Writer debunks "The Four Who Baffled Liston Article"

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by swagdelfadeel, Mar 17, 2020.


Page 7 of 7
  1. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,137
    13,089
    Jan 4, 2008
    That is certainly not objective. So both articles left out crucial information, but you started a thread against only one of them.
     
    Bokaj, Mar 20, 2020
    Bokaj, Mar 20, 2020
    #91
    choklab and swagdelfadeel like this.
  2. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing

    19,065
    20,547
    Jul 30, 2014
    Tbh I didn't notice they left that part out. The reason why, I don't know but their could be alternate reasons. It doesn't have to be a case of objectivity or bias. He could've forgot about the injury, not noticed it, or not believed it (even though you say it's clear he was hurt.).
     
    swagdelfadeel, Mar 20, 2020
    swagdelfadeel, Mar 20, 2020
    #92
  3. Bokaj

    Bokaj Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    28,137
    13,089
    Jan 4, 2008
    I think both omissions (Liston's inexperience when he lost to Marshall and Machen's injury) seem to be of the variety of not letting the truth getting in the way of a good story. Not unusual when someone wants to make a point.
     
    Bokaj, Mar 20, 2020
    Bokaj, Mar 20, 2020
    #93
    juppity, mcvey, swagdelfadeel and 1 other person like this.
  4. swagdelfadeel

    swagdelfadeel Obsessed with Boxing

    19,065
    20,547
    Jul 30, 2014
    I can agree with this.
     
    swagdelfadeel, Mar 20, 2020
    swagdelfadeel, Mar 20, 2020
    #94
    Bokaj and mcvey like this.
Page 7 of 7