forum and drop gold on an almost daily basis. I see some of your fight calls on probie fights and I wonder if you have actually seen them. semenko gave probert a beating? did you watch the fight spider? nilan beat probert? on dyg maybe. lost 5 fights in his rookie year? never happened. he lost to fraser, berube, ewen-in his second year. i think some of those guys who have probie ahead of wilson all-time that haven't seen all the fights would have known that too.

Let's address each one of your comments one by one, something you have not done on all my previous posts.

Prime or not, you have to account for his ENTIRE career when rating him. You clearly do not want to do that. That's your call but I don't agree with you, AGAIN.

People compare Probert as a measuring stick when comparing other fighters?
Of course they do, he was a great fighter, the most popular and well known ever in the NHL. And your point is what? Because he is the most popular fighter on this website I should make him the best fighter? Wrong.

If you READ my post from SIX years ago, it clearly states that, when combined with ENFORCING, which Probert was one of the best, if not the best. But if you READ further, I said in the same post that WILSON would beat him one on one and is a BETTER PURE FIGHTER. NO SPIN NECESSARY.

As you know, Probert fought over 340 fights, that means there is no video on over 60 of his fights. Some day we may actual get to see everything on him and many others including Behn Wilson. Do you think you will be open minded enough to change your mind if something there that doesn't fit your criteria? I know I would if it involves Wilson!

Probert lost FIVE fights as a rookie. His first FULL season was 86-87. The previous year he was up and down from the minors. I do not consider that his first season. That was the year he was TKO'd by Ewen, lost badly to Fraser, lost twice to Berube and once to Clark. That fight with Clark put Wendel on the map by the way.

As far as speculation goes, you seem to do alot of it. You want to ignore 7 years of a fighters career, not talk about Probert's bad loses, and project how well or not Wilson would do in a "better" era with a "better" fight card. What's good for the goose...........

Considering that "I'm one of the posters on this site", let me speak for myself.

I'm not INSULTING anyone's opinion on here, including you, even though I disagree with you on the topic at hand.

Everyone has the right to pick and choose who is the all-time best fighter. Some people have very limited time schedules, such as myself. Would I like to post everyday, yes. Would I like to look at video all the time as its available, yes. But sometimes its not possible and sometimes word of mouth is used.

We all have lives outside of HF.com, that's just the way it is and it works that way in other walks of life as well. Sometimes we TRUST other people's opinions because they've earned the trust in the past.

I have the utmost respect for the posters on this site and always have and that's why I'm on here and I don't appreciate my character being challenged just because I don't agree with you.

So your questioning me on what I've seen? I suggest you look at the tapes AGAIN. Semenko wasn't pounding on Probert, fair or not? Why was Gallant jumping in then?

I stopped watching fights after 1988? Why because I don't agree with you?
Have you watched fights before 1988? I have watched and gone to games live in ALL eras that are being discussed.

I'm judging Probert on his ENTIRE 16 season career, NOT 9 seasons, sorry.

Count me in the MINORITY that Behn Wilson is the best fighter!

[spiderarms]

Originally Posted by srehm1

You can tell a fighters prime by watching the fights. Sometimes they start off slow like grimson or ray and sometimes they're great right off the bat like mccarthy or laraque. Age doesn't factor in as far as being a prime fighter goes. we can argue about the average age of fighters in their primes but it's the fights that count and how well they perform that tell me if a fighters is in his prime. Probert was in his prime from about 87-94 or so. He missed a whole year in 94-95 then came back in 95-96 and you could just tell that he was slowing down and not the same fighter.

It's funny but when people compare fighters from today and yesterday-probert always seems to be the measuring stick. It isn't behn wilson. it isn't gillies or fotiu. interesting.

I also remember you a few years back saying probert was your #1 all-time fighter, not wilson. what has changed spider?

I'm not sure what you mean by probert losing 5 fights as a rookie? I don't recall him losing any fights that year.

This idea that wilson wouldn't get knocked out by so and so is just speculation on your part. He may have had he played more than 9 years and had more than 98 fights in an era of player -first types. just speculation.

I have seen some very knowledgable people on this site make cases for probert being #1 all-time. these are people who have SEEN the fights and watched the video. lets not try to insult their intelligence by making some claim that they haven't seen all the fights and only watch the probert wins. i think this is a very telling statement by you. I have great respect for the knowledge of the people in this forum and would never make a generalization like that. i could easily say all those who have wilson at #1 probably stopped watching fights in 1988 and have never updated their all time lists and judge probie off what he did as a grizzled veteran in his 14th 15th or 16th season. I would never do that becacuse i respect the posters who come on this forum and drop gold on an almost daily basis. I see some of your fight calls on probie fights and I wonder if you have actually seen them. semenko gave probert a beating? did you watch the fight spider? nilan beat probert? on dyg maybe. lost 5 fights in his rookie year? never happened. he lost to fraser, berube, ewen-in his second year. i think some of those guys who have probie ahead of wilson all-time that haven't seen all the fights would have known that too.

Let's address each one of your comments one by one, something you have not done on all my previous posts.

Prime or not, you have to account for his ENTIRE career when rating him. You clearly do not want to do that. That's your call but I don't agree with you, AGAIN.

People compare Probert as a measuring stick when comparing other fighters?
Of course they do, he was a great fighter, the most popular and well known ever in the NHL. And your point is what? Because he is the most popular fighter on this website I should make him the best fighter? Wrong.

If you READ my post from SIX years ago, it clearly states that, when combined with ENFORCING, which Probert was one of the best, if not the best. But if you READ further, I said in the same post that WILSON would be beat him one on one and is a BETTER PURE FIGHTER. NO SPIN NECESSARY.

As you know, Probert fought over 340 fights, that means there is no video on over 60 of his fights. Some day we may actual get to see everything on him and many others including Behn Wilson. Do you think you will be open minded enough to change your mind if something there that doesn't fit your criteria? I know I would if it involves Wilson!

Probert lost FIVE fights as a rookie. His first FULL season was 86-87. The previous year he was up and down from the minors. I do not consider that his first season. That was the year he was TKO'd by Ewen, lost badly to Fraser, lost twice to Berube and once to Clark. That fight with Clark put Wendel on the map by the way.

As far as speculation goes, you seem to do alot of it. You want to ignore 7 years of a fighters career, not talk about Probert's bad loses, and project how well or not Wilson would do in a "better" era with a "better" fight card. What's good for the goose...........

Considering that "I'm one of the posters on this site", let me speak for myself.

I'm not INSULTING anyone's opinion on here, including you, even though I disagree with you on the topic at hand.

Everyone has the right to pick and choose who is the all-time best fighter. Some people have very limited time schedules, such as myself. Would I like to post everyday, yes. Would I like to look at video all the time as its available, yes. But sometimes its not possible and sometimes word of mouth is used.

We all have lives outside of HF.com, that's just the way it is and it works that way in other walks of life as well. Sometimes we TRUST other people's opinions because they've earned the trust in the past.

I have the utmost respect for the posters on this site and always have and that's why I'm on here and I don't appreciate my character being challenged just because I don't agree with you.

So your questioning me on what I've seen? I suggest you look at the tapes AGAIN. Semenko wasn't pounding on Probert, fair or not? Why was Gallant jumping in then?

I stopped watching fights after 1988? Why because I don't agree with you?
Have you watched fights before 1988? I have watched and gone to games live in ALL eras that are being discussed.

I'm judging Probert on his ENTIRE 16 season career, NOT 9 seasons, sorry.

Count me in the MINORITY that Behn Wilson is the best fighter!

[srehm1]

Originally Posted by spiderarms

Let's address each one of your comments one by one, something you have not done on all my previous posts.

I tried to but the site froze on me in that other post. I'm not a technical savvy guy with the pc so I have to break it down like this.

Prime or not you have to account for his ENTIRE career when rating him. You clearly do not want to do that. That's your call but I don't agree with you, AGAIN.

People compare Probert as a measuring stick when comparing other fighters?
Of course they do, he was a great fighter, the most popular and well known ever in the NHL. And your point is what? Because he is the most popular fighter on this website I should make him the best fighter? Wrong.

I just pointed out that most people make comparisons to probert and use him as the measuring stick. I very rarely see that with wilson. if at all.

If you READ my post from SIX years ago, it clearly states that when combined with ENFORCING, which Probert was one of the best, if not the best.
But if you READ further, I said in the same post that WILSON would be beat him one on one and is a BETTER PURE FIGHTER. NO SPIN NECESSARY.

I saw a post where you called probert the #1 fighter of all-time. There is no spin there. i will post the link if you want. no big deal but you stated it.

As you know, Probert fought over 340 fights, that means there is no video on over 60 of his fights. Some day we may actual get to see everything on him and many others including Behn Wilson. Do you think you will be open minded enough to change your mind if something there that doesn't fit your criteria? I know I would if it involves Wilson!

you must be counting his juniors and AHL fights then. He didn't have 340 fights in the NHL.

Probert lost FIVE fights as a rookie. His first FULL season was 86-87. The previous year he was up and down from the minors. I do not consider that his first season. That was the year he was TKO'd by Ewen, lost badly to Fraser, lost twice to Berube and once to Clark. That fight with Clark put Wendel on the map by the way.

His rookie year was 85-86-he qualified as a rookie that year. You never stated anything about 'first full season' you said rookie year. that would be 85-86. it wasn't a full season but it counts towards him being a rookie that year. I know it's semantics but lets get our facts straight. you're entitled to your own opinion but not your own facts.

As far as speculation goes, you seem to do alot of it. You want to ignore 7 years of a fighters career, not talk about Probert's bad loses, and project how well or not Wilson would do in a "better" era with a "better" fight card. What's good for the goose...........

You said that wilson would have uppercutted probert to the moon and that he would never get tko's by guys he never fought. that is the defenition of the word specualtion my friend.

Considering that "I'm one of the posters on this site", let me speak for myself.

I'm not INSULTING anyone's opinion on here, including you even though I disagree with you on the topic at hand.

Everyone has the right to pick and choose who is the all-time best fighter. Some people have very limited time schedules, such as myself. Would I like to post everyday, yes. Would I like to look at video all the time as its available, yes. But sometimes its not possible and sometimes word of mouth is used.

We all have lives outside of HF.com, that's just the way it is and it works that way in other walks of life as well. Sometimes we TRUST other people's opinions because they've earned the trust in the past.

Interesting since you tried to say that people who have probert as #1 all-time haven't seen all of his fights and are judging him based on fights cherry picked by his fans. I simply stated the same could be true of wilson fans who haven't updated their all-time lists since 1988 and have stopped watching fights entirely-yet still make claims that wilson is #1 all-time.

I have the utmost respect for the posters on this site and always have and that's why I'm on here and I don't appreciate my character being challenged just because I don't agree with you.

I'm not challenging your character. i don't know you personally at all. However making a broad generalization like that is insulting to the people who do say probert is #1 all-time. people who have seen all the fights and have the knowledge to make those claims. these people aren't the kind that just say "yay probie is #1 all-time because i saw him beat up a guy on a video once." that's the only thing I really took issue with. Again, it's not like you said that about wilson fans who simply don't watch the fights and have a top-10 all time list from 1985. those types could be just as guilty but i would never make such a generalization like that. i also wouldn't make claims that probert would get uppercutted to the moon by wilson or that wilson would never get dropped by fighters he never fought. it's' not like I'm claiming probert would smoke wilson or beat him in a 10 fight series easily or anything like that.

So your questioning me on what I've seen? I suggest you look at the tapes AGAIN. Semenko wasn't pounding on Probert, fair or not? Why was Gallant jumping in then?

Because semenko jumped him and started throwing punches at him when he wasn't even looking at him. gallant also jumped when probert was coming back in that one. total mugging by sammy in that one. when it was a fair fight probie smoked him. it's like me saying baxter tko'd wilson when we all know it was a total suckershot. if that's your criteria than wilson does have a clear loss on his record...and it was too paul baxter WOW.

I stopped watching fights after 1988? Why because I don't agree with you?
Have you watched fights before 1988? I have watched and gone to games live in ALL eras that are being discussed.

I did not say you stopped watching fights after 1988. maybe you did-I don't know. you said that people are going along with this idea that probert is #1 all-time based off watching a few highlight fights of his and not seeing the entirety of his career. I was just remarking that the same thing could be true for wilson fans who stopped watching fights altogether and still rank him that high. I wasn't directing it at you specifically. I'm not sure if it does or does not apply. I was making a point...

I'm judging Probert on his ENTIRE 16 season career, NOT 9 seasons, sorry.

Count me in the MINORITY that Behn Wilson is the best fighter!

ok, no problem but please be open to different points of view. I have watched the fights to make my claims. i have watched the fights of almost every fighter we discuss here in RW. From orr/cashman to mcgrattan and everything in between as well as most of the great minor league fighters available on video as well. I have watched fights before 1988 haha. You can look at my collection in the tape trade thread. I'm not some johnny youtuber who watches a 30 second youtube video or gets his info from dyg and claim i'm knowledgable.

My replies are bolded. i hope this works this time. We can agree to disagree here spider. I'm not taking shots at you but i had to speak up about some of your claims and what i saw as pure speculation on your part. We are really going nowhere here anyway. We have said all that needs to be said.

[srehm1]

I wonder how Wilson would have fared had he stayed in the league for 16 seasons. Imagine Wilson taking on some of the great fighters who came along during or just after he had retired? imagine him against John Kordic? A machine gun lefty with a nice little crossover. How about Tim Hunter who was the Kryptonite to all one armed bandits with his crossover style. Imagine an old grizzled veteran wilson taking on a young Chris Simon? Simon was the legend KILLER!

So what if Wilson had a bad back for most of these fights. tough sh!t!

How about Wilson fighting a 1988-91 version of Dave brown? I'm sure this would have been a true test for sure.

How about Wilson dropping the gloves with Jim Mckenzie with his ability to swtich hands and that good handspeed. a matchup nightmare for anyone.

How about a young lion like Sandy Mccarthy taking on an older, slowly breaking down Wilson at the end of his career? That would have been interesting for sure.

Wilson vs..... Tie Domi? Domi with his two fisted style and low center of gravity. instant comparisons can be made to a Stan Jonathan who gave Wilson trouble as well.

How about seeing Wilson take on a prime time roid raged Twist? Wilson's career would have been winding down when twist was entering his prime.twist would have relished an opportunity to take on a great like wilson, long in the tooth or not.

How would Wilson have fared against a speed merchant like berube or the southpaw stylings of Gord Donnelly? or even a prime version of mcsorley-not the pittsburgh young gun version.

Some interesting matchups here!

[srehm1]

Gotta run, guys! Nice debate. Happy Thanksgiving! Catch ya later...

[spiderarms]

Originally Posted by srehm1

I wonder how Wilson would have fared had he stayed in the league for 16 seasons. Imagine Wilson taking on some of the great fighters who came along during or just after he had retired? imagine him against John Kordic? A machine gun lefty with a nice little crossover. How about Tim Hunter who was the Kryptonite to all one armed bandits with his crossover style. Imagine an old grizzled veteran wilson taking on a young Chris Simon? Simon was the legend KILLER!

So what if Wilson had a bad back for most of these fights. tough sh!t!

How about Wilson fighting a 1988-91 version of Dave brown? I'm sure this would have been a true test for sure.

How about Wilson dropping the gloves with Jim Mckenzie with his ability to swtich hands and that good handspeed. a matchup nightmare for anyone.

How about a young lion like Sandy Mccarthy taking on an older, slowly breaking down Wilson at the end of his career? That would have been interesting for sure.

Wilson vs..... Tie Domi? Domi with his two fisted style and low center of gravity. instant comparisons can be made to a Stan Jonathan who gave Wilson trouble as well.

How about seeing Wilson take on a prime time roid raged Twist? Wilson's career would have been winding down when twist was entering his prime.twist would have relished an opportunity to take on a great like wilson, long in the tooth or not.

How would Wilson have fared against a speed merchant like berube or the southpaw stylings of Gord Donnelly? or even a prime version of mcsorley-not the pittsburgh young gun version.

Some interesting matchups here!

No problem picking a winner in anyone of these matchups. It would be Behn Wilson because he was the best pure fighter in the NHL and like you said, he could fight in any ERA.

[spiderarms]

Originally Posted by srehm1

My replies are bolded. i hope this works this time. We can agree to disagree here spider. I'm not taking shots at you but i had to speak up about some of your claims and what i saw as pure speculation on your part. We are really going nowhere here anyway. We have said all that needs to be said.

WE DON'T AGREE!!!!!

By the way, are you sure you're not a DETRIOT born and raised guy?

[BaddaBing Badda Boom]

Originally Posted by spiderarms

No problem picking a winner in anyone of these matchups. It would be Behn Wilson because he was the best pure fighter in the NHL and like you said, he could fight in any ERA.

Gotta disagree - either you are being woefully ignorant, conspicuously omitting facts, or neeed to adjust your Black and Orange Behn Wilson glasses.
I will give you this: that a Behn Wilson w/o a bad back automatically makes the aforementioned matches a push from a betting stand-point. However, you factor in his loss of mobility and pain, not to mention his age, and you pit him against a Grimson, Parker, Moose Johnson, Laraque, McCarthy, crazy a** Gaetz, McIntyre, Simon, Brown, two fisted guys Domi, McKenzie, etc - this is an entirely different kettle of fish we have here

[BaddaBing Badda Boom]

Originally Posted by spiderarms

No problem picking a winner in anyone of these matchups. It would be Behn Wilson because he was the best pure fighter in the NHL and like you said, he could fight in any ERA.

These are all valid points that Srehm has made and to just chalk it up to as automatic for BW is a stretch, isn't it?

[spiderarms]

Everything in life is all about timing!

Fotiu fights Wilson in his ROOKIE year and gets an edge with the last punch in the fight, when we all know, Fotiu couldn't beat Wilson in a Ten fight series as Wilson continued to get better and better over the years. Fotiu never pressed for another fight with Wilson, just yapped at him and didn't force the issue because he knew better, unlike some of our posters.

Chris Simon beats Dave Brown and Bob Probert later in their careers, when we all know, Simon would have been soundly beaten by both in their primes.

BBBB addresses a thread almost 4 months later when EVERYTHING has been clearly stated with nothing more to add.

ITS ALL ABOUT TIMING!