Will Sergey "The Klutcher" Holdalev do more than a head lock to stop inside fighting

[Mr Objecitivity]

WRONG. To see who made the first illegal move with regard to clinches, you have to look at the first clinch. You refuse to look at the first clinch in this fight because....? Well let me stop there before you go on with more of your (il)logical bullshlt. You want to "resolve" the first issue. There is nothing to resolve. You say there is a body headbutt. I say there isn't. You REFUSE to show the exact moment that his head made contact with Kovalev's body. I wonder why.



Being that I've never seen a professional fighter warned for this, I'm wondering if a crouch is the same as what you are describing. In any event, and for the sake of moving this along so that you stop your blatant ducking, let's say Ward ducked below the waist in this particular instance. So Ward committed a foul first. Care to look at the other 53 instances of Kovalev clinching now??? Or will you still duck?



Once again, are you going to step up and tell me the exact moment that his head makes contact with Kovalev's body, or will you keep ducking. I'm noticing a trend. Duck duck duck.



I aced every single one of my logic courses at an Ivy League university. You aren't impressing me with your ******ed argument based on false premises.

WRONG. To see who made the first illegal move with regard to clinches, you have to look at the first clinch.

That's a false dilemma logical fallacy because it assumes clinching is the only way to commit a foul / an illegal move. It obviously isn't. There exists other fouls / illegal moves excluding clinching.

Thus, it doesn't NECESSARILY have to be the first clinch that has to be investigated, but the first foul / illegal move committed, which could be any foul / illegal move.

You refuse to look at the first clinch in this fight because....?

I've already addressed this question. It's because the initial point hasn't been resolved yet and it's irrational / illogical to move to another point when the first point is still yet to be resolved.

Well let me stop there before you go on with more of your (il)logical bullshlt.

Or perhaps stop yourself from using uncivilized language and personal attacks as it only makes you appear less intelligent and credible.

You want to "resolve" the first issue.

It has to happen if we're debating this in a logical manner.

There is nothing to resolve.

Yes, there is!

You REFUSE to show the exact moment that his head made contact with Kovalev's body.

The gif is posted above.

Being that I've never seen a professional fighter warned for this,

That's a non sequitur logical fallacy. Just because the referee doesn't warn a boxer for committing a foul / illegal move doesn't mean the foul / illegal move wasn't committed.

Once again, are you going to step up and tell me the exact moment that his head makes contact with Kovalev's body, or will you keep ducking.

The gif is posted below.

I'm noticing a trend. Duck duck duck.

I'm also noticing a trend, which is your incapability of staying on topic, incapability of staying on topic, incapability of staying on topic........

I aced every single one of my logic courses at an Ivy League university. You aren't impressing me with your ******ed argument based on false premises.

1) I'm not intending to 'impress' you. In other words, I could careless whether I 'impress' you or not.

2) I am an artificially intelligent extraterrestrial robot who is programmed with logic. In other words, I could careless about your insignificant courses you've completed.

3) If you're going to commit logical errors, then expect (or perhaps don't) to be called out on them. The most likely scenario is, you will eventually be called out on your logical errors whether you like it or not.

Even TonyGe, who agrees with you about bending below the waist, went on record saying there were no headbutts.

My conclusions aren't based on appealing to popularity / authority. In other words, I could careless what others say / think. They could say the Earth is round for all I care, doesn't NECESSARILY make it true.

We all know you can't commit a foul in retaliation for a foul, right?

We all know that there can't be an uneven playing field and a handicapped advantage for one boxer over the other. So if one boxer is allowed to foul whilst the other isn't, then there is an uneven playing field / handicapped disadvantage. However, if both boxers are allowed to foul, then there isn't any uneven playing field / handicapped advantage and as such, it's acceptable as it is fair!

If Ward did not headbutt Kovalev, then he simply can not be seen as initiating a foul.

That's another false dilemma logical fallacy! Andre Ward doesn't NECESSARILY have to headbutt Sergey Kovalev in order to qualify as the boxer 'initiating a foul'. In any given sequence, If Andre Ward is the first to commit ANY foul before Sergey Kovalev does, then Andre Ward is the one who is initiating the foul.

