Chris John's funny little career

[billeau2]

yeah fraud is definitely a top 10 word and im claiming ownership of it!

you do realize this is just my opinion right? i think marquez clearly beat john. i look at the rest of johns resume and see almost nothing respectable. a guy who holds a world title for 10 years with almost nothing of substance on his resume is fraudulent. wilder was as well.

what is the real data? title defenses? yeah he had a lot. against who? according to you they must be good if they are in title fights. circular logic at work. this is how wilder got you! get out its a trap

You voice your opinion in a very derisive manner. It tends to make you look foolish. For example, I thought marquez won as well, I also happen to be fond of marquez, I am a fan, but I would not call John a fraud. even your avatar, who comes close... is a guy who actually went into the ring and risked his health and being, hardly a fraud.

People have a habit of neglecting scale when they wage opinions and it snowballs... I had an ugly encounter with a guy who likes to critisize others in the martial arts, my own particular baliwick. He gets this kid, a nice kid who fights professionally and he starts sort of demanding, Spanish Inquisition style, (I am exxagerating) that he consent that his father was a bad person, role model etc. The kid has more sense and in the interview qualifies but no, this idiot goes on and on...

heres the thing Daggum: This "horrible father" coached his kid, took care of his kid, trained his kid... his horrible crime? He exxagerated,lied to his kid about being a fighting champion. The holier than though martial arts guy was all up on a righteous spree about misrepresenting one's art and achievements... Because after all he was a qualified Brazilian Brown Belt! Humph! My point was that the guy was an ******. He was taking a foible and exxagerating it misrepresenting the whole situation. Many fathers do not coach, train or invest any time or love in their kids.

There is no "real data" there are different sources of data and different relationships that data points out. You need a totality of circumstances to make a judgement about a situation, usually from more than one data source.

[billeau2]

when did i ever say these things mister straw man? joshua is better because he has a much better resume, not because he lost to usyk or others. dont make straw mans please. you are just arguing against yourself not me. and you think wilder and joshua have the same resume and you dont realize how silly that makes you look?

. Better resume with better losses? Did Joshua beat one of the top 3? He went life and death with an older Klitchko that Fury beat convincingly, Usyk was much more impressed with Fury as well. So what are we left with? Joshua beat more typical opponents, big deal. This does not mean that Joshua does not have a better resume but it diminishes the importance of this resume considerably. It becomes almost irrelevant. What we are left with is Joshua beating a few more decent fighters like Chisora, from the same pool of fighters, and subjective rankings that have no real direct cause and effect relationship with ability... And little else!

Not such a strawman after all!

BTW here is a great example. Joshua beat an MMA star that almost beat Fury... What does that tell us? think about it carefully before answering.