as long as old cranky boxing historians are alive a dictating boxing history, Mayweather or Pacquiao could beat the brakes off of Valuev & Klitchko without evening sniffing the GOAT position. It takes decades for these opinions to change... thirty years from now, who really knows?
Silky, I would like my Cheesburger with pickles and onions. This is all speculation until you prove me wrong. To me, you're probably a high school dropout still living at home in your mom's basement. It's tooooooooooooo obvious.
in what kind of ****ery world do we live in when ChicPierce
http://sportsnation.espn.go.com/fans/ChicPierce
passes as a source?
"ChicPierce is a fan of the Arkansas Razorbacks, the St. Louis Cardinals, the Miami Dolphins, the Los Angeles Lakers"
WTF?! I might as well be a fan of the Yankees AND the Redsox.
Yall need to relax on Silky. The only thing he has left is this boxing forum. 8.50 an hour flipping burgers at Mickey D's is no way to live. It's pretty obvious he dodged the whole highschool diploma topic... so let him have his dignity.
Silky, how do we expect to take you seriously with your poor writing skills & high school dropout intelligence? How about you spend more time on that GED than making incoherent arguments about boxing. Get Better.
Why should I argue with you when I know you can't even convince me of having a highschool diploma? What do you know about a bachelors degree? Stop ducking the truth, you can't hide from your own shortcomings.
great points Gambler.
Yeah, there's probably little truth to the rumor, but it does make feel a little bit on the fence about how the two became sudden bed fellows.
If anything, your opinion probably holds more water.
Experience wise, I'd give Clottey the edge. His chin could probably eat Yuri's punches all day. On the other hand, Foreman is still largely a wild card. We don't know too much about how he'd fair against elite competition. We also don't know too much about his chin nor do we know how slick he can be against guys like Clottey.
Some of these idiots are putting pac in the top 25 and i swear they have never seen 90 of the top 100 fighters ever
Eh, old curmudgeon boxing historians have made it part of the culture that most of what's considered the top boxers in history are from a time when having a television was a mark of luxury. Most basketball historians consider George Mikan as one of the greatest basketball players ever... but it's laughable to compare him to a prime Shaq. In the similar sense, I've always found it strange when fighters of the past are thrown on the list more out of respect than out of legit consideration and analysis. How much can we really extract from clips of grainy black and white film of Jack Johnson, Jack Dempsey, and John Sullivan? But back to the quote... I get a little squirmy with the thought of Pac in the top 25..... but he's on his way.
Alexa.com
Boxingscene.com users come from these countries:
* 48.0% United States
* 8.5% Philippines
* 7.3% United Kingdom
* 3.2% South Korea
* 2.7% Canada
* 2.3% Australia
* 2.0% China
* 1.8% Italy
* 1.7% Russia
* 1.7% Germany
* 1.4% India
* 1.2% Saudi Arabia
* 1.1% Ireland
* 1.1% Mexico
* 1.0% Puerto Rico
* 1.0% Japan
* 1.0% Pakistan
* 0.9% Qatar
* 0.8% New Zealand
* 0.7% Poland
* 0.6% Singapore
* 0.6% Netherlands
* 0.5% United Arab Emirates
That's just boxingscene. If you check Google trends, you'd be surprised to see how the search volumes for "boxing" correlate according to region/city/country.
A boxer can spend an entire career focusing on four points of contact. His entire training will solidify in his mind and his body that there are four attacks possible. The points of contact consisting of his two hands and those of his opponent.
This knowledge allows for the boxer to focus in acute areas when considering both offense and defense. Obviously the whole body plays a role in boxing but the hands are the tip of the sword. His mind is conditioned to contemplate the defense and attacks based on those facts.
For a mixed martial artist the spectrum broadens considerably. Where only the hands are employed as weapons in boxing, in MMA there are eight points of contact. Two feet, two knees, two elbows, and two fists.
Multiply that by two and a fighter has eighteen things to consider before throwing a punch. That doesn’t take into consideration the ability to take one down, or complex aspect of submissions.
So where a boxer can focus in a broader spectrum and excel in that area, an MMA fighter must spread his mind thinner, as well as his body and also remain effective based on those aspects.
Those points are the very reason why the two can not be compared. Is it tomayto tomawto, or is it apples and oranges? The latter makes more sense.
- from Todd Jackson's most recent piece.
MMA vs. Boxing is like trying to convince your parents to listen to hiphop when you were younger. There's a big generation gap. If you look at the demographics for each sport, Boxing's got the older crowd while MMA's got the younger crowd. The number one demographic for boxing is people over the age of 50. The UFC doesn't draw particularly well among 35-to-49-year-olds, much less people over the age of 50. With time, the misconceptions of MMA will dissolve and the general audience knowledge about the finer points of the sport (nonce's of BJJ, Muay Thai, etc... / Striking/Clinch/Ground game) will grow. By the time the younger generation takes over, MMA will be viewed quite differently than what the older generation sees as nothing but two drunks in a bar brawling.
"Lookin' like a bitch" ain't the way I'd put it if Cotto loses to Pac. Both these boxers are warriors. You ain't no bitch if you step into that ring, period. If either fighter loses, my respect level for either Pac or Cotto ain't gonna change.
There's a fine difference between the following two statements:
"Quarterback is the most difficult position IN football"
"Quarterback is more difficult to play THAN football"
one of the above statements makes zero sense.
http://www.heartsandminds.org/fotos/MSCAstressedMan.jpg