[travestyny]

What was Andre Ward's head doing after he raised his head from a ducked / lower position?

Wasn't Ward moving his head towards Sergey Kovalev's body from less than an arm's length distance?

Didn't Andre Ward cause a reaction from his headbutt?

The answer is yes to all of those questions and Andre Ward's actions in that gif are fouls / illegal moves.

If you answer no to any of those questions, then you need to explain yourself and provide evidence to the contrary.

Are you going to tell is the exact point in which his head "butts Kovalev's body" or not? I don't understand what's taking you so long to do this.

What is his head doing? His head is moving up after ducking down. You are saying he ****** his head against Kovalev. Show it. It's very simple. Either you can, or you can't. Look at the video and tell us the exact time in which his head ****s into Kovalev's body.

[travestyny]

We all know that there can't be an uneven playing field and a handicapped advantage for one boxer over the other. So if one boxer is allowed to foul whilst the other isn't, then there is an uneven playing field / handicapped disadvantage. However, if both boxers are allowed to foul, then there isn't any uneven playing field / handicapped advantage and as such, it's acceptable as it is fair!

So what you're saying is that when Kovalev is allowed to excessively hold, it would be fair for Ward to punch him in the balls. Any argument against that, Mr. Logic? Go ahead. Make the ******est argument in this entire thread, which is only slightly more ****** than the other arguments you've made.

That's another false dilemma logical fallacy! Andre Ward doesn't NECESSARILY have to headbutt Sergey Kovalev in order to qualify as the boxer 'initiating a foul'. In any given sequence, If Andre Ward is the first to commit ANY foul before Sergey Kovalev does, then Andre Ward is the one who is initiating the foul.

Which is exactly why you should look at all of the sequences, don't you think, "genius"? You're stuck on one and clinging to it for dear life, ducking pointing out the exact moment when Ward "head butted Kovalev's body," and just throwing in ducking below the waist because you know your whole "head butting the body" bullshlt is just that. Simply bullshlt.

When are you going to stop ducking like a little bltch? Tell me the exact time when he headbutt's Kovalev's body. I've asked about 8 times now, while NOT ducking any question from you. You keep asking what was Ward's head doing? He was returning to his fighting stance. And by the way...there was no head butt.

[travestyny]

Just to make this clear:

What was Andre Ward's head doing after he raised his head from a ducked / lower position?

His head was returning from a lowered position.

Wasn't Ward moving his head towards Sergey Kovalev's body from less than an arm's length distance?

Yes. That is irrelevant to the discussion of whether he butted Kovalev's body or not. Why the hell would you post a gif from farther away and in which you can't see clearly what's happening to try to prove your point? Oh, that's right...because you are afraid of the truth.

One more time:

Didn't Andre Ward cause a reaction from his headbutt?

No, because there was no headbutt.

The answer is yes to all of those questions and Andre Ward's actions in that gif are fouls / illegal moves.

If you answer no to any of those questions, then you need to explain yourself and provide evidence to the contrary.

Oh, I have some explaining to do? Ok, how about this? A little challenge. We can find some unbiased posters to judge who is initiating the fouls during the clinches. I guarantee that we find Kovalev initiates these fouls a great deal more often than Ward. Are you up for it, or will you back out? I think that's completely fair, don't you? Let's see if you are willing to step up for this "head butting the body" belief, or if you are a coward.


By the way, thought you might want to know that Ward isn't the only one that ducks below the waist. Check this nice move out by Sergey.

[IMG]http://i62.***********.com/albums/h95/travestyny/Screen%20Shot%202017-06-09%20at%209.46.26%20PM.png[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i62.***********.com/albums/h95/travestyny/Screen%20Shot%202017-06-13%20at%209.13.23%20PM.png[/IMG]

[img]https://media.*****.com/media/l3E6uhDAN3W7vylji/*****.gif[/img]

[Mr Objecitivity]

Are you going to tell is the exact point in which his head "butts Kovalev's body" or not? I don't understand what's taking you so long to do this.

