Comments Thread For: Terence Crawford Trainer on Spence: 'Bud Gon' Beat the **** Out of Him, Mark My Words'

[aboutfkntime]

If Bud truly believed he could beat the shlt out of Spence, he would have just said 'fine' when Spence was saying 80/20. Then beat the shlt out of him and taken all his belts, become the man in the division, and massively boosted his commerical worth for every future fight.

*** lol... that is one of the dumbest posts I have seen in a while

did it ever occur to you that 80/20 is obviously absurd ?






...

[Monty Fisto]

*** lol... that is one of the dumbest posts I have seen in a while

did it ever occur to you that 80/20 is obviously absurd ?






...

You're proving my point. There is a form of logic called reductio ad absurdum, in which you prove a claim by showing the opposite leads to absurdity.

It's absurd if there is a significant risk in facing the opponent. Hence my point.

Thanks for unwittingly backing me up, pal.

[Slip jab]

Why does it seem like a few of these posters are almost hopeful it falls through so they can say one of these two "ducked" the other and continue crying about how bad boxing is?

This fight is 2 years past it's prime, and at the tail end of it being a great fight. It HAS to happen now. Both want it, both sets of trainers are excited to prepare for it, and the promotion of the fight sells itself (if done properly). This is a classic clash of styles between two fighters who are supremely confident and each have arguments to back up why they will win.

How can anyone on a Boxing Fan site NOT want it to happen??

It would've been a good scrap but
even Maypac was 6 yrs overdue. An L increases the odds of it happening . Just how the bidness works. Welterweight would have been Buds 2nd consecutive weight as undisputed. The angle is to prevent it to build up Spence. Had it already happened , TCs title run wouldn't look as tough. Benavides did better than Spence WOULD HAVE in 2018, who was retaining alot of water at the time..

[aboutfkntime]

You're proving my point. There is a form of logic called reductio ad absurdum, in which you prove a claim by showing the opposite leads to absurdity.

It's absurd if there is a significant risk in facing the opponent. Hence my point.

Thanks for unwittingly backing me up, pal.

saying that Crawford should accept 20% is... utterly ridiculous

20% is a utterly ridiculous offer... so, that was utterly ridiculous advice






...

[LAchargers373]

60/40 spence let’s get it on. He detected the “a” side based of previous ppvs and gate performances. Not to mention strength of schedule.

[Monty Fisto]

saying that Crawford should accept 20% is... utterly ridiculous

20% is a utterly ridiculous offer... so, that was utterly ridiculous advice






...

Advice? Where was the advice? I can see why you were getting so emotional now; because you were tangling with the confusion that I had given advice.

My point in its entirety was this: Crawford's trainer is talking bollocks. Crawford does not believe he is going to beat the shlt out of Spence. My argument was that if Crawford genuinely believed he was going to beat the shlt out of Spence, he would have publicly snapped up those bad offers Spence was throwing out there (80/20, 70/30, whatever they were). This would then lead to either Spence ducking him in the most cowardly way for the whole world to see or a fight in which Crawford beats him up and takes the belts and enhances his career massively. It only becomes absurd if the proposition that Crawford will beat the shlt out of him is incorrect. As you say, it is absurd. Therefore, we prove the proposition is false. Crawford, his trainer and advisers do not believe he will beat the shlt out of Spence.

There was no advice. There was an if statement. A logical proposition to be proven true or false. Your comments backed up my point. It was false.

[aboutfkntime]

Advice? Where was the advice? I can see why you were getting so emotional now; because you were tangling with the confusion that I had given advice.

My point in its entirety was this: Crawford's trainer is talking bollocks. Crawford does not believe he is going to beat the shlt out of Spence. My argument was that if Crawford genuinely believed he was going to beat the shlt out of Spence, he would have publicly snapped up those bad offers Spence was throwing out there (80/20, 70/30, whatever they were). This would then lead to either Spence ducking him in the most cowardly way for the whole world to see or a fight in which Crawford beats him up and takes the belts and enhances his career massively. It only becomes absurd if the proposition that Crawford will beat the shlt out of him is incorrect. As you say, it is absurd. Therefore, we prove the proposition is false. Crawford, his trainer and advisers do not believe he will beat the shlt out of Spence.

There was no advice. There was an if statement. A logical proposition to be proven true or false. Your comments backed up my point. It was false.

saying that Crawford should accept 20% is..... a ridiculous statement

20% is a utterly ridiculous offer..... so, that was a utterly ridiculous statement






...

[Monty Fisto]

saying that Crawford should accept 20% is..... a ridiculous statement

20% is a utterly ridiculous offer..... so, that was a utterly ridiculous statement






...

Perhaps the failure is mine, but you are failing to understand the point I've been attempting to make all along.

An if statement: IF [event is true] THEN [something should happen]. A natural corollorary of this is that if the event isn't true, then thing shouldn't happen.

The IF in this case is IF Bud actually belived he was gonna beat the shlt out of Spence, THEN he should have taken whatever ridiculous offer was made by Spence, calling his bluff.

As explained, this would mean (assuming the IF was true) that Spence would either run from the fight, being humiliated because Bud had accepted such a poor offer and Spence had run anwyay... or the fight would happen, Bud would win and he would be the man in the division, able to command vastly higher sums for his fights and sealing his legacy.

The point is: it would not be ridiculous IF he knew he was going to beat the shlt out of Spence.

However, if he wasn't confident of doing so, then it is ridiculous.

You say it is ridiculous. You clearly agree with me that Bud and his trainer do not believe they are guaratneed a W, let along beating the shlt out of Spence.

QED


Thanks for backing up my argument once again. You make an excellent point.

[aboutfkntime]

Perhaps the failure is mine, but you are failing to understand the point I've been attempting to make all along.

An if statement: IF [event is true] THEN [something should happen]. A natural corollorary of this is that if the event isn't true, then thing shouldn't happen.

The IF in this case is IF Bud actually belived he was gonna beat the shlt out of Spence, THEN he should have taken whatever ridiculous offer was made by Spence, calling his bluff.

As explained, this would mean (assuming the IF was true) that Spence would either run from the fight, being humiliated because Bud had accepted such a poor offer and Spence had run anwyay... or the fight would happen, Bud would win and he would be the man in the division, able to command vastly higher sums for his fights and sealing his legacy.

The point is: it would not be ridiculous IF he knew he was going to beat the shlt out of Spence.

However, if he wasn't confident of doing so, then it is ridiculous.

You say it is ridiculous. You clearly agree with me that Bud and his trainer do not believe they are guaratneed a W, let along beating the shlt out of Spence.

QED


Thanks for backing up my argument once again. You make an excellent point.

that is flawed logic...

one possible outcome in the fight, is just the opinion of one man... which is not a " true [event] "

the only " true [event] "... was a offer, that would either make that fight possible... or, impossible... in this case

that [event] is not true... it is... CLEARLY... OBVIOUSLY... nonsense

FACT: 20% is a utterly ridiculous offer

in fact, that offer is sooooooo ridiculous... the ONLY possible result from that nonsense, is a impassable roadblock that kills the fight

come on man... that failure is yours alright

the correct corollary in that example is... IF, [event is true] ... (the offer)... THEN, we can see if Crawford's opinion is correct






...

[Monty Fisto]

[B]that is flawed logic...

one possible outcome in the fight, is just the opinion of one man...

...

Yes, the whole point of this thread is about the opinion of one man. That is literally what we are discussing: the merits of what Spence's trainer said.

My point is what his trainer said is horseshlt. If they really thought Crawford was going to beat up Spence, they would have called his bluff. What would there to be to lose? That they didn't maximise their earnings from that one lone fight but enhanced Crawford's future earnings from a younger age.

The actions they have taken -- consistently taking fights in which Crawford is the overwhelming favourite -- does not speak of supreme confidence in battering the best other fighter in the division.

They may well fancy their chances against Spence, but they certainly do not think a victory is a given, let alone believing they will "beat the shlt out of him, mark my words."