Articles I wrote 11 Tyson Fury Billeau (dsimon)

[The Old LefHook]

Very nice read, Bill. I would finish it in a magazine, where I often only read parts of articles. I am mystified that anyone can fault you for not forseeing Fury's mental illnees and meltdown a couple of years in advance. When your article was written, everything in it was reasonable. Now with the advantage of retrospect, it is a pure shame we did not get to see how Fury would measure out against the other behemoths currently in play. We got denied some intriguing fights for sure. At 6'9" he was the largest of them all and knew how to use his size a la Klitschko. He beat a ponderous Vlad at his own chicken defense originally devised by Steward for a tall man with suspect whiskers.

[billeau2]

Lamon Brewster defeated Wladimir Kiltschko before he was champion, and so did Corrie Sanders! Those fights where essential turning points in his career, which made him the fighter he was! The fact of the matter is? Once Wladimir Kiltschko became the Heavyweight Champion of the world, he faced his mandatory challengers and he also faced his biggest dangers! (David Haye who is my current favorite heavyweight was probably his most dangerous challenger!).....and he did rematch Lamon Brewster! As a heavyweight champion Wladimir Kiltschko has shown pugilistic virtues, more so than Tyson Fury or any of the other heavyweight champions since Lennox Lewis! And that is why he is still symbolically the bench mark! Tyson Fury is not the bench mark; you cannot live off one fight forever!

Lions and Tigers defend their territory, and they only leave if they are defeated! For whatever personal reason’s…......Tyson Fury did not go through with his obligation to rematch Wladimir Kiltschko! (And as a champion he has not made his intentions clear to his fans, or the boxing world!)…....when you become the heavyweight champion of the world! You take extra responsibilities that normal mortals don’t experience in life! And I just feel that this constant discrediting of Wladimir Kiltschko, is over looking the fact that he has been the last world wide recognized Heavyweight Champion...(Because he took on those responsibilities and lived up to the pugilistic virtues, that all the great champions from the past have set in stone! He defended his belt against all comers with dignity and honor! Tyson Fury has not achieved any of this! So let’s not give him credit for virtues he has not displayed inside of the ring…..

And lets hope if Tyson Fury ever decides to come back? that he can display those pugilistic virtues! because he is great personality....

You missed my point about his mandatories. Brewster was a shell of himself by the time of the rematch, it was obvious. No bone to pick with the rest.

[billeau2]

Very nice read, Bill. I would finish it in a magazine, where I often only read parts of articles. I am mystified that anyone can fault you for not forseeing Fury's mental illnees and meltdown a couple of years in advance. When your article was written, everything in it was reasonable. Now with the advantage of retrospect, it is a pure shame we did not get to see how Fury would measure out against the other behemoths currently in play. We got denied some intriguing fights for sure. At 6'9" he was the largest of them all and knew how to use his size a la Klitschko. He beat a ponderous Vlad at his own chicken defense originally devised by Steward for a tall man with suspect whiskers.

Thanks Lefty! I used to submit to the mags...I don't because they own it once they pay you. What is so nice is I just took the article from the site where I wrote it, and pasted it here... Nobody can sue me, etc for taking my work and sharing it.

True story: One time I published something in karate illustrated, and I get a call from one of my students and he is telling me about how nice the article was, and then he mentions the Dequaspales Jiu Jitsu group, and a magazine they put out...Long story short, these bastards had taken my article and without permission and without paying me, used it...Guess who karate Illustrated could have sued?

[The Old LefHook]

Thanks Lefty! I used to submit to the mags...I don't because they own it once they pay you. What is so nice is I just took the article from the site where I wrote it, and pasted it here... Nobody can sue me, etc for taking my work and sharing it.

True story: One time I published something in karate illustrated, and I get a call from one of my students and he is telling me about how nice the article was, and then he mentions the Dequaspales Jiu Jitsu group, and a magazine they put out...Long story short, these bastards had taken my article and without permission and without paying me, used it...Guess who karate Illustrated could have sued?

Publishing is a dishonest game, a fixed game for the most part. I have written the literature, but have proved a failure at possessing the follow through and persistence they say is necessary. I would always rather write some more than spend my time trying to convince dunces I should be published.

Novels, essays, poetry, books of short stories from western genre to scifi, fantasy and boxing tales--I probably have 2 million words I feel could be published successfully.

People say, You should do this or that, try self publishing, try e-publishing. If I were 27 instead of 67, their advice would be something to consider seriously.

Now I only write seriously for the universe, for some far law or property that might exist which credits me as a passenger on a very long journey for my efforts.

I am certainly not adverse to publishing or sharing my work, though I have learned to be cautious. For a fact, you cannot please everyone, and most people do not like to read anyway, they like to blab like we do here. This is the blab generation.

Holding the attention of readers is always the goal, whether one expects to publish or not. You can lose a reader in the first seconds, or draw them in. Even perfection may not draw them in. So you write to draw yourself in with perfection. I revise constantly until I feel something is perfect.