What is his head doing? His head is moving up after ducking down. You are saying he ****** his head against Kovalev. Show it. It's very simple. Either you can, or you can't. Look at the video and tell us the exact time in which his head ****s into Kovalev's body.

Are you going to tell is the exact point in which his head "butts Kovalev's body" or not?

Are you going to tell me exactly what Andre Ward was doing with his head after raising his head to Sergey Kovalev's chest height from a ducked / lower position? I don't understand what's taking you so long to do this.

Here, this is the last time I'm going to break it down for you and I won't break it down any further:







To me, it looks like Andre Ward's head landed on Sergey Kovalev's body in the first image, which then caused Sergey Kovalev to move back an inch / inches in the second image. Even if one wants to claim that it's unclear whether Andre Ward truly made contact on Sergey Kovalev's body with his head, one thing is very CLEAR, which is that Andre Ward at the very least ATTEMPTED a headbutt and in best case scenario (for Kovalev), he failed. So Andre Ward still deserves criticism for an ATTEMPTED headbutt regardless.

His head is moving up after ducking down.

That doesn't answer my question as I didn't ask what his head was doing only after he ducked down but after he raised his head from a ducked down position. Your answer is merely giving some of the exact same info as my question. It's like saying 'I returned home' in response to being asked by somebody 'what were you doing AFTER you returned home'.

In other words, you're not answering the unknown, but simply repeating the known info.

So what you're saying is that when Kovalev is allowed to excessively hold, it would be fair for Ward to punch him in the balls.

Yes, by definition it would be fair! It's one illegal move for another.

Or are you claiming it's less '******', more intelligent and fairer if Sergey Kovalev were to do nothing, just stuck to the rules whilst Andre Ward is allowed to perform illegal moves and is performing those illegal moves? I'll let you think about that Mr Logic!

For anything to be 'fair', there has to be equal rules and standards in place for both boxers. So either disallow either boxer to commit any illegal move, or allow both to commit any illegal move. In that way, it's perfectly 'fair' for both!

Make the ******est argument in this entire thread, which is only slightly more ****** than the other arguments you've made.

Unsubstantiated claim = exposing your own level of ******ity / intelligence.

Which is exactly why you should look at all of the sequences, don't you think, "genius"?

Yes, but only after the first point has been resolved.

When are you going to stop ducking like a little bltch?

When are you going to stick to the topic at hand without waffling, or diverting away like an incompetent individual with the attention span of a toddler or an ADHD sufferer?

You're stuck on one and clinging to it for dear life

I'm refusing to move to another point until the first point is RESOLVED. If that means I'm 'clinging onto it for dear life', then so be it!

ducking pointing out the exact moment when Ward "head butted Kovalev's body,

I've posted a gif which shows exactly that. I've also posted pictures. So no, I'm not 'ducking'

and just throwing in ducking below the waist

Which is a justifiable criticism as it's against the rules and as Andre Ward committed this particular foul.

because you know your whole "head butting the body" bullshlt is just that. Simply bullshlt.

Maybe that's what you are! Considering you have to use the word '****' and 'bull****' repetitively.

When are you going to stop ducking like a little bltch?

When are you going to?

Tell me the exact time when he headbutt's Kovalev's body.

I have! Now whether you accept it or ignore it, doesn't change what happened.

I've asked about 8 times now, while NOT ducking any question from you.

Whilst I have responded to your question similar number of times.

In addition, you haven't given an exact answer to my question I asked.

You keep asking what was Ward's head doing?

Yes!

He was returning to his fighting stance.

Which again has nothing to do with the question I asked.

Or are you implying Andre Ward moving his head onto Sergey Kovalev's body from less than an arm length away is him 'returning to fighting stance'?

And by the way...there was no head butt.

And by the way, there was a head butt.

His head was returning from a lowered position.

Again, doesn't answer my question.

Yes. That is irrelevant to the discussion of whether he butted Kovalev's body or not.

