Comments Thread For: Upon Further Review: We All Deserved Better

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

By Lyle Fitzsimmons - An Open Letter to My Readers:

Sometimes, as I tell my wife when I’m finishing up an article… it feels good off the hands.

The salient points come to mind quickly. The supporting phrases are easily built. And by the time the piece is done, it feels as if barely an effort has been made to reach a prescribed word count.

Those are the days when this job is just about the best thing in the world.

And then there are other days.

When the ideas don’t come. When the logistics aren’t right. And when every single word – let alone phrases, sentences or paragraphs – feels roughly akin to pushing the family car uphill in the rain.

Those are the days when I tell myself that factory work wouldn’t be so bad.

Not surprisingly, the readers on those days tend to endorse my alternate employment as well.

Upon review, I can’t argue that the intro to last week’s piece was representative of the latter scenario, not the former.

In my rush to punctuate an argument that Arturo Gatti is a flawed inductee to the hall of fame in Canastota – a viewpoint I feel no shame in having, by the way – my selection of words, phrases and sentences were beneath the standard I’d like to believe I’ve set for myself as both a writer and a person. [Click Here To Read More]

[ninerdude90]

You're entitled to your opinion on the HOF and who belongs there, Lyle. But the way you chose to insult the late Arturo Gatti was simply classless. He deserves better than that from you, and so do your readers.

Merry Christmas.

[ROSS CALIFORNIA]

Too boring to read. Didn't capture my attention at all.

[Motofan]

It's all good Lyle. People's passions seem to run high when discussing how to appropriately remember Gatti.

[Null]

Don't worry, bro. Never apologize when you are right or wrong. No retreat, no surrender. You just gotta keep it real, and you kept real with Gatti.

[BennyST]

Sparkman, keeping it 'real' often gets tied in today with simply being an arrogant, ego centric twat. Not that I'm saying Lyle was. You don't have to be disrespectful to a great champion to 'keep it real'.

I don't Gatti is a HOFer either, but I didn't agree with Lyle's article. Arrogant, usually ignorant, pricks that feel the need to push their moronic overblown opinions on everyone use 'keeping it real' as an excuse to do so.

Luckily Lyle is not the above and recognised that he wasn't keeping it real.

Note: Lyle, I must admit I have to wonder about something. You are willing to put up what is easily among the worst robberies of the year, equal to Rios/Abril, as the Upset of the Year? There was no upset, despite the ridiculous corrupt, inept scoring. Pacquiao, in reality, beat the brakes off Bradley, to the tune of the same score you thought Abril/Rios was. Why recognise one hideous robbery as what it was while perpetuating another just as bad as legit?

Just seems a little off to have one big robbery as Robbery of the Year while using another robbery easily as bad as Upset of the Year. It wasn't just a handful that thought Bradley won. From memory, out of 260 or so press scorers etc, only 8 had it as a draw or Bradley winning. A few had 115/113, quite a few with 116-112. The average score was 117-111, 9-3 and then 118-110.

Instead of buying into one robbery, I don't think a fight that is clearly not even close to an upset, but was in fact, a one sided beating, should be used in that manner. No matter how corrupt the judges were, an upset doesn't result from a fighter easily winning but getting robbed. That's just perpetuating the cycle.

Pac/Bradley was the biggest robbery of the year or a dishonourable mention at least. It was as bad as Rios/Abril but a much higher profile fight. It should never, whatever you think of the fighter involved be perpetuated as a legit score and fight by calling it the Upset of the Year. The only upset was how easily Pacquiao beat a young, prime p4p fighter.

[Null]

Sparkman, keeping it 'real' often gets tied in today with simply being an arrogant, ego centric twat. Not that I'm saying Jake was. You don't have to be disrespectful to a great champion to 'keep it real'.

I don't Gatti is a HOFer either, but I didn't agree with Jakes article. Arrogant, usually ignorant, pricks that feel the need to push their moronic overblown opinions on everyone use 'keeping it real' as an excuse to do so.

Luckily Jake is not the above and recognised that he wasn't keeping it real.

Note: Jake, I must admit I have to wonder about something. You are willing to put up what is easily among the worst robberies of the year, equal to Rios/Abril, as the Upset of the Year? There was no upset, despite the ridiculous corrupt, inept scoring. Pacquiao, in reality, beat the brakes off Bradley, to the tune of the same score you thought Abril/Rios was. Why recognise one hideous robbery as what it was while perpetuating another just as bad as legit?

Just seems a little off to have one big robbery as Robbery of the Year while using another robbery easily as bad as Upset of the Year. It wasn't just a handful that thought Bradley won. From memory, out of 260 or so press scorers etc, only 8 had it as a draw or Bradley winning. A few had 115/113, quite a few with 116-112. The average score was 117-111, 9-3 and then 118-110.

