"True Warrior", Translation: No defense

[Clegg]

Your point was that 'true warriors' have no defence. Although you also accept that some true warriors do have a good defence. So your point is that some true warriors have a good defence, but others do not?

I agree.

[DiegoFuego]

Your point was that 'true warriors' have no defence. Although you also accept that some true warriors do have a good defence. So your point is that some true warriors have a good defence, but others do not?

I agree.

if you are hyping a fight by saying it is between two "true warriors," you are usually saying, "get ready to see a lot of punches land since neither guy knows how to block them, which is better than seeing a guy hit and not be hit, because after all the point of boxing is to get punched in the face for 11 rounds and win by miracle KO in the 12th. any other way is the way of the coward"

[JoartCC]

As far as I've been able to tell over the years, "true warrior" is a term used to praise a guy that gives blood and guts action. Generally, since nobody willingly gets punched in the face, you must lack good defense to be a true warrior. So let's all do ourselves a favor and stop equating "true warrior" with "great fighter" because rarely are the two ever the same. There are exceptions, but for the most part if you block punches with your face, you are not a great fighter. If you take all the fighters in the world and give them the same chin and can say, "this guy would still be a great fighter," then you have something. A chin is not something that can be learned, so let's stop praising guys for it. It's a great thing to have, but you didn't do anything to earn your chin. If we all had chins like Margarito and Castillo, we'd all be "true warriors."

Idiot.

True warriors are the ones who doesn't piss on their pants.

Nor are they the ones who talk **** then ***** retires like the ****** that he is.

And may I remind you.

Only cowards will prefer other cowards.

Like you.

[DiegoFuego]

I would watch a Cotto-Margarito or Vazquez-Marquez or Corrales-Castillo over any other fight, but I'm not dumb enough to say they are as good as Mayweather.

Think Gatti-Ward I. Would that have been a good fight at all if either guy was a great fighter? Hell no

[DiegoFuego]

People like you got it twisted mistaking entertainment for greatness. You should follow UFC

[KESSLER]

True warriors (at least for most of their careers):

Gatti
Margarito
Castillo
Corrales
Hatton
Mayorga
Katsidis

add more as you think of them

I wouldn't put Hatton on that list.

Mayorga > all.

You forgot a guy like Vargas. True warrior...

But anyway, just because you are a defensive fighter don't mean you ain't no warrior.

[JoartCC]

I would watch a Cotto-Margarito or Vazquez-Marquez or Corrales-Castillo over any other fight, but I'm not dumb enough to say they are as good as Mayweather.

Think Gatti-Ward I. Would that have been a good fight at all if either guy was a great fighter? Hell no

Based on what idiot?

In your blindness you persist on idiocy.

Greats beat other greats. Tell me a great in ****** Floyd's resume.

Undefeated proves nothing. Only the lowest idiots, Dogs actually, will fall for undefeated ****.

Skill is measured by level of opposition which in turn in reflected in his resume.

135 - Casa, Frei
140 - Kostya, Spafa
147 - refuses to fight any top welter.

The problem with your idiocy is that it knows no bounds.

But that is what I want. Because the readers in this forum after reading your idiotic posts will only turn away in disgust.

Idiots have their uses.

And you are playing your part to the hilt.

I would like you to keep it up.

[DiegoFuego]

I guess i need to clarify that this thread is more directed at guys like VIVA MEXICO and Joarct and even RunWithKnives who think the only warriors in this sport are the guys who throw tons of punches, block zero, and have iron chins.

Please don't act like Mayorga doesn't fall under this description lol

The list I compiled was according to their description

MY description would be anybody that shows a fighting spirit, which is pretty much any and every boxer. Think about it. Even Kermit Cintron is a warrior. He WANTED to get in with a guy who knocked him out. That is a fighter's spirit even if Cintron breaks down in the ring. At one point, everybody in boxing is a warrior. Everybody. Not just Mexican sluggers

[DiegoFuego]

Based on what idiot?

In your blindness you persist on idiocy.

Greats beat other greats. Tell me a great in ****** Floyd's resume.

Undefeated proves nothing. Only the lowest idiots, Dogs actually, will fall for undefeated ****.

Skill is measured by level of opposition which in turn in reflected in his resume.

135 - Casa, Frei
140 - Kostya, Spafa
147 - refuses to fight any top welter.

The problem with your idiocy is that it knows no bounds.

But that is what I want. Because the readers in this forum after reading your idiotic posts will only turn away in disgust.

Idiots have their uses.

And you are playing your part to the hilt.

I would like you to keep it up.

Yeah Floyd probably should have done more at 135, but he made no secrets about chasing a fight with Oscar his whole career. That was his number one goal: beat Oscar De La Hoya. You can't blame him for continuing to move up, beating enough guys to make his name. At 140, Kostya never mentioned a fight with Mayweather so don't act like it's all Floyd's fault. Spaddy got a draw with Dorin at 135 and ended up in prison so he's out. 147 Floyd beat everybody worth beating except Cotto. Now Williams has come up, but SOMEBODY WILL ALWAYS BE COMING UP. Nobody fights 5 times a year to get the job done before a new guy comes up. Once Floyd beats Cotto, it's Williams or Berto. It never ends just like your crying over Mayweather never ends.

[Shalafi]

As far as I've been able to tell over the years, "true warrior" is a term used to praise a guy that gives blood and guts action. Generally, since nobody willingly gets punched in the face, you must lack good defense to be a true warrior. So let's all do ourselves a favor and stop equating "true warrior" with "great fighter" because rarely are the two ever the same. There are exceptions, but for the most part if you block punches with your face, you are not a great fighter. If you take all the fighters in the world and give them the same chin and can say, "this guy would still be a great fighter," then you have something. A chin is not something that can be learned, so let's stop praising guys for it. It's a great thing to have, but you didn't do anything to earn your chin. If we all had chins like Margarito and Castillo, we'd all be "true warriors."

Why must you associate it that way? that is your own warped perspective and opinion to the matter and not everyone else's.

To me, any man who is willing to set foot in a boxing ring willingly wanting to go 12 rounds against another man is a warrior. Now there are exceptions to this of course, a true warrior goes in the ring and gives the fans knock outs, he is willing to put his body through punishment and fatigue while also hurting his opponent in the process to ultimately win a fight. That is after the whole concept of boxing isn't it?

I personally choose these kind of fighters over the ones who potshot all night, get on their bikes when they get in trouble, and look to win on the cards. Those fighters although "warriors" in their own way are boring fighters and do not provide the same excitement than the ones who are willing to dig in and go toe-to-toe against their opponents to become the best.

In closing, all Mexican fighters = True Warriors.

PBCS.