No, it isn't irrelevant because an attempted headbutt that fails to hit the target is just as much of a foul as a landed headbutt. An attempted elbow attack which misses the target is just as much of a foul as a landed elbow attack. The same applies for knee strikes and any other illegal move.

Andre Ward pushing his head forward towards Kovalev's body from such a distance counts as an ATTEMPTED HEADBUTT!

Why the hell would you post a gif from farther away and in which you can't see clearly what's happening to try to prove your point?

Perhaps speak for yourself! I can see what's happening clearly. Even if it's totally unclear whether Ward landed a damaging headbutt on Kovalev, what's indisputable is that he at the very least attempted a headbutt.

Oh, that's right...because you are afraid of the truth.

Perhaps speak for yourself again!

No, because there was no headbutt.

Yes, because there was a headbutt.

Oh, I have some explaining to do?

You don't? Then why are you responding to me?

A little challenge. We can find some unbiased posters to judge who is initiating the fouls during the clinches.

Appeal to popularity is a logical fallacy. As such, I don't base my conclusions on it. Therefore, I don't accept your challenge.

By the way, thought you might want to know that Ward isn't the only one that ducks below the waist. Check this nice move out by Sergey.

Perhaps post the whole sequence so it can be seen what exactly happened there..

In addition, Sergey Kovalev or any other boxer ducking the odd single / rare time doesn't mean much. CONSISTENCY is what I go by. Based on CONSISTENCY, Andre Ward CONSISTENTLY ducks below the waist.

If Andre Ward produces a rare knockout victory, does that make him a knockout artist?

If Andre Ward gets knocked out once, does that make mean he has a glass jaw?

If Sergey Kovalev fails to KO one opponent, does that make him a feather fist or a weak puncher?

[travestyny]

I don't accept your challenge.

Blah blah blah. I had a challenge for you. Do you want to find unbiased posters and see who is initiating the fouls.

Matter of fact, I'll make it even easier. Do you want to find unbiased posters and ask if there is a "body headbutt" in that gif. That should get to the bottom of this.


What do you think. Are you in, or will you duck?


Edit: Oh, I'm sorry, I see you didn't accept. LMAOOOOOOO! THAT PROVES YOU ARE FULL OF SHlT. LMAOOO. SORRY, YOU LOSE.


In a court of law, it works something like this. Unbiased jurors are sought, they review the evidence, they vote. You are not only saying you are unwilling, most likely because you are afraid you will be found wrong, but don't think I didn't also catch that "even if it is unclear that he was head butting" mumbo jumbo of yours. LMAOOO.

1. You're unwilling to listen to me when I've explained this shlt to you over and over again.
2. You're unwilling to listen to unbiased posters who would explain this shlt to you.

Yea, you're done.
Take care, clown.

[nacho daddy]

LOL I love how the guys who have never boxed have somehow flipped this as Kovalev the one initiating the clinch.

If your opponent charges you aggressively with his head low the way Ward does it's very hard to get punches off, if you are a high IQ fighter you stop his momentum and that's by standing your ground which will result in a clinch, that way you are not on your heels while the guy coming in is under you giving him better leverage to punch.

If you're a ****** fighter you let Ward smother you and bully you while Ward gets his shots in.

Ward bulrushes his way into a clinch that's why he has been involved in headbutts which usually will be in his favor because he has the momentum.

what about using a red cape and stepping to the side when he charges in? what about stepping to the side for real and smashing the side of his face?

[nacho daddy]

Yeah but after you stop the fighters momentum clinching is not the only option, you can use footwork to slide or pivot away, or you can start working on the inside. I can name you a few fighters who clinch in that scenario - you know what they all have in common? They can't fight on the inside.

I don't think either fighter was to blame entirely - but they are at least equally to blame (clash of styles), whereas I have seen so many threads blame Ward entirely, now that its coming back the other way you don't like it. I think its ludicrous to blame ALL of the clinching on the fighter that wants to work inside, its simply not true.

