Joe Frazier Had a Glass Chin?

[BigStereotype]

I'm presuming you're referring to me since what you quoted was a response to my post. Don't bring me into this and insult me, especially by saying I was trying to make some claim to being better. It's circular because of his refusal to acknowledge the actual points made rather than superficial details, and because I chose to play with the troll and bothered to continue to respond for the lulz. I don't have any strong conviction/vested in this thread topic period.

Nah dude, I was talking about the other two. I quoted the first part as an abysmally bad post and then read the rest of the thread and added in that second part. I know you know what you're talking about, it's these other two that are going nowhere.

[Vadrigar.]

Nah dude, I was talking about the other two. I quoted the first part as an abysmally bad post and then read the rest of the thread and added in that second part. I know you know what you're talking about, it's these other two that are going nowhere.

"A semantic dispute is a disagreement that arises if the parties involved disagree about whether a particular claim is true, not because they disagree on material facts, but rather because they disagree on the definitions of a word (or several words) essential to formulating the claim at issue."

So it's "glass Jaw" and what other term? Or is it just "glass Jaw"?

[BigStereotype]

"A semantic dispute is a disagreement that arises if the parties involved disagree about whether a particular claim is true, not because they disagree on material facts, but rather because they disagree on the definitions of a word (or several words) essential to formulating the claim at issue."

So it's "glass Jaw" and what other term? Or is it just "glass Jaw"?

"Glass chin" and "below average chin." Very definition of a semantic dispute.

[Vadrigar.]

"Glass chin" and "below average chin." Very definition of a semantic dispute.

So what's your problem with our debating?

Have you read the whole thread carefully?

[StarshipTrooper]

"A semantic dispute is a disagreement that arises if the parties involved disagree about whether a particular claim is true, not because they disagree on material facts, but rather because they disagree on the definitions of a word (or several words) essential to formulating the claim at issue."

So it's "glass Jaw" and what other term? Or is it just "glass Jaw"?

The problem is that too many of these so-called fans live on the extremes and see no degrees in between. Either a fighter has a granite jaw or he has a glass jaw. Either he has one-punch power or he can't punch at all. Either he's impossible to hit or he's a punch sponge. Either he's the GOAT or he's a bum. Ect. ect. ect..... They are incapable of seeing the different levels between the two extremes.

Poet

[BigStereotype]

I am happy to concede that he has a "below average chin" or something interchangeable/similar to that.

I don't see what's your problem with our debating.

Have you read the whole thread carefully?

I have and I have no problem with debating, but when it's reduced to "you're ducking me" "no you're ducking me!" "well you're an idiot" "no YOU'RE an idiot!" tit-for-tat bull**** it gets annoying.

[Vadrigar.]

I have and I have no problem with debating, but when it's reduced to "you're ducking me" "no you're ducking me!" "well you're an idiot" "no YOU'RE an idiot!" tit-for-tat bull**** it gets annoying.

who exactly are you referring to? and give an example.

[BigStereotype]

TKO =/= KO. Requirements of a glass chin is a KO.

He got knocked down six times and he got up six times. How exactly is this a knock OUT?

Says who? You and you alone?

So what? prove otherwise.

Go ask everyone else on this forum whether or not they agree with your ****** logic. Then you'll get your proof.

You're nothing but a troll. You make false claims without backing them up.

getting up six times from a man like George foreman proves otherwise.

Look at the poll. who agrees with you?

I think getting knocked down eight times, with six of them in one fight, by the only power puncher he ever faced, is enough proof.

A poll regarding Frazier's chin has nothing to do with how everyone perceives a knockout.

Well people don't just blindly and randomly vote. They have enough common sense to realise that Frazier did not have a glass chin.

Yes and he got up six times against George foreman. It's ridiculous to suggest that a glass chin is capable of getting up six times against a man like George foreman.

Like I said, this poll is about Frazier's chin. Not what everyone thinks the requirements for a knockout are. Perhaps you shouldn't try avoiding this again, in your next reply.

Is it so ridiculous that a man has the heart and desire to fight on? No. You, on the other hand, refuse to acknowledge that the man had heart and only claim that his ability to get up after being knocked down six times in two rounds is from a cast-iron chin.

Yes and the question of frazier's chin is related to the George foreman fight. Most posters on this history section/NSB have probably seen it. Hence they draw their own conclusions.

I never claimed he had a "cast-iron chin". Show me one quote.

A large amount of heart can not overcome a glass chin. Your brain and your nervous system knows when it's time to shut down and no amount of heart can prevent/override the natural feedback of the body.

He got up from those knock downs because he was physically resilient, not solely due to heart.

All his heart really helped him to do was run face first into more viscous uppercuts. He was a man of pride and wanted to fight like a warrior.

You avoided my point twice. I'll repeat it yet again: this poll is about Frazier's chin. Not what everyone thinks the requirements for a knockout are. Try not to avoid it a third time.

Apparently you have never watched a single boxing match in your life (including Frazier vs Foreman I) and only use false intellect to sum up your opinions.

Floyd Patterson is another heavyweight that is considered to have a glass jaw. He's never been "knocked out" by your definition, yet he's tasted the canvas more than any other heavyweight champion and got back up.

If he doesn't have a glass jaw, why was he knocked down so many times and why does everyone call him a glass-jawed fighter?

Saying the same things over and over. And that's just one page. You both made your points and now you just can't acknowledge that you have differing opinions.

[Vadrigar.]

Saying the same things over and over. And that's just one page. You both made your points and now you just can't acknowledge that you have differing opinions.

Well you've missed out a crucial point: "nightowl" is a troll.

I change my debating personality depending on which kind of poster I debate with. Trolls need to be dealt with in ONE way: bluntly, harshly and offensively.

Now If I was to hypothetically start a debate with someone like you or "poet", then I would change my debating personality into a civilised one. (Judging by your rep I am assuming you're a rational poster)

So it all depends.................

BTW I responded to "Nightowl" in a further posts which you didn't quote.

[StarshipTrooper]

Well you've missed out an crucial point: "nightowl" is a troll.

I change my debating personality depending on which kind of poster I debate with. Trolls need to be dealt with in ONE way: bluntly, harshly and offensively.

Now If I was to hypothetically start a debate with someone like you or "poet", then I would change my debating personality into a civilised one. (Judging by your rep I am assuming you're a rational poster)

So it all depends.................

BTW I responded to "Nightowl" in a further posts which you didn't quote.

That is true.....one deals with trolls on a different level than one would a rational poster. From the posts I've read Big falls into the "rational" catagory

Poet