POLL: Was Carnera's knockout of Sharkey legit?

Come on what?

If it’s a slanted poll, you should be able to easily explain your reasoning, the way I was able to with the poll in this thread.

I covered the full spectrum.
If you’re referring to the word “fraud,” it’s because Carnera was a champion. So unless you’re exaggerating or being colorful with your wording, a champion by definition can’t be a bum, unless their success was earned fraudulently.

 

The only two choices below "good" both involved the word fraud. "Average" or even "poor" or any number of descriptions should have been in there somewhere. It was a **** poor poll effort to be honest mate. It was noticeably slanted toward "good".

 

See the post again, which I edited before your reply came through. How can you be a poor boxer but also be a champion? That’s an oxymoron. Again, unless you’re being overly colorful with your wording.

For someone who seemingly has an issue with slanted polls, you seem to take exception to the ridiculous poll that this thread was made with. How is that?

 

How about, he was an average boxer who had the benefit of the mob fixing fights for him?

 

You are superimposing your own wording and theory onto others. Simply give them a vote - that's what polls are for. It's entirely possible for people to consider a champ "poor". You will see some of that with guys like Moorer.

Plenty of beers in but i would have went something like -

A. Terrible
B. Poor
C. Average
D. Good
E. Great

Two choices either side of average and enough scope covered. You could add F. Elite but no donkey would vote for that.

Yes Kevin's poll could also be worded plenty better.

 

So like a fraud journeyman?
If only I included that option. Oh wait, I did.

Even if my poll was slanted, which for all intents and purposes I believe it isn’t (perhaps it’s even the opposite considering I included the fraud options) it’s pretty hypocritical to research an old thread I made to make that point, when you can’t admit that the poll in this thread is slanted.

Even if my poll hypothetically were slanted, do two wrong, slanted polls make a right? What exactly is the point you’re trying to make here? It seems like you’re just finger pointing without substance.

 

Moorer was not a poor fighter. He was a boxing champion. This is where your point falls apart.
Whether or not he was a poor champion would be an entirely different question.

In my poll I was actually being sensitive to the fact that some may assume that Carnera was a bum or a journeyman level fighter who achieved his success fraudulently, so I made options for those too.

But I’m glad you agree that the poll in this thread wasn’t worded right.

 

The point he is trying to make is that here you were first post attacking Kevin for slanted posts when you have made just as bad or worse.

You are dishing out the perfect answer in post #18, absolutely, but when you run your poll you didn't get within light years of what you are suddenly (correctly) preaching. Quite ironic.

 

There almost surely will be people that vote Moorer was a poor fighter. Do you not understand that? Have you not seen some of the severe criticisms of him in here? Why have polls if you don't think certain answers are acceptable. Polls are for other peoples opinions.

 

You are saying my poll was bad or worse, but you’ve completely failed to formulate a plausible argument to back it up.

The point you made, that Moorer could be considered a poor fighter, made no sense.

I was able to demonstrate why the poll in this thread was slanted using reasonable logic. You weren’t able to do the same thing in regards to my poll.

 

Which is why I carefully noted that unless people are using colorful language, he cannot be considered a poor fighter.

Objectively speaking, a poor fighter cannot be a boxing champion. It’s an oxymoron.

 

You are obviously not picking up what i am putting down so i will leave it at this.

 

I think I know exactly what you’re arguing. It’s just not a good argument.

 

I would have to agree with this.

A lineal champion has by definition, achieved the highest possible accolade in the sport.

They are not necessarily the best fighter in the world at that point, but there is nobody higher than them!

 

What you think doesn't matter tho. The purpose of a poll is to cover the full spectrum of various opinion. Choices need to be there.

You want to argue poor isn't a reasonable option yet Rez had the option of "fraud bum"!