I am not saying I agree with the thread starter but I think what you are seeing is a reaction to all the threads made about Ward.

I think Kovalev initiated a lot of the clinches to stop Ward working inside - in fact I think it was apart of the pre-fight strategy to clamp him down in those situations. Its there for everyone to see in the fight for crying out loud, anyone can watch it. The proof is in the pudding.

in the first round Kov staggered ward with a jab and the black uncle ben ref stopped the action to warn Kov for nothing twice. it is sickening to watch the way ward would try to tackle Kov

[Mr Objecitivity]

Blah blah blah. I had a challenge for you. Do you want to find unbiased posters and see who is initiating the fouls.

Matter of fact, I'll make it even easier. Do you want to find unbiased posters and ask if there is a "body headbutt" in that gif. That should get to the bottom of this.


What do you think. Are you in, or will you duck?


Edit: Oh, I'm sorry, I see you didn't accept. LMAOOOOOOO! THAT PROVES YOU ARE FULL OF SHlT. LMAOOO. SORRY, YOU LOSE.


In a court of law, it works something like this. Unbiased jurors are sought, they review the evidence, they vote. You are not only saying you are unwilling, most likely because you are afraid you will be found wrong, but don't think I didn't also catch that "even if it is unclear that he was head butting" mumbo jumbo of yours. LMAOOO.

1. You're unwilling to listen to me when I've explained this shlt to you over and over again.
2. You're unwilling to listen to unbiased posters who would explain this shlt to you.

Yea, you're done.
Take care, clown.

Blah blah blah.

Blah blah blah.

I had a challenge for you.

Which my response to that challenge was a negative because the challenge was a logical fallacy.

Do you want to find unbiased posters and see who is initiating the fouls.

No, because that's appealing to popularity, which is a logical fallacy, which means I shouldn't accept such a challenge because I don't base my conclusions on logical fallacies.

Matter of fact, I'll make it even easier. Do you want to find unbiased posters and ask if there is a "body headbutt" in that gif.

No, because that's appealing to popularity, which is a logical fallacy, which means I shouldn't accept such a challenge because I don't base my conclusions on logical fallacies.

That should get to the bottom of this.

No, because that's appealing to popularity, which is a logical fallacy, which means I shouldn't accept such a challenge because I don't base my conclusions on logical fallacies.

What do you think.

I think (rather I KNOW) that it's a logical fallacy!

Are you in

No, because I don't base my conclusions on logical fallacies.

or will you duck?

Is that so Mr / Mrs / Miss Duck?

In a court of law, it works something like this. Unbiased jurors are sought, they review the evidence, they vote.

Which is the last resort and which isn't the most reliable / definitive way of coming to a conclusion. It's used only when other more reliable methods have previously failed.

You are not only saying you are unwilling, most likely because you are afraid you will be found wrong,

Perhaps speak for yourself? I can speak for myself thank you very much!

but don't think I didn't also catch that "even if it is unclear that he was head butting

Yes, because given the evidence, at this point it doesn't even matter whether Andre Ward landed a damaging headbutt on Sergey Kovalev. The attempt was evident which alone warrants criticism.

mumbo jumbo

OK Mr / Mrs / Miss Mumbo Jumbo.

You're unwilling to listen to me

I am unable and not 'unwilling' to 'listen' to anything from you because I am not receiving any audio messages / comments from you. I am only receiving written comments from you. Thus, I can only read and not 'listen' to them.

when I've explained this shlt to you over and over again.

OK, continue with your '****' explanations.

You're unwilling to listen to unbiased posters

I am unable and not 'unwilling' to 'listen' to anything from you or anybody because I am not receiving any audio messages / comments from anybody here. I am only receiving written comments here. Thus, I can only read and not 'listen' to them.

who would explain this shlt to you.

Whilst I will explain urine to you.

Yea, you're done.

Again, perhaps speak for yourself? I can speak for myself thank you very much!

Take care, clown.

OK Mr / Mrs / Miss Clown!

[travestyny]

my response to that challenge was a negative

Step up or **** off, bltch. You're scared.