Comments Thread For: Wilder-Zhang, Hrgovic-Dubois, And The 'Loser Leaves Town' Heavyweight Run

[buge]

—————
Someone here described it best, it’s a wordplay propaganda!
And people that use it do so to prop their favorite guys. Let’s take a look what you wrote above - “As he should have done the first time”.

That right there is a biased statement. You wanted AJ to win and even after he lost, you still go with the “he should have won the first time”. Well, he did not.

He got beat by Usyk and you probably hoped he won the rematch but he didn’t.

It appear AJ might fight Usyk a third time, if he wins, are we going to be describing his career as “he beat everyone he faced”?
Ryan Garcia may get a rematch with Tank and if he wins and retires, are we going to say the same thing and leave out the part where he was knocked out and failed a drug test?
If Spence was to get a rematch with Crawford at 154 and somehow wins, are we going to say the same thing and ignore the fact that he got beat up like a pińata by Crawford?

There is a reason why the old adage of The pen is mightier than the sword is incredibly true. The pen changes opinions. Look at the genocide happening in ****. The media has convinced a lot of us that there is no genocide and it’s a just war. Is it?
Pardon my apples to oranges comparison

wtf, you can't write Gaza on this site?

[Oregonian]

I will pardon the genocide comparison.

Maybe it is 'wordplay propaganda'. But it's also just an opinion. And the opinion that Joshua, a future HoFer, should have beaten Ruiz, a future circular hole in the ground, doesn't seem particularly biased to me. I can back that up.

I don't have to caveat every single statement I make. It would make for some pretty lengthy essays.

I believe it's true that Joshua has been better than every man he has faced... with one exception. That exception is the best of the era.

———-
A future circular hole in the ground is a very apt description for Ruiz lol.
AJ is a sure HoF guy and I think he can beat Usyk if they fought again. I do not discredit him at all.

[Oregonian]

wtf, you can't write Gaza on this site?

————
My thoughts exactly AND it pretty much proves my point - the media is extremely biased and could give two cents about Gâzä of Phâlestiniáns.
You can see it very clearly here

[57Blues]

Wilder's problem is that his drug taking him is making him loose all the time.

Oh, you mean lose.

Booze Fuze confuse it is all the same in the end................

[DeeMoney]

—————
Someone here described it best, it’s a wordplay propaganda!
And people that use it do so to prop their favorite guys. Let’s take a look what you wrote above - “As he should have done the first time”.

That right there is a biased statement. You wanted AJ to win and even after he lost, you still go with the “he should have won the first time”. Well, he did not.

He got beat by Usyk and you probably hoped he won the rematch but he didn’t.

It appear AJ might fight Usyk a third time, if he wins, are we going to be describing his career as “he beat everyone he faced”?
Ryan Garcia may get a rematch with Tank and if he wins and retires, are we going to say the same thing and leave out the part where he was knocked out and failed a drug test?
If Spence was to get a rematch with Crawford at 154 and somehow wins, are we going to say the same thing and ignore the fact that he got beat up like a pińata by Crawford?

There is a reason why the old adage of The pen is mightier than the sword is incredibly true. The pen changes opinions. Look at the genocide happening in ****. The media has convinced a lot of us that there is no genocide and it’s a just war. Is it?
Pardon my apples to oranges comparison

I dont view it as this “word play propaganda” I think most of us view it as different than claiming undefeated. What it leads me to think is that a given fighter was good enough to have beaten everyone he fought. Not necessarily that he did, but was at least good enough to. Which is impressive because most fighters arent that good.

I think most recognize what it means, and know it probably doesnt mean undefeated, because if they wanted to to say undefeated, theyd say exactly that

[buge]

I dont view it as this “word play propaganda” I think most of us view it as different than claiming undefeated. What it leads me to think is that a given fighter was good enough to have beaten everyone he fought. Not necessarily that he did, but was at least good enough to. Which is impressive because most fighters arent that good.

I think most recognize what it means, and know it probably doesnt mean undefeated, because if they wanted to to say undefeated, theyd say exactly that

Can you imagine them doing that for sports teams?

"The New York Yankees beat every team they faced last year."

[Oregonian]

I dont view it as this “word play propaganda” I think most of us view it as different than claiming undefeated. What it leads me to think is that a given fighter was good enough to have beaten everyone he fought. Not necessarily that he did, but was at least good enough to. Which is impressive because most fighters arent that good.

I think most recognize what it means, and know it probably doesnt mean undefeated, because if they wanted to to say undefeated, theyd say exactly that

——-
I can’t argue against that.

[DeeMoney]

Can you imagine them doing that for sports teams?

"The New York Yankees beat every team they faced last year."

Different contextually, even the best baseball teams lose about 1/3 of their games. Its less noteworthy as it happens often.

[Sid-Knee]

———
Yes and AJ also got KTFO by Ruiz.
Proclaiming a boxer beat everyone he faced is like saying he was undefeated. Sure he did win the rematch like Lennox but they were both KO’d by nondescript guys. What exactly did Rahman do after Knocking out the great Lewis?

It could be taken as them being described as undefeated. But it still isn't incorrect.

It's never about what they did afterwards. It's always what they were at the time. Rahman went on a huge downward spiral after getting knocked out in the rematch. It happens sometimes. I wouldn't say he was shot, but it clearly had a big effect on him.

The reason to why Lennox lost to him in the first place was not training properly and turning up in SA too late to acclimatise to the altitude. That was the killer blow. That was the theme in fight week. Is there going to be an upset because of it. As we saw, there was an upset. Lennox corrected the problem and dominated the rematch. Anyone who isn't at their best can lose, regardless of the reasons to why they weren't at their best.

[Sid-Knee]

And yet his pro record stands at 32-0.
Funny how that works, init?

That's how robberies work. They steal the fight from the rightful winner. Why, are you under the impression they still put a defeat on the record after they've been given a gift decision?