Instead of buying into one robbery, I don't think a fight that is clearly not even close to an upset, but was in fact, a one sided beating, should be used in that manner. No matter how corrupt the judges were, an upset doesn't result from a fighter easily winning but getting robbed. That's just perpetuating the cycle.

Pac/Bradley was the biggest robbery of the year or a dishonourable mention at least. It was as bad as Rios/Abril but a much higher profile fight. It should never, whatever you think of the fighter involved be perpetuated as a legit score and fight by calling it the Upset of the Year. The only upset was how easily Pacquiao beat a young, prime p4p fighter.

Damn, bro. Good Post. I'm just gonna keep it real, though. I didn't even read his other article. I don't know how bad he tore into Gatti. I don't think he is hall of fame worthy, though. I'm just bored. I was trying to offer some words of encouragement, since he feels bad for what he did. No biggie, though.

[BattlingNelson]

Sparkman, keeping it 'real' often gets tied in today with simply being an arrogant, ego centric twat. Not that I'm saying Jake was. You don't have to be disrespectful to a great champion to 'keep it real'.

I don't Gatti is a HOFer either, but I didn't agree with Jakes article. Arrogant, usually ignorant, pricks that feel the need to push their moronic overblown opinions on everyone use 'keeping it real' as an excuse to do so.

Luckily Jake is not the above and recognised that he wasn't keeping it real.

Note: Jake, I must admit I have to wonder about something. You are willing to put up what is easily among the worst robberies of the year, equal to Rios/Abril, as the Upset of the Year? There was no upset, despite the ridiculous corrupt, inept scoring. Pacquiao, in reality, beat the brakes off Bradley, to the tune of the same score you thought Abril/Rios was. Why recognise one hideous robbery as what it was while perpetuating another just as bad as legit?

Just seems a little off to have one big robbery as Robbery of the Year while using another robbery easily as bad as Upset of the Year. It wasn't just a handful that thought Bradley won. From memory, out of 260 or so press scorers etc, only 8 had it as a draw or Bradley winning. A few had 115/113, quite a few with 116-112. The average score was 117-111, 9-3 and then 118-110.

Instead of buying into one robbery, I don't think a fight that is clearly not even close to an upset, but was in fact, a one sided beating, should be used in that manner. No matter how corrupt the judges were, an upset doesn't result from a fighter easily winning but getting robbed. That's just perpetuating the cycle.

Pac/Bradley was the biggest robbery of the year or a dishonourable mention at least. It was as bad as Rios/Abril but a much higher profile fight. It should never, whatever you think of the fighter involved be perpetuated as a legit score and fight by calling it the Upset of the Year. The only upset was how easily Pacquiao beat a young, prime p4p fighter.

Hard not to agree with everything there if only one could substitute Jake for Lyle.

[JakeNDaBox]

Sparkman, keeping it 'real' often gets tied in today with simply being an arrogant, ego centric twat. Not that I'm saying Jake was. You don't have to be disrespectful to a great champion to 'keep it real'.

I don't Gatti is a HOFer either, but I didn't agree with Jakes article. Arrogant, usually ignorant, pricks that feel the need to push their moronic overblown opinions on everyone use 'keeping it real' as an excuse to do so.

Luckily Jake is not the above and recognised that he wasn't keeping it real.

Note: Jake, I must admit I have to wonder about something. You are willing to put up what is easily among the worst robberies of the year, equal to Rios/Abril, as the Upset of the Year? There was no upset, despite the ridiculous corrupt, inept scoring. Pacquiao, in reality, beat the brakes off Bradley, to the tune of the same score you thought Abril/Rios was. Why recognise one hideous robbery as what it was while perpetuating another just as bad as legit?

Just seems a little off to have one big robbery as Robbery of the Year while using another robbery easily as bad as Upset of the Year. It wasn't just a handful that thought Bradley won. From memory, out of 260 or so press scorers etc, only 8 had it as a draw or Bradley winning. A few had 115/113, quite a few with 116-112. The average score was 117-111, 9-3 and then 118-110.

Instead of buying into one robbery, I don't think a fight that is clearly not even close to an upset, but was in fact, a one sided beating, should be used in that manner. No matter how corrupt the judges were, an upset doesn't result from a fighter easily winning but getting robbed. That's just perpetuating the cycle.

Pac/Bradley was the biggest robbery of the year or a dishonourable mention at least. It was as bad as Rios/Abril but a much higher profile fight. It should never, whatever you think of the fighter involved be perpetuated as a legit score and fight by calling it the Upset of the Year. The only upset was how easily Pacquiao beat a young, prime p4p fighter.

Why do you keep mentioning me in this post? I didn't write this article or the one to which you refer from last week.

[Canelo Phresh]

So classy you might be from Classistan. Seriously though, good article.