Golovkin has vacated his WBA belt

No clarification needed there Olu, the third bout was never disputed. If you check, you will find that I only claimed GGG to be unbeaten at 160. The third fight was at 168. I explicitly stated that Canelo edged the third fight at 168.

From that, we can conclude that you believe the judges to be infallible in matter of boxing scores.

It necessarily follows then, that you believe that Park Si-hun beat Roy Jones Junior in Seoul in 1988.

And that pretty much puts paid to your claim of being "seasoned in the sweet science." Even Park Si-hun disagrees with you.

Looking over your record of scoring on this forum, that's scarcely surprising.

But it certainly does shatter your self-congratulatory and oxymoronic remark regarding "...discerning observers like me who know boxing."

I am surprised that a man educated in logic and reason would make such a rash claim.
You could know how much boxing you have seen, but you could not know how much of the sport I have seen, and are not, therefore, in a position to make any comparisons on the matter.

Twice now in the same sentence, you make the same schoolboy error and profer yet another rash claim that strays into areas of fact that are not within your purvey.

I have not given you any lectures on any of those topics, Olu.

I have taken issue with your stance on the scoring of two fights involving Canelo and GGG.

Those are laudable qualities, Olu.

This bit is interesting but it relates to punditry, and is not really germane to the scoring of fights that have already taken place.

As Yogi Berra remarked, predictions are always risky, especially if they are about the future.

We can never know with certainty what will happen in a future fight, hence the excitement of upsets.

We were, however, discussing the scoring of fights that are in the past.

No one suggested that you were.
You continue to rebut statements that were never made here.

I'm glad to hear that. Authenticity is another laudable quality.

Now you're starting to sound like a sourpuss, Olu.

Tell me, which one of us started with content that you now you term, "inappropriate?"

Looking back over our exchanges in this thread, it looks like the 'inappropriateness' got started in post 171 when you opined on the consequences of your aunty's hypothetical dick:

My response to that particular post was entirely and very obviously tongue-in-cheek.

Medice, cura te ipsum !

Now it's you who are being ironic Olu, perhaps unwittingly.

You're lecturing me on humility while boasting and spouting braggadocio regarding your knowledge of boxing, jurisprudence and such.

Iterum, Medice, cura te ipsum !

 

Sometime Olu surprises.

 

I stand by my comments all of them. I accept constituted authority as law abiding citizens must even when one does not personally agree with the decision of judges. The records show Lil G has lost at 160 pounds, I know it, you know it and the history books record it.

Thanks for your admiration of my laudable qualities. It goes to my antecedents, training and learning. As per the motto of my alma mater in Latin “Bonet et Fedelis” which to those who did not get an education in the Classics means to be good and faithful by which motto I have tried to live my life.

I notice your determination to converse and make dialogue with me so have at it as I will meet you head on. Whilst I am busy my responses will take time but I will get back to as you will benefit from it.
As for RJJ yes he should have got the verdict in the Olympics against the Korean but he did not hence he did not win the gold medal same thing happened to Floyd. However the verdict rendered stand full stop. Lil G and Canelo was not like that at all. Canelo is superior as proven in 3 fights at 160 and 168.

Also as I keep noticing your grammatical errors in your written text I must correct you. You mean to say “purview”not as you wrote purvey.

I can analyse your knowledge base about boxing from what you write. Keep at it son and you will get there.

I don’t claim to be Nostradamus but I am knowledgeable in my areas of expertise such as boxing ,Jurisprudence, Economics etc.

Enjoy your day young man.

 

You don’t know me Sir and it will take a lot more than this to silence me. Believe that and take it to the bank!

 

So dumb...

 

Youre on a very small island of people who share that opinion.

 

Nope. What you said has no basis in fact, and it just an opinion you are allowed

 

No, you’re the one on the island.

 

Lol, I see that you are very eloquent today.

 

I am always eloquent Sir.

 

We are not considering matters of law here, Olu. We are discussing how we scored a boxing match.
There is no legal compulsion on anyone to accept boxing judges decisions. One can be a completely law-abiding citizen and still not accept the decisions of boxing judges. Such decisions have nothing to do with the law.

We must accept that the decision turned in by the judges is the official result.
That is simply a fact.

That is not the same thing as accepting that the decision is correct.

This statement is open to misinterpretation.

I will restate it to clear up some of that possible misinterpretation

The official boxing records show GGG losing at160 pounds, Olu knows it, Cuchulain knows that the official boxing records shows it, and the history books record that GGG lost at 160 pounds.

You are privileged to have had the benefit of such a fine education, and I'm sure it has been of great benefit to you in your life so far.

I do believe, however, that your memory might be a little faulty when it comes to the old school motto.

From my school days, I'm guessing that the motto might have been Bone et Fidelis.

Bone is the imperative mood of the adjective Bonus (good). You appear to have added an extra "t" at the end.
And the latin word for faithful is Fidelis, not Fedelis.

When your school days are more than three decades in the past, such details can become a little hazey.

I'm always happy to converse with fellow posters, and glad to see that you feel the same way.

And likewise for me...I don't always respond immediately but I will usually get to it eventually and give you the benefit of my thinking on whatever matters we are discussing.

That is sadly the case for both Roy and Floyd.

