Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

It is INTELLECTUALLY & ANALYTICALLY DISHONEST to rank fighters with NO FIGHT FOOTAGE

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • It is INTELLECTUALLY & ANALYTICALLY DISHONEST to rank fighters with NO FIGHT FOOTAGE

    Im sorry but i cannot respect nor find it credible any ATG list that has highly ranked fighters with no fight footage over fighters with extensive video evidence.

    It is intellectually and analytically dishonest and its done by the vanguards of old school golden age fighters to preserve their history.

    The most glaring example is this guy:



    How can you take this seriously? How can you take a guy with two sets of records; offiicial & newspaper record, seriously?


    Historians and older boxing fans love to talk about the "Golden Age" of boxing and how pure and so much better it was when in reality the golden age of boxing was the most crooked era in all of boxing.

    Referees as judge, jury, and executioner. Mob Controlled fights. Black fighters not given title opportunities and when given get royally screwed. How can a black fighter get a fair shake in the "Golden Era" when he cant even get a fair shake when it comes to his most basic civil rights?



    When we see list done by boxing "historians" its littered with past great white hopes.








    Its all done to preserve history.

    There's a reason why as civil rights started getting momentum, the number of great white fighters started declining. In fact, this happened in almost all sports especially basketball and baseball.

    Today is not as bad and back then wasnt all its cracked up to be.

  • #2
    No, it's not. You can look at a fighter's record, look at who they beat, and know whether they were great. It's really that simple. And trying to make it a race thing is ****** when you look at who exactly is considered the greatest fighters of all time.

    Comment


    • #3
      I agree that people highly overrate the old era of boxers same with baseball, football and basketball

      Its not the boxers/athletes fault that they were born and fought in that particular era tho

      Comment


      • #4
        I have said this before about these ATG lists posters have and unless you are like 90 years old and have watched thousands of the best fighters extensively you have no business and can in no way make a credible list, so yes TS it is dishonest.

        PPL should stop trying to sound like they know more than they do, honestly I started watching boxing in like 97 and don't know a great deal about things going on in the sport before that period, nothing wrong with that though.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by bojangles1987 View Post
          No, it's not. You can look at a fighter's record, look at who they beat, and know whether they were great. It's really that simple. And trying to make it a race thing is ****** when you look at who exactly is considered the greatest fighters of all time.

          yes it is. its a race thing.

          the same with the delusional nut that says babe ruth and ty cobb are just as great as any player in the history of mlb when they only played against white players.


          i hate it when people are so dismissive and pc when it comes to race.

          As long as humans are alive, race will always come to the equation.

          Humans are tribal by nature.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Spray_resistant View Post
            I have said this before about these ATG lists posters have and unless you are like 90 years old and have watched thousands of the best fighters extensively you have no business and can in no way make a credible list, so yes TS it is dishonest.

            PPL should stop trying to sound like they know more than they do, honestly I started watching boxing in like 97 and don't know a great deal about things going on in the sport before that period, nothing wrong with that though.
            thank you.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by DTMB View Post
              yes it is. its a race thing.

              the same with the delusional nut that says babe ruth and ty cobb are just as great as any player in the history of mlb when they only played against white players.


              i hate it when people are so dismissive and pc when it comes to race.

              As long as humans are alive, race will always come to the equation.

              Humans are tribal by nature.
              Again, you should take a look at who are considered the greatest fighters ever and tell me again that people are just trying to pretend boxing was best when it was predominantly white. That is unbelievably dumb.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by bojangles1987 View Post
                Again, you should take a look at who are considered the greatest fighters ever and tell me again that people are just trying to pretend boxing was best when it was predominantly white. That is unbelievably dumb.
                cmon bo how many times have we heard the boxing was so much better back then than it is now cliche?


                you cannot rank a great fighter with no fight footage over a great fighter with fight footage.

                You just cant.

                It is analytically and intellectually dishonest.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by DTMB View Post
                  yes it is. its a race thing.

                  the same with the delusional nut that says babe ruth and ty cobb are just as great as any player in the history of mlb when they only played against white players.


                  i hate it when people are so dismissive and pc when it comes to race.

                  As long as humans are alive, race will always come to the equation.

                  Humans are tribal by nature.

                  But it's not just a race thing.
                  It's also a nationality thing.

                  Let me explain. The rankings done by a variety of sources in terms of heavyweights usually goes like this.


                  1-Muhammad Ali
                  2-Joe Louis
                  3
                  4
                  5- 7 Lennox Lewis


                  There are a bunch of posters from various 'classics' sections of boxing sites that also seem to believe the likes of Jack Johnson could do well against Lewis.

                  Lennox at 6'5-6'6 is the greatest of the super heavies and would have brutally and harilously destroyed Jack Johnson to the point where Johnson dies in the ring.


                  Lewis would also have brutally knocked out Joe Louis, yet morons will say **** like 'WELL Louis got that KO POWER and is such a ruthless finisher.'

                  So it's not just hyping the American White fighters of the very distant past. It's the hyping of Americans period.

                  All fighters prior to 60's footage era should have asterisks next to their names.

                  What the **** justification is there in ranking Joe Louis or Rocky Marciano over Lennox? Lennox would have walked down both their combined resume in 3 years time.

                  The Golota VERSION of Lennox Lewis would have knocked off Rocky Marciano's head into the 10th row.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Check_hooks View Post
                    I agree that people highly overrate the old era of boxers same with baseball, football and basketball

                    Its not the boxers/athletes fault that they were born and fought in that particular era tho
                    the history of basketball in terms of colorization is a great example.

                    It coincides with the social history of america.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP