Be fair and don't hate a guy because he beat your idol

[Anthony342]

"Be fair and don't hate a guy because he beat your idol." Fair point, I usually don't, not for long anyway. I know I hated Rampage Jackson for a long time because he ended Chuck Liddell's reign at light heavyweight and Tito Ortiz just for being a douche and loved seeing him get shut up by Chuck, but not really anybody I can think of hating in boxing, except people that smack talk too much. I didn't mind it when someone like Ali, Leonard or Mayweather did it, but it really irked me when guys like Mayorga, Vargas and Hamed did and loved seeing them get beaten and made to eat their words.

[chaconfan]

Quote from Mr I twist facts to suit my argument because I am determined to put Holyfield down, whilst pretending to be unbiased.
Joeisabum "All of the boxers you listed, with the exception of those I have named were a level at best below Holyfield."
Absolute bull****! You asked me to list any boxer who massively outweighed Holyfield, WHO HAD A CHANCE TO BEAT HIM. Let me repeat, what I had already made clear...EVERY SINGLE OPPONENT I LISTED, HAD A CHANCE TO BEAT HIM. Later on even Savarese and Neilsen had a chance because he had started to lose quite regularly.
Originally Posted by chaconfan He was still massively outweighed, by many of his opponents, even if he did use steroids to bulk up. Firstly you asked, "who massively outweighed him who had a chance to beat him?"
But when I gave a comprehensive answer, you changed it to. "I said, who outweighed him who Holyfield was not favoured to beat?" If that wasn't enough, you then altered it yet again, to "heavily favoured".
I was still able to give a postive answer, and now when you realize that you cannot win that particular argument, you change it one more time to, "Does weight equate to skills?"
REALLY??? You want to go with that? All the times guys have had to forfeit their belts, pay their opponent compensation, fight at an agreed catchweight, been unbeatable and a great KO artist until they moved up a division or more, and you now try to say that size makes no difference?
I won't waste any more time debating with you. You have CLEARLY SHOWN that you have an agenda, and that you won't even accept answers that PROVE you wrong. You just say you meant something else, or find another negative, and I don't want people like you in my life.

[chaconfan]

"Be fair and don't hate a guy because he beat your idol." Fair point, I usually don't, not for long anyway. I know I hated Rampage Jackson for a long time because he ended Chuck Liddell's reign at light heavyweight and Tito Ortiz just for being a douche and loved seeing him get shut up by Chuck, but not really anybody I can think of hating in boxing, except people that smack talk too much. I didn't mind it when someone like Ali, Leonard or Mayweather did it, but it really irked me when guys like Mayorga, Vargas and Hamed did and loved seeing them get beaten and made to eat their words.

Thanks pal. I also hated Bowe tbh. I will tell you why. He and Rock Newman both criticized Holyfield for fighting Foreman and Holmes. Two all-time greats, both were unbeaten in their comebacks, one was 24-0 23 stoppages (Evander was 25-0) with an overall record of 69-2.
The other was 54-3 with two of those 3 losses being disputed decisions and the other a loss after coming out of retirement to face Tyson.
So who did Bowe defend against? Ferguson and Dokes, who was the most washed up boxer I ever saw in a ring, he literally could barely walk straight. He was one of my fav's (Dokes) so I am not saying he was a bad boxer, I am saying that he was a TERRIBLE boxer when he fought Bowe though.

[joeandthebums]

You asked me to list any boxer who massively outweighed Holyfield, WHO HAD A CHANCE TO BEAT HIM. Let me repeat, what I had already made clear...EVERY SINGLE OPPONENT I LISTED, HAD A CHANCE TO BEAT HIM.

Had a chance to beat him because they were an opponent? Because they did not a realistic chance.

Would you of said Felix Diaz had a chance of beating Terence Crawford recently? A realistic chance?

He was still massively outweighed, by many of his opponents, even if he did use steroids to bulk up. Firstly you asked, "who massively outweighed him who had a chance to beat him?"
But when I gave a comprehensive answer, you changed it to. "I said, who outweighed him who Holyfield was not favoured to beat?" If that wasn't enough, you then altered it yet again, to "heavily favoured".
I was still able to give a postive answer, and now when you realize that you cannot win that particular argument, you change it one more time to, "Does weight equate to skills?"

So in a hypothetical match-up between Evander Holyfield at 212-pounds and Dillian Whyte at 247-pounds who would you favour?

Does the 35-pound weight difference offset the significant gap in ability?

REALLY??? You want to go with that? All the times guys have had to forfeit their belts, pay their opponent compensation, fight at an agreed catchweight, been unbeatable and a great KO artist until they moved up a division or more, and you now try to say that size makes no difference?

We were discussing heavyweights...

I won't waste any more time debating with you. You have CLEARLY SHOWN that you have an agenda, and that you won't even accept answers that PROVE you wrong. You just say you meant something else, or find another negative, and I don't want people like you in my life.

I am not in your life. I am someone on a boxing discussion forum who engages in threads when I think I can learn something about the subject.

I think if you re-read the thread on balance your posts have been more biased and negative about boxers than my own.

[Anthony342]

This thread title reminds me of those old shampoo commercials where Kelly Lebrock would say "Don't hate me because I'm beautiful" haha.

[boxinghead530]

IF he took steroids, it was only to be able to put on enough weight to make the heavyweight limit. He was STILL massively outweighed by most of his HW opponents, and NEVER tested positive before or after a fight, therefore he had NO advantage in the ring whatsoever. Tyson came into the ring with cocaine in his system and most top athletes use something. The Klitschko's def did.

Dude there is no limit high or low in heavyweight boxing. You dont have to be a certain size to become heavyweight.

[chaconfan]

Dude there is no limit high or low in heavyweight boxing. You dont have to be a certain size to become heavyweight.

You obviously don't get what I am saying.
He was a light heavy, then cruiser. Cruiser limit is 14st 4lbs. He got to 14st 10lbs to fight the almost 18st Bowe and people try to make a big deal about his weight gain.
My point is, he was still outweighed, (sometimes massively) by all his HW opponents, so he had no advantage even if he did take steroids to bulk up.
Now if he was 17st natural and then took steroids, he would have had a big advantage.
In the Olympics, just before turning pro, he fought at 12 1/2st. He ended up fighting guys as big as 23st

[chaconfan]

[QUOTE=joeandthebums;17704099]Had a chance to beat him because they were an opponent? Because they did not a realistic chance.

Would you of said Felix Diaz had a chance of beating Terence Crawford recently? A realistic chance?



So in a hypothetical match-up between Evander Holyfield at 212-pounds and Dillian Whyte at 247-pounds who would you favour?
Does the 35-pound weight difference offset the significant gap in ability?



Chaconfan's reply. What about the 100lb advantage Valuev had, with the added advantage of age and no ring wars, which made him a 10-1 favourite? Also you don't seem to factor in that Holyfields weight was added on to a light heavyweights frame.

Joeisabum
We were discussing heavyweights...

Chaconfan's reply. Really? So why did you say this?
"Would you of said Felix Diaz had a chance of beating Terence Crawford recently? A realistic chance?

Joeisabum
I am not in your life. I am someone on a boxing discussion forum who engages in threads when I think I can learn something about the subject.


Chaconfan.
You aren't trying to learn anything, you are trying to be the teacher all the time, and you are VERY patronizing.
I could continue to argue with you forever, but it would get me nowhere. You are clearly looking to have the last word. Clearly looking for ways to prove Holyfield was not worthy of admiration, and clearly never going to admit your argument was proven wrong. If I am getting p#ssed off seeing your attempts to criticize Holyfield and accuse me of being biased every time I log in, then clearly YOU ARE in my life. You can have your way, you can have as many last says as you like. I don't want to debate with people like you. Agree or disagree with things I post, it is irrelevant to me, I do not hold any value to your opinions.

[chaconfan]

This thread title reminds me of those old shampoo commercials where Kelly Lebrock would say "Don't hate me because I'm beautiful" haha.

Ha ha, how vain! Truth is I couldn't fit the title I would have liked to use. I would have added Holyfield beat Tyson as a big underdog, and no excuses can be used, that can't be called sour grapes. Thanks for commenting on the thread pal.

[boxinghead530]

You obviously don't get what I am saying.
He was a light heavy, then cruiser. Cruiser limit is 14st 4lbs. He got to 14st 10lbs to fight the almost 18st Bowe and people try to make a big deal about his weight gain.
My point is, he was still outweighed, (sometimes massively) by all his HW opponents, so he had no advantage even if he did take steroids to bulk up.
Now if he was 17st natural and then took steroids, he would have had a big advantage.
In the Olympics, just before turning pro, he fought at 12 1/2st. He ended up fighting guys as big as 23st

Dude quit with the 14st and whatever ounce ****. Say pounds you idiot.

And you don't get the point. His didn't need huge weight to compete at heavyweight that's why his highest weight back then stayed at about 210lbs or so.

His advantage over those big heavyweights was his speed, combination punching, boxing ability and his massive will to win.