However, like most who follow the sport, I do not speak of Park Si-hun defeating Roy at Seoul as I think that would be factually incorrect. especially if I was talking to a young newcomer to the sport.

I would be more likely to say that Roy outclassed the Korean in their bout, and explain that the judges got it wrong and robbed Roy of his official victory.
And I would be happy to add that, despite what the olympic records book might show, everybody knows that Roy was unbeaten at the Olympics in Seoul.

While the GGG robbery was not as egregious as the Roy robbery, it was still a robbery in my opinion.
And as you have stated earlier, in your opinion the decision was correct.

So we will have to agree to disagree on that point.

I'm not sure that is completely true or even significant.

Yes, upon examination, I did type PURVEY when I meant PURVIEW (I was responding to you while watching the Oscar ceremonies) but that is a single instance. You grossly exaggerate here by using terms like "keep noticing" and "errors (plural) " when you have cited a single, trivial instance.
Did this mis-typing of purview interfere with your understanding of my points, or are you trying to combat argument with pedantry?

I don't usually check my posts for grammar issues and I notice that apparently, you don't either.


Upon review of your posts, I notice a number of grammatical errors.

This content is protected

Some punctuation is required after the word clarification. A comma perhaps, or a colon.

This content is protected

You are missing some punctuation after the word masses.
You could put a full stop there and begin a new sentence by capitalizing the r at the beginning of rather, or you could put a comma there.

This content is protected

The "neither" here should have a "nor" after Byrd, not an "or."

This content is protected

Punctuation missing between "medal" and "same."

This content is protected

Here, you have a full stop in the middle of a sentence and an incorrect capitalization of a "t."

This content is protected

The "was " needs to be pluralized.

This content is protected

There should be an apostrophe after judges.



And so on...

I'm pointing out these trivial errors to illustrate that we are not writing formal letters here but making responses fairly quickly in the form of a dialogue. For this reason, from time to time, some of us will have minor grammatical mistakes or deviations from accepted usage.

My policy is not to nitpick unless the resulting text is rendered unintelligible.

Yes, you can make some guesses regarding one's boxing knowledge from reading what they write. But your analysis is only valid if it's based on examination of the facts in their text. Disagreeing with someone's opinions is not grounds for negatively assessing their boxing knowledge.

And at any rate, you cannot conclude how long they have watched the sport, based on such analysis.

I have no doubts about that, Olu. You seem knowledgeable and an enthusiastic student of the sport.


Enjoy your day young man.[/QUOTE]

It's uplifting to hear such an appellation, even if it comes from someone half a generation my junior.



BTW, I don't know with certainty which of us has seen more boxing.

But I do know which of us has been watching the sport longer.

When you watched the Rumble in the jungle at five years of age with your dad, I was in university.

 

Has there been a more unlucky fighter than golovkin in terms of clearly being ducked everyone just waited on him getting old and the fact he clearly won the first Canelo fight guy was born in the wrong era

 

It's uplifting to hear such an appellation, even if it comes from someone half a generation my junior.



BTW, I don't know with certainty which of us has seen more boxing.

But I do know which of us has been watching the sport longer.

When you watched the Rumble in the jungle at five years of age with your dad, I was in university.[/QUOTE]

Good post @cuchulain which I must admit I enjoyed.

Now to substantive points I have issue with though I agree with a lot of this post.

We are not considering points of law but it was you that raised my knowledge and qualifications in Jurisprudence in earlier posts. There is in fact an apt relevancy in that the boxing judges appointed tend to be appointed by the constituted regulatory authorities be it the Nevada State Athletic Commission, the BRitish Boxing Board of Control and fights sanctioned by the licensing authorities be it the WBC, WBA, WBO or IBF. I personally find a lot of boxing fans immature because as I always say we are all entitled to our feelings but we cannot make up our own facts. You are a highly intelligent older man who knows and appreciates the difference which is merely what I am pointing out. The fights between Canelo and Lil G may have been close but many fans just refuse to accept the official verdicts because they did not get the results they want. When my country man and friend the late Kid Akeem Anifowoshe lost the the title fight to Robert “Pickin” Quiroga I knew he deserved to win but the valiant Quiroga got a hometown decision. However I refused to tarnish Quiroga’s victory because as much as I was unhappy what will transpire after the fight shows us there are even more important things in life than boxing. Both brilliant young fighter who had the 1991 fight of the year are dead.


You know where I stand on really poorly decisions in boxing. I may not like them but I don’t go on and on about it. I maintain the verdicts in Canelo vs Lil G we’re not bad judging decisions. I stand by this.


On spelling errors I agree that as we type in a hurry and these are not formal letters the usual standards of spelling and punctuation are not always in place as well as predictive text from mobile devices playing up.

Furthermore I am more than a fan. I have been a participant in professional game.


If you are up for it at a time convenient for us I am happy for us to watch all 3 Canelo vs Lil G fights so that we can share our scoring with each other and discuss. It may enlighten the forum.

 

GGG Canelo debate yet again. I’m one of the few neutrals here. I have it 2-1 to Canelo. GGG won the first fight but Canelo won the next 2.

GGG fans impossible to argue with. The most bias on the forum

 

People seem to forget he's 50