Boxing myths

[RightCross94]

Simple, Kostya. A great career is worth a lot, of if you're simply talking about peak ability it isn't the end all. Mike Tyson and Jack Dempsey had relatively crappy careers compared to some other greats, but at their best they were better than many fighters with superior overall careers.

but how can you speculate they were better at their peaks than other guys with better careers? they didnt have the quality of opposition to prove that, its easy to look great beating up on bums

[Thread Stealer]

Yes. Wasn't that the direct fight that caused the change?

Not sure really. Flip Homansky was one of the people I believe who led the change (he now wants the old way back) for medical reasons, but "Weightgate" and money might've played a role too.

Same with the change to 12 rounds. It might've been more because networks like CBS could fit 12 rounds and the extras into an hour easier than 15.

[DeepSleep]

Ken Norton having a glass chin is a rather bizarre statement considering his KO losses were too Shavers(One of the Hardest Punchers), Young Foreman(One of the Hardest Punchers) and Cooney(A Extremely Hard Puncher) and early in his career he dropped a fight which is understandable early in a fighters career.

[ßringer]

One that constantly gets on my nerves, is this one.

Bernard Hopkins only beat smaller men.

It's not just in Hopkins' case that this annoys me ; it's that any great fighter who happens to beat an equally great fighter from a lower division, the win is instantly **** because he was "smaller"?

Get the hell out of here with that ****.

Trinidad was a fit at Middleweight. He knocked out a damn good career Middleweight in William Joppy in what? 6 rounds? Joppy you may recall, lasted 12 with Bernard himself - despite Hopkins' best effort to end it early because he had a personal bet of $100,000 with Joppy that he wouldn't last 12 with him.

The Oscar fight was at 156, not 160. A lot of people fail to realize or understand that. It was at a catchweight only 2lbs north of Oscar's most comfortable weight post-147.

Winky Wright, I'll give you. He was blown up as hell, and nowhere near anywhere he was good at. And he still put forth a good effort.

Pavlik was at 170, 4lbs north of the 166 limit in which Kelly beat Jermain in the rematch. A weight Kelly himself said "felt good", and that he "feels stronger". Physically speaking, both Pavlik and Hopkins are equal in terms of reach, and Pavlik is actually taller than Hopkins, with slightly larger shoulders.

A lot of people talk down about fighters who fight a fighter from a lower weight coming up, or what have you.

But I've noticed it's mostly directed at Hopkins around here.

One guy even bashed the hell out of B-Hop for fighting Tito, yet had absolutely no problem with Hagler fighting Duran and Leonard.

I'm not saying those fights weren't legit, they clearly were.

But damn - if you're going to ***** about a particular incident ; ***** about it all across the board.

Don't belittle it when someone you dislike does it and then turn around and justify it when you're favorites have done it.

[Thread Stealer]

The DLH fight was actually contracted for 158, but Hopkins came in 2 lbs. below that at 156, saying he could catch Oscar because he was "light in the ass".

Hopkins, Hagler, and Monzon all get criticism from time to time for beating "smaller men". But that's not all they beat. They also beat some of the top middleweights around (not just fighters who had suddenly risen to 160), and in Hopkins's case, dominating a career-long light heavy.

[KnockoutTheFat]

Not sure really. Flip Homansky was one of the people I believe who led the change (he now wants the old way back) for medical reasons, but "Weightgate" and money might've played a role too.

Same with the change to 12 rounds. It might've been more because networks like CBS could fit 12 rounds and the extras into an hour easier than 15.

I thought Mancini-Kim led to the change from 15 round championship fights to 12 round championship fights. The Spinks-Muhammad proposed rematch should be the one that lead to the weigh-in change I mean that was for the undisputed LHW title and the fight doesn't get postponed, but CANCELED on the day of the fight! That's utterly ridiculous and a ****-ton of money was lost that day

[Thread Stealer]

I thought Mancini-Kim led to the change from 15 round championship fights to 12 round championship fights. The Spinks-Muhammad proposed rematch should be the one that lead to the weigh-in change I mean that was for the undisputed LHW title and the fight doesn't get postponed, but CANCELED on the day of the fight! That's utterly ridiculous and a ****-ton of money was lost that day

Mancini-Kim is said to have to led to the change of both 15 rounds to 12 rounds, and also the weigh-in procedures. Kim lost a lot of weight to make 135 so that was believed to be a reason why he died.

The powers that be may have used the health reasons as an excuse to make both of these changes for financial reasons. Who knows really.

[ßringer]

The DLH fight was actually contracted for 158, but Hopkins came in 2 lbs. below that at 156, saying he could catch Oscar because he was "light in the ass".

Hopkins, Hagler, and Monzon all get criticism from time to time for beating "smaller men". But that's not all they beat. They also beat some of the top middleweights around (not just fighters who had suddenly risen to 160), and in Hopkins's case, dominating a career-long light heavy.

Damn, I thought it was 156. LOL@ "Light in the ass".

The weird thing, as I said, was that this guy discredited every single "standout" name on Hopkins record as being "too small", with Tarver being "weight drained" of course.

But had the balls to say something like "Marvin Hagler was much better, he never picked on small men.".

It left me scratching my head in amazement at the double standard.

And it's not just Hopkins, it's fighters in general. It doesn't even have to be a full weightclass, sometimes it's only a couple pounds difference on fight night, and everybody bitches a fit about it.

As if 5lbs is the difference between life and death when you're talking about Elite fighters.

[Thunder Lips]

The whole concept of a "glass chin" or "strong chin" is actually a myth, the terms weren't meant to be took literal. At any rate, Norton was certainly ill equipped in dealing with big knockout punchers as he folded rather quickly against every one he faced. His crab defense and smothering pressure was excellent at deflecting jabs and frustrating pure boxers but not so effective against big sluggers.



Norton at his best spoiling one of the greatest jabs in history.




Norton unable to stop Conney's barrage.

[Abstraction]

One that constantly gets on my nerves, is this one.



It's not just in Hopkins' case that this annoys me ; it's that any great fighter who happens to beat an equally great fighter from a lower division, the win is instantly **** because he was "smaller"?

Get the hell out of here with that ****.

Trinidad was a fit at Middleweight. He knocked out a damn good career Middleweight in William Joppy in what? 6 rounds? Joppy you may recall, lasted 12 with Bernard himself - despite Hopkins' best effort to end it early because he had a personal bet of $100,000 with Joppy that he wouldn't last 12 with him.

The Oscar fight was at 156, not 160. A lot of people fail to realize or understand that. It was at a catchweight only 2lbs north of Oscar's most comfortable weight post-147.

Winky Wright, I'll give you. He was blown up as hell, and nowhere near anywhere he was good at. And he still put forth a good effort.

Pavlik was at 170, 4lbs north of the 166 limit in which Kelly beat Jermain in the rematch. A weight Kelly himself said "felt good", and that he "feels stronger". Physically speaking, both Pavlik and Hopkins are equal in terms of reach, and Pavlik is actually taller than Hopkins, with slightly larger shoulders.

A lot of people talk down about fighters who fight a fighter from a lower weight coming up, or what have you.

But I've noticed it's mostly directed at Hopkins around here.

One guy even bashed the hell out of B-Hop for fighting Tito, yet had absolutely no problem with Hagler fighting Duran and Leonard.

I'm not saying those fights weren't legit, they clearly were.

But damn - if you're going to ***** about a particular incident ; ***** about it all across the board.

Don't belittle it when someone you dislike does it and then turn around and justify it when you're favorites have done it.

Pretty much Agreed