Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"He was winning until he got knocked out" why do people say this?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #51
    People say that the loser was winning the fight because...maybe he REALLY was winning the fight on the scorecards till he got KO;d. Close thread on that point alone.

    Of course in the end the winner is remembered for getting the W, no denying that.

    Comment


    • #52
      Of course it's worth saying, dumbass. It's part of boxing discourse, which is why you don't understand why people would say it. A knockout might be a definitive statement but it doesn't erase what happened before it. In fact, what happened before it will often shed light on the KO.

      Ie Khan vs Garcia. Amir looked offensively great before he got KOd - but only because he was taking huge risks. Bombs were whizzing by his head. If he had fought the measured fight he should have, he probably would still be leading rounds-wise but he wouldn't have looked as offensively potent (and would have lasted a few more rounds).

      "He was winning until he got knocked out" is actually a very interesting statement as knockouts will usually be done by the party who was winning at the time. So are you really saying it's not worth exploring what happened before the KO?

      You think we should just move straight past that and into being smug and making troll threads?

      Come on, Larry. Use your brain, man.

      Comment


      • #53
        Originally posted by Chino Madonna View Post
        Of course it's worth saying, dumbass. It's part of boxing discourse, which is why you don't understand why people would say it. A knockout might be a definitive statement but it doesn't erase what happened before it. In fact, what happened before it will often shed light on the KO.

        Ie Khan vs Garcia. Amir looked offensively great before he got KOd - but only because he was taking huge risks. Bombs were whizzing by his head. If he had fought the measured fight he should have, he probably would still be leading rounds-wise but he wouldn't have looked as offensively potent (and would have lasted a few more rounds).

        "He was winning until he got knocked out" is actually a very interesting statement as knockouts will usually be done by the party who was winning at the time. So are you really saying it's not worth exploring what happened before the KO?

        You think we should just move straight past that and into being smug and making troll threads?

        Come on, Larry. Use your brain, man.
        LOL

        This thread is weird...it's common sense that a fighter CAN be winning a fight on the cards till he got KO'd.

        Such type of fights are the ones which end up with the HUGE dramatic upset ending...

        Comment


        • #54
          A fighter takes the best of the other fighter and then he gets a KO victory. You simply have to finish the fight. Scores are only counts for the end of the fight or a technical decision.

          Comment


          • #55
            Larry is the best at making Pac and/or Floyd threads without saying their names

            Comment


            • #56
              Originally posted by gamefrk View Post
              LOL

              This thread is weird...it's common sense that a fighter CAN be winning a fight on the cards till he got KO'd.

              Such type of fights are the ones which end up with the HUGE dramatic upset ending...
              They don't understand that simple concept until it happens to their favorite fighter.

              Comment


              • #57
                Gamboa was outclassing Crawford until he got KOed, it was very obvious it was the weight that did him in. It's a valid argument.

                Comment


                • #58
                  pacf@gs and khantards need this excuse so their gods won't look as bad.......

                  Comment


                  • #59
                    Originally posted by LA_2_Vegas View Post
                    Just the phrase "He was winning until..." basically implies something dramatic happened. A moment that wouldn't have been as interesting, heroic, dramatic, etc without the context of what was happening beforehand. That goes for a KO or a game winner by MJ.

                    (I can't speak for people who tries to use it as a rationale for losing tho. I'm a Lakers' fan so over the yrs with Kobe I've been able to ride off with wins and hear opposing fans cry "we were winning until"..lol)

                    I'm just saying sometimes KO, games winners, etc. SOMETIMES can mask the bigger picture. There is plenty of info to take from completed rounds in a boxing match
                    Like my Jamaican friends says, " eye ear ah mahn when ah mahn speak "

                    Comment


                    • #60
                      Originally posted by Xi_ View Post
                      pacf@gs and khantards need this excuse so their gods won't look as bad.......
                      I'm neither a pacf@g nor a khantard, but this is common sense dude...

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP