"no THATS a stupid comment. Getting knocked out by Kaman is one of the reasons he became great. you learn from your losses. every great fighter has had some devastating loss. those losses are what sends them to the top."
Your saying it was a stupid comment and then explain by bringing up something that is totally irrelevant to the comment i made.
Hoost was not in his prime when Kaman beat him.
Kaman was in his prime when he beat Hoost
Yes i fully agree that he learned from his losses and became better because of them. But what exactly does it have to do with Kaman beating him if both guys were in their primes?
how is that totally irrelevant?
Because what you wrote has nothing to do with my comment. What does Hoost learning from his losses have to do with the fact that Kaman was at his best. In his prime when he beat Hoost while Hoost did not reach his best or his prime until Kaman retired.
Thats why i wrote no rules :)
"Hoosts KO losses to a 45 year old Branko Cikatic while Hoost was in his prime puts a dent in his Mr Perfect image."
I personally think Hoost was quite green when he lost to him in 93, I don't know when the other fight happened though.
"I personally think Hoost was quite green when he lost to him in 93, I don't know when the other fight happened though."
The other KO loss was in 94. I dont think Hoost was green but he was not at his best either. But still Branko was over 40 by then. He also never beat any of the other K1 guys at the time either. So that kind of puts a dent into Hoosts otherwise spotless record
yeah, mabye green isn't so much the word, but I can remember watching him in 95 and STILL feeling that he hadn't reached his full potential at that time.
Yeah i understand. I think Hoost in 99 was perfection. You dont get much better than that