Tweet
Despite all the idiotic threads, lets prove that we'll have a modicum of intelligence in here guys.
For once, just for one thread, lets all post sensibly and realistically and without resorting to name-calling, petty arguing or for want of a better term 'being daft'.
1). Fights not being made does not necessarily mean that one fighter or the other is 'ducking' them. Boxers are fairly precious and somewhat egomaniacal and the negotiation process is a notoriously difficult one because of how important it is.
2). Very few boxers are 'cowards'. They all get punched in the face for a living, not many of us do.
3). Not many boxers are 'afraid' of other boxers. They fight for a living, they almost all get beat. They may often be concerned about going up against a superior opponent without suitable financial reward or conditions, but that is (mostly) sensible negotiation. It is rarely 'fear'. Out of all the professional athletes out there, boxers are much more 'fearless' than most.
4). In the world of boxing, few fighters have been 'murdered' in the ring. Thus its unlikely that Floyd Mayweather would 'MURDER' Ricky Hatton. Lets be sensible when talking about fights, that makes it easier to take us credibly. By far the more likely result to this fight is that Mayweather will win a UD.
5). Very few boxers have 'no chance' against other boxers. The history of boxing is littered with unbelievable 'upsets'.
6). It is ****** to claim that two people who are both within the top 10-20 in the P4P lists are TOO far apart in class. If there was such a difference they wouldnt be considered within 20 (MAXIMUM) places of each other in rankings that take into account THOUSANDS upon thousands of boxers.
7). Triangular logic is NOT a reliable tool in the prediction process. It is even less credible when used as a primary argument in a debate.
8). You cannot prove a fighter to be 'shot' by a win. You cannot PROVE a fighter to be 'shot' by a loss, but its a much firmer indication than an unimpressive win. Shot fighters still need to be beat and top-class victories against 'shot' fighters who arent TOO far gone (Floyd against DLH, Hatton against Castillo) are still better results than convincing victories against unproven fighters.
9). A win is a win is a win. Doesnt matter how you get it. Doesnt matter how ugly it is, how boring it is. Champions lose their belts by getting beat, not by someone putting on a better spectacle than them.
10). Referees are quite often eager and over-protective. They are very rarely 'cheaters', they have very rarely been 'bought off'.
11). A fighter being past his prime doesnt mean that he throws fights.
12). Mike Tyson's Prime was a very short period. His downfall was tragic. To over-analyse this all too much is pointless. He proved a lot in a short amount of time, he could have done a lot if he had 'stayed in his prime', but he didnt.
13). In boxing 90% is speculation. Predicting contests is hugely subjective, otherwise the bookies wouldnt make much money if the favourite always won. Your answer isnt always the definitive one. Fair enough if you are confident in what you say is right, but dont act like its undisputable when it isnt.
14). People are rarely rarely ever truly
on this site. The whole idea of 'owning' is ridiculously diluted by people posting a ridiculously simple and debatable argument and then posting after it. (I'm pre-empting people doing it here by already pointing out that it wont be funny).
15). Liking one fighter doesnt make you a nut-hugger, providing you are open to their flaws and dont think them to be 'unbeatable' (nobody is) and arent blindly tunnel visioned in your support of them.
16). Disliking the style and manner of a certain fighter doesnt make you a 'hater'. Posting constant threads about those posters certainly makes you a little bit weird.
17). Most things said in the press are to publicise the fight or get the fight made and very few are ever grounded in truth or are a fair reflection of the fighters. However, they can be used to give you an indication of the personality of the fighters in question.
18). Almost everything said by ALL promoters should always be taken with a pinch of salt until official statement is made as it is invariably bull****.
Anyone care to add any?
For once, just for one thread, lets all post sensibly and realistically and without resorting to name-calling, petty arguing or for want of a better term 'being daft'.
1). Fights not being made does not necessarily mean that one fighter or the other is 'ducking' them. Boxers are fairly precious and somewhat egomaniacal and the negotiation process is a notoriously difficult one because of how important it is.
2). Very few boxers are 'cowards'. They all get punched in the face for a living, not many of us do.
3). Not many boxers are 'afraid' of other boxers. They fight for a living, they almost all get beat. They may often be concerned about going up against a superior opponent without suitable financial reward or conditions, but that is (mostly) sensible negotiation. It is rarely 'fear'. Out of all the professional athletes out there, boxers are much more 'fearless' than most.
4). In the world of boxing, few fighters have been 'murdered' in the ring. Thus its unlikely that Floyd Mayweather would 'MURDER' Ricky Hatton. Lets be sensible when talking about fights, that makes it easier to take us credibly. By far the more likely result to this fight is that Mayweather will win a UD.
5). Very few boxers have 'no chance' against other boxers. The history of boxing is littered with unbelievable 'upsets'.
6). It is ****** to claim that two people who are both within the top 10-20 in the P4P lists are TOO far apart in class. If there was such a difference they wouldnt be considered within 20 (MAXIMUM) places of each other in rankings that take into account THOUSANDS upon thousands of boxers.
7). Triangular logic is NOT a reliable tool in the prediction process. It is even less credible when used as a primary argument in a debate.
8). You cannot prove a fighter to be 'shot' by a win. You cannot PROVE a fighter to be 'shot' by a loss, but its a much firmer indication than an unimpressive win. Shot fighters still need to be beat and top-class victories against 'shot' fighters who arent TOO far gone (Floyd against DLH, Hatton against Castillo) are still better results than convincing victories against unproven fighters.
9). A win is a win is a win. Doesnt matter how you get it. Doesnt matter how ugly it is, how boring it is. Champions lose their belts by getting beat, not by someone putting on a better spectacle than them.
10). Referees are quite often eager and over-protective. They are very rarely 'cheaters', they have very rarely been 'bought off'.
11). A fighter being past his prime doesnt mean that he throws fights.
12). Mike Tyson's Prime was a very short period. His downfall was tragic. To over-analyse this all too much is pointless. He proved a lot in a short amount of time, he could have done a lot if he had 'stayed in his prime', but he didnt.
13). In boxing 90% is speculation. Predicting contests is hugely subjective, otherwise the bookies wouldnt make much money if the favourite always won. Your answer isnt always the definitive one. Fair enough if you are confident in what you say is right, but dont act like its undisputable when it isnt.
14). People are rarely rarely ever truly
on this site. The whole idea of 'owning' is ridiculously diluted by people posting a ridiculously simple and debatable argument and then posting after it. (I'm pre-empting people doing it here by already pointing out that it wont be funny).15). Liking one fighter doesnt make you a nut-hugger, providing you are open to their flaws and dont think them to be 'unbeatable' (nobody is) and arent blindly tunnel visioned in your support of them.
16). Disliking the style and manner of a certain fighter doesnt make you a 'hater'. Posting constant threads about those posters certainly makes you a little bit weird.
17). Most things said in the press are to publicise the fight or get the fight made and very few are ever grounded in truth or are a fair reflection of the fighters. However, they can be used to give you an indication of the personality of the fighters in question.
18). Almost everything said by ALL promoters should always be taken with a pinch of salt until official statement is made as it is invariably bull****.
Anyone care to add any?
Comment