Almost none of you should have a top 100 ATG list

[edgarg]

I remember when nobody even knew who, or what Bert Sugar was. He was an unknown , very minor "player". He arrived at his present position some years ago, by outliving all the REAL experts.

Bert (or Burt) Sugar is not nearly as old as he looks. He looks about 90, but in reality is only a little over 70.

If anybody ever heard of Bunk Johnson, it is the same sort of thing. When New Orleans Jazz revived in the 1940's Bunk was saying that he was around, and playing, when it all began. He said he was born in 1879, and taught King Oliver, but eventually, after many years the truth came out. He was born in 1889, was 10 years younger, never taught King Oliver, and he was a young kid when it all began.

But he LOOKED old............

[baracuda]

some of the things we read are true, yet some, or most are lies. How can we decipher what's true, or not? You are assuming that everything one reads is a lie which is absurd. Nevertheless, I would listen to poet's account over yours because he has shown over time that he knows the sport.

i dont know where that assumption came from tbh..........and i trust the facts more than hearsay about things that went on in the 1920"s....and that is villa beat wilde fair and square!.....

[JAB5239]

all im saying is none of us can come up with excuses for anyone in the 1920's fights or so because we dont know the details of what went on in the bout ........ to me, anyone who says big things like reasons why one lost from a fight in the ww1 era is just ****ing insanely trying to be an imprssive poster when in fact he's just going by the things he read, and not by the things he knows for sure!

So should I just dismiss everything that's ever been historically recorded because I didn't see it myself? If I dig up 5 different newspaper accounts about the same fight and they all say the same things, are they all lying or exaggerating? And we do know for sure what their contemporaries thought of them as well. I didn't see the holocaust, but I damn well believe it happened and hasn't been exaggerated about. Whats the difference?

[baracuda]

So should I just dismiss everything that's ever been historically recorded because I didn't see it myself? If I dig up 5 different newspaper accounts about the same fight and they all say the same things, are they all lying or exaggerating? And we do know for sure what their contemporaries thought of them as well. I didn't see the holocaust, but I damn well believe it happened and hasn't been exaggerated about. Whats the difference?

not at all.....but you should dismiss every fikking excuses that comes from a 20 year old, 30 ,40, 50 etc years old who does'nt know the details of the bout!...........

[JAB5239]

not at all.....but you should dismiss every fikking excuses that comes from a 20 year old, 30 ,40, 50 etc years old who does'nt know the details of the bout!...........

What Im saying is details can be checked through multiple sources if you're willing to put the leg work in. ANYBODY can do that if they're willing.

[edgarg]

one of the posters that is guilty of this is el jesus.......mother****er said pancho villa would'nt have beaten jimmy wilde if he was'nt past his prime...how the **** does he know when you cant even find a damn good vid to know which one is which or know the single detail of the bout.....

It has nothing to do with footage etc. Wilde WAS too old, had had hundreds of fights, and virtually won them all, but a handful. He was brought up boxing in a carnival boxing booth, where all comewrs can challenge the fighter, no matter how huge or good they are. Wilde was less than 110 lbs, and had a punch like a mule, judging by the huge number of KO's.

To assess Jimmy Wilde, nobody, except a dumbo, needs footage. Greb was the same.

[baracuda]

What Im saying is details can be checked through multiple sources if you're willing to put the leg work in. ANYBODY can do that if they're willing.

exactly!...people who comment about it now is based on wht they've read, and not based on their personal judgement....this is a matter of faith my brother!....

[Hi-Dro]

So should I just dismiss everything that's ever been historically recorded because I didn't see it myself? If I dig up 5 different newspaper accounts about the same fight and they all say the same things, are they all lying or exaggerating? And we do know for sure what their contemporaries thought of them as well. I didn't see the holocaust, but I damn well believe it happened and hasn't been exaggerated about. Whats the difference?

let's not confuse world history with boxing history. World History is politically driven, thus it can be infiltrated with lies, and propaganda for specific political agendas. That's why most of us in this thread are distrustful of history because we know that the so-called "facts" presented in the text could be driven by propaganda, and the people stressing these facts could very well have a hidden agenda.

However, we must not let the ideas we have of world history affect our perception of boxing history. While I am not saying that boxing history is free of corruption...I am saying that it is more believable then some of the **** we learn in world history....

I don't know... I wasn't there so I don't know much about life before me besides what I have read, studied, and viewed on a TV screen. We have the ability to choose what we believe, and what not to believe. Some stuff is so well documented that you would be a dumbass if you argued with it. However some stuff is arguable, and debatable. You motha****az should be able to decide without trying to rub your opinion on other people as if its the only 1 around

[baracuda]

It has nothing to do with footage etc. Wilde WAS too old, had had hundreds of fights, and virtually won them all, but a handful. He was brought up boxing in a carnival boxing booth, where all comewrs can challenge the fighter, no matter how huge or good they are. Wilde was less than 110 lbs, and had a punch like a mule, judging by the huge number of KO's.

To assess Jimmy Wilde, nobody, except a dumbo, needs footage. Greb was the same.

wilde was 31!......ray robinson was the fightwer of the decade TWICE!

[JAB5239]

exactly!...people who comment about it now is based on wht they've read, and not based on their personal judgement....this is a matter of faith my brother!....

fair enough. But why wouldn't you accept it in good faith when you're getting the same info from different sources?