So, yeah, someone should write a more definitive book on Ketchel. It seems there are quite a few of these books like this to be written.
You could do it ! I agree with others who had said he'd make a great subject for a film, a mini series even. The setting and period is attractive, cinematic. Perhaps a bit gritty and downbeat ending, which is fine with me.
This is like debunking the Flat Earth Theory. Where do you even start? How do you know she was only interested in money? How would Tyson know that at the time? Why would he expect his relationship with Givens to be transactional? How can that be the case, when their relationship was emotional in nature? If he deserved it, since he "got what he signed up for," would you say the same about her if he knocked her out with a 6 punch combo? She "signed up for it." This is the poorest argument a person can make. That because there is a possibility that negative things happen, that person should bear all responsibility if it indeed does happen. At the end of the day, this line of thinking ends with every human being suffering as a means of justice. Stupid. I wonder what tragedies you and your family have faced, that some bozo on the internet can paint as a deserved event? Your argument is built off one flimsy pretense after another. Use this pattern of logic in any place of sophisticated problem solving and decision making and get laughed out the room.
Ketchel to me is in top ten ever...but never top 5....just too crude....great great talent there with mental toughness to extreme but even if taught better....just too awkward thanks
This again? Easy. I prioritize learning about boxing, and whats right for boxing, over interpersonal disputes. Klompton has called my work crap, and I've called his crap. We probably both have enough positive validation of our respective work that neither of us can be bothered by one another. If he produces something valuable, it's more important than him or me. For instance, I liked your last post in this thread, because what you said is more important than who you are. It's a simple contradiction that seems like it would keep you up at night, but that I can juggle with ease. Maybe because I consider myself to be genuine and extreme in my passion for boxing. Steve Jobs still sat with Bill Gates at ATD despite their decades long rivalry. So I think klompton and I can find some common ground to dispute your ******ed arguments. Its is simple as agreeing that the sky is blue. Not as impressive or noteworthy as you make it out to be. So thanks much ****, but I think I know how to manage my relationships with others just fine. Take your fake concern elsewhere.
I'm not sure why you've come along being so patronizing and antagonistic again. You started straight off the bat with an insult/ad hominem attack on me personally ("Your critical thinking skills on matters outside the ring are atrocious." .... ... a most sweeping generalization and a character attack). You totally fail to comprehend the most basic arguments then cast judgment on my thinking/logic abilities. If you stopped being so stubborn in trying to insult, berate or attack my posts you might escape the idiotic state you're working yourself into and actually grasp what I've been saying. And to fill your comprehension void you've created a multitude of strawman arguments to aim fire out, none of which I have made. As far as I know, Mike Tyson never DID knock Robin Givens teeth out, nor knock her out with a 6-punch combo ... Yet here you are siding with the person who said he SHOULD HAVE DONE so or would have been justified in doing so .... It's bizarre. It's sad that you defend such statements. My point is simple: Tyson married a bad woman, a woman that was clearly after his money, things predictably turned sour and they broke up, that's life. It's no great tragedy, it's just life. For someone to say that situation actually required more violence towards the woman is frankly disgusting or perhaps just extremely misguided. I never said Tyson deserved to be fooled and fleeced by a couple of women (if indeed he even was fooled) - I'm not sure where you're getting that from - but I do say it's no big tragedy, worse things happen, you live and learn. Life goes on. A rich guy with millions marries a golddigger and ends up with a few less millions. Hardly something for us to feel bitter and express violent thoughts about 30 years later, is it ? Tyson certainly isn't going around being bitter about it. He even looks back and laughs about it. He's actually a level headed and matured person. The marriage with Givens is a relatively minor blip in his life. So, what's your problem with that all that?
The point is you're siding with the man who was advocating more violence towards women and attacking me for countering that. I stated my opinion about Tyson-Givens situation to show a bit of context and perspective on how life is and how life goes on. Now, if you think it's okay for heavyweight champions to knock women's teeth out (and, I repeat, Tyson, for all his faults never did that !) then carry on taking klompton's side on it. I don't think beating women's teeth out is justified, however much money they want to fleece from you in a marriage situation. It simply isn't, in my opinion. By my moral standards. Klompton, I don't know him but he often comes across as a nasty, sick and twisted individual. So I don't really care about his opinion and am not surprised by it. I can counter it or ignore it. He's very possibly an unusually nasty person in real life, so I wouldn't spend time trying to convince him woman beating is kinda bad. But I will occasionally try to temper the hateful violence-advocating comments with something more civilized. Take aim at me if you want. That's your prerogative. I've tried to be civil with you often and you're now just coming across as an idiot with a vendetta or something, the root cause of which I have no idea. To recap the course of events in this thread: 1. Perry said Mendoza had an issue with Johnson because of wife beating allegations. 2. Mcvey pointed out that Mendoza didn't have any issue with a number of other boxers with wife beating allegations. McVey listed some. The list included Tyson. 3. Klompton piped in, saying Tyson should have done worse to Givens and her mother, knocked their teeth out would have been justified. 4. I piped in saying "not really" and stated my opinion on context and perspective, explaining what happened to Tyson at the hands of those women was both obvious and just part of life for many rich men, etc. 5. Klompton says people who were there (not Tyson himself mind you) were his source to justify the unjustifiable. 6. You came along with a post that completely failed to grasp what I'd wrote, while at the same time dissing my critical thinking abilities. I'll let you get on with it now. I feel I've already stated the case against the idea that Tyson didn't inflict enough physical damage on a couple of women, and that's all I set out to do. I'm quite sure Tyson doesn't wish he had done that either. Couldn't care less what klompton and a bunch of losers still living off their past associations with Tyson want to say on the matter. There's wrong and there's right.
Lol. Captain Righteous to the rescue. Like I said: Youre a ****ing nobody on a forum thats devoted to a niche sport hiding behind a screen name who has never done anything but armchair commentate about and with people far more accomplished than you. Pardon me if I dont take you or your opinions seriously. So yes, I will defer to the people who knew her personally who today, 30 years later with nothing to gain by it, maintain that she was a vile snake of a woman who got better than she deserved. When a guy who I have literally never heard say a negative word about anyone else, including many that in my opinion were equally bad to Tyson, refers to her as "pure evil" that gets my attention much more than some nameless clown on the internet who has read a couple of magazines in his life and suddenly thought he was expert enough to pontificate on the subject and justify that gold digging bitches actions by saying "he should have known better" as if you yourself, in all of your professed wisdom didnt make any mistakes in love at 21 years old. Sorry pal but having a ***** instead of a **** doesnt exhonerate you from wilfully attempting to ruin someones life for your own financial gain. Nor does the argument hold up that because she was a woman she doesnt deserve the same treatment that a man would had he been the one to do everything to you that she did to Tyson. Sorry pal, but this is the 21st century and Robin and Ruth Givens were not damsels in distress. But you hang on to that fairy tale if it helps you sleep at night.
I don't expect you to take my opinions seriously. Or care one bit whether you do. I've made it clear enough what I think of yours. To me, you're just a nobody on a forum too. That's how the internet works I didn't say we don't all make mistakes. I'm saying the opposite. Yes, we do make mistakes. Tyson made a mistake, married a woman who took some of his money. Could happen to anyone. Life went on. She didn't "ruin his life". Why are you crying about it ? Tyson was no saint either, as he admits he was having relationships with dozens of other women throughout his entire courtship and marriage with her. To most people that isn't thought of as a "nice" thing to do to a spouse either, so why not cry about that ? Why not ? If you're going to be all soppy about what happened to poor little Mikey, his wife taking all his money while he was out screwing other women. It's all par for the course. It's the adult world. On the known facts alone the whole thing was a bit of a sham, as it appeared from the start. Not that it's anyone else's business. This is nothing for us to care about. It's no tragedy. It's nothing. Givens did wrong by being a greedy gold-digging *****. She is not exonerated for that, however ... I'll draw the line at saying she and her mother deserved to get their teeth knocked out by the world's heavyweight champion. You've made it clear that you believe she should have been physically damaged in that way. That's your outlook. Good luck with that. The people who were there who want to whine about it now are the losers. I doubt Tyson or Givens give that episode in their lives much importance. No, they were not damsels in distress. They were conniving gold-digging bitches. There are a lot of them about. And Tyson was a philandering husband who might have slapped her about once or twice (although he clearly went short of "knocking her teeth out" as you'd liked him have to.). There are a lot of them about too. It's nothing to whine about 30 years later. Get over it.
I don't have more time to waste on silly discussions with you people who want to cry and whine about little things in their favourite boxers lives that didn't actually effect you at all, like some ridiculous soap opera ...... or against people who use these boxing discussions to randomly vent expressions or thoughts of violence against women for your own personal gratification, (due to what I'd hate to guess) ...... or against people who can't even comprehend the meaning of the most simple paragraphs so contruct poor strawman arguments to come at me with. ..... that probably accounts for most the time I waste on this forum these days. I retire. My legacy is secure.
You wrote this whole demeaning paragraph professing your superiority, yet you make the most basic of logic errors, errors a 10 year old would pick up on. The lack of logic is likely because you get so riled up you aren't thinking straight when posting. This is also evident about your lack of comprehending what he was saying, I mean, you missed the points totally, and I'm wondering what you think that says? Just like I could ask, how many internet forums have you been banned from, and how that reflects on you... I mean, that is the definition of child like behavior is it not? The tried and true saying comes to mind when I see posts like this.... "Why do you look at the speck of sawdust in your brother’s eye and pay no attention to the plank in your own eye? How can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when all the time there is a plank in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the plank out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother’s eye.
Whoa. Did klompton really say beating a woman is not that bad? Source? Mcvey of is wrong!!! He said what???I do not like Lamotta, Or McCoy for doing this. The same for Jack Johnson. I also despise Golota for his cheap fouls.
@Unforgiven Too late to point out logical fallacies when your first post on this is chock full of them. You must be projecting. Calling my arguments straw men, when you continually associate Klompton opinion with mine. I don't think girls should get beaten by guys. But there are times where it is justified and necessary. Was this one of them? Probably not. But Klompton probably knows things about who she is that you and I don't. Givens seemed to have did everything to ruin his life. She must've drove him to the brink of insanity with her mind games and manipulations. She's a thief, a manipulator, and an evil person. You can see her evil for yourself in that one interview.
What... and Tyson is some shrinking white flower Rez? Please.. we're talking about someone who beat up old woman and robbed them. Somebody who routinely hang out with and associated with pimps, hustlers, pros and criminals. I'd reckon he's done far worse in his life than Givens ever has, but yet it's okay to "punch her in the mouth" LOL. It's a ludicrous statement that is totally unjustifiable in ANY moral/ethical sense, let alone a logical one.
So what? We're supposed to hate Tyson forever because he grew up in a crappy household and did bad things? That doesn't change the fact that when he became a productive superstar as a result of hard work on his craft, this woman mentally tortured this guy, destroyed his character on live TV, and much worse. She made him suffer more than anybody else in his life. And she made him suffer hard. I didn't say it was.