Lately I got interested in some mathematics and have not written as much. I go through these phases. I am a scrub mathematician, but very interested in the subject.

Writing takes constant practice. Every word we write contributes to our development as writers. Dickens spent as much time with his quill as Heifitz did with his bow.

In all other arts but writing there are child prodigies. Children who might write a lot never turn out to be real prodigies of writing. There are no people born to writing as Ramanujan was born to mathematics and Mozart was born to music. As if by instinct these prodigies produced marvels at a very young age.

This cannot be done in writing, at least never has been. It requires the development of certain sensibilities that only come with time and that a 10 year old simply cannot possess, it requires being a philosopher, which every mature writer is, and no 10 year old is.

If you write and you are young or old, keep practicing. You may have the ability to promote your work or the ability and time to learn how. That part never interested me very much. My fatal flaw is that I can only do what I am interested in.

I do not rate myself too highly. I have never produced the story that is irresistible because the story idea is so unique. Such a storyline would probably be something like The Legend Of 1900. I never read the book but saw the movie. The story itself is captivating. I wish I could think of a story that seems universally irresistible. So far, I haven't, but I still have 2 million probably publishable words. Most of the time even the greatest authors do not produce universally irresistible tales. What they do is perform artistic miracles in ordinary tales.

Anyway, I want to encourage writers to write their best. To do this you have to read the best. See how the proven masters have done it. See that their sentences are not always perfectly organized as you might think, notice that the length of their sentences never becomes monotonous. An important factor is to strive for sentence length that compliments the action without becoming monotonous. Strive for variety of sentence length and structure as a general rule, would be my learned advice.

I say this: do not be afraid to show your work, unless you have plans to publish it later. I could understand such hesitancy.

[billeau2]

Publishing is a dishonest game, a fixed game for the most part. I have written the literature, but have proved a failure at possessing the follow through and persistence they say is necessary. I would always rather write some more than spend my time trying to convince dunces I should be published.

Novels, essays, poetry, books of short stories from western genre to scifi, fantasy and boxing tales--I probably have 2 million words I feel could be published successfully.

People say, You should do this or that, try self publishing, try e-publishing. If I were 27 instead of 67, their advice would be something to consider seriously.

Now I only write seriously for the universe, for some far law or property that might exist which credits me as a passenger on a very long journey for my efforts.

I am certainly not adverse to publishing or sharing my work, though I have learned to be cautious. For a fact, you cannot please everyone, and most people do not like to read anyway, they like to blab like we do here. This is the blab generation.

Holding the attention of readers is always the goal, whether one expects to publish or not. You can lose a reader in the first seconds, or draw them in. Even perfection may not draw them in. So you write to draw yourself in with perfection. I revise constantly until I feel something is perfect.

Lately I got interested in some mathematics and have not written as much. I go through these phases. I am a scrub mathematician, but very interested in the subject.

Writing takes constant practice. Every word we write contributes to our development as writers. Dickens spent as much time with his quill as Heifitz did with his bow.

In all other arts but writing there are child prodigies. Children who might write a lot never turn out to be real prodigies of writing. There are no people born to writing as Ramanujan was born to mathematics and Mozart was born to music. As if by instinct these prodigies produced marvels at a very young age.

This cannot be done in writing, at least never has been. It requires the development of certain sensibilities that only come with time and that a 10 year old simply cannot possess, it requires being a philosopher, which every mature writer is, and no 10 year old is.

If you write and you are young or old, keep practicing. You may have the ability to promote your work or the ability and time to learn how. That part never interested me very much. My fatal flaw is that I can only do what I am interested in.

I do not rate myself too highly. I have never produced the story that is irresistible because the story idea is so unique. Such a storyline would probably be something like The Legend Of 1900. I never read the book but saw the movie. The story itself is captivating. I wish I could think of a story that seems universally irresistible. So far, I haven't, but I still have 2 million probably publishable words. Most of the time even the greatest authors do not produce universally irresistible tales. What they do is perform artistic miracles in ordinary tales.

Anyway, I want to encourage writers to write their best. To do this you have to read the best. See how the proven masters have done it. See that their sentences are not always perfectly organized as you might think, notice that the length of their sentences never becomes monotonous. An important factor is to strive for sentence length that compliments the action without becoming monotonous. Strive for variety of sentence length and structure as a general rule, would be my learned advice.

I say this: do not be afraid to show your work, unless you have plans to publish it later. I could understand such hesitancy.

Well said Lefty! I agree. Thats the conclusion I came to... I think about it like this: The qualities of the writer are Wisdom, which is distinct from intelligence. Wisdom takes cultivation and experience, so yeah its hard to be a prodigy under those circumstances. I enjoy writing for fun. I sort of wrote for fun when publishing, but when the writing is objectified, and it turns into a comodity that they own...well its a lot like when Marx talks about human beings being alienated from the things they produce through artifice and creativity by the capitolist who only sees the objects as financial commodities.