Which Classic Fighter Did You Try To Like, But Couldn't?

holmes and lewis 2 exceptional boxers and lewis especially i watched alot of but i could never find myself becoming a fan

 

Yep right, because that´s comparable :rofl

Get yourself some education.

 

why is it not comparable??

Look at it like this. Muslim countries treat women like **** and they have far less rights and value, but its accepted because that is their culture and on an international level its left alone. You beat or stone your woman in Europe and that **** is not gunna fly.

Now is there not something wrong with this issue? Or is it fine how it is and the two scenarios arent comparable?

 

I dislike Ali completely.His attitude, mouth, boxing style(a dumber but more athetically talented Tunney-esque thing), just everything.

I don't understand the obsession people have for Marciano really. I don't think his comp was truly great, nor do I find him interesting as a person. Same goes for Liston and Lennox.

Dempsey was not a racist, by all accounts.

You know who people never call on as far as racism goes? ****ing Corbett. Some of the stuff he said to Johnson when working the FotC.....

 

What has this to do with this case? And no, I don´t see anything wrong with that issue. Why? Because there is no such thing an ultimate ethics. Ethics are made by people and they change it how it fits them. History is proof for this.

Beeing a racist in an era were racism was perceived as a normal thing is something different to beeing a racist in an era were racism is perceived as wrong. The guy back then didn´t think they were doing something wrong. The guys today know they do. That´s the difference.

 

I love how Johnson owned him.

 

"I'm just doin how you did, mistuh corbett"

 

Well although i dont want to use this word and i cringe when hip, smart mouth teenagers use it, im going to have to....this look on things makes you a conformist!! I dont need to put a word on it like ethics or think about it, i just naturally know in my heart that it shouldnt be that way and women should not be treated like that, nobody should.

And you are wrong. It is exactly the same thing! They knew exactly what they were doing. They were dehumanising other human beings for their own benefit.

 

You know it because you was raised in a society where it was wrong. If you would have been raised 100-150 years ago you would think otherwise. Anyway, by the posts you made here I don´t really expect you to understand this.

 

He's not saying it was wrong. He's just saying that it was a factor of the times. Ideologies, society, and culture change on a yearly basis. Your perceptions of race are more than a hundred years removed from someone like Sullivan's- 100 years of huge advances in science, 100 years for a young country to become more racially and culturally diverse, for globalism and awareness of racism and prejudice to spread. If you can't comprehend that the impact of all that time can change how people act and think- you really are as ****ing stupid as everyone on this forum says you are.

 

I have to jump on board with this. I like Marchegiano for the same reasons you stated but, I am not in a hurry to watch his bouts.

Another fighter is Emile Griffith. I know that he is great, but I have not wanted to study his style. I know that I am missing out, but the fights of his that I watched, I was completely bored.

 

This is over-simplifying it. There are people in those countries who certainly see it as wrong, just as there were in our societes 100-150 years ago. Those people ensured that we are where we are today, just as their peers in for example Iran try to do presently.

Scientific studies have shown for example that a society's values "modernize" when its economy does and income level rises (funnily enough, USA is the country that has the most tradional values compared to income level according to these studies).

This is really going astray, but it's just hard to see someone express a somewhat simplified view point and try to come off as superior when doing it.

EDIT: I do agree, though, that Jeffries, Dempsey etc can't really be judged the same as someone refusing to fight people of another colour today. Context do matter. But I also find it hard to rate them as high as some others do just because they used the racism of the time to avoid challenges.

 

I have followed Emile Griffith since I started watching boxing..and that was before I've been "educated" here in this forum as to how boring he was..he was, since the tragedy of the Paret fight caused him to gradually change his style, a master ring mechanic.

 

Of course it is. First, I was talking to Pachilles, you have to keep it simple when you talk to him. Second, I had a similar argument already with Stonehands a while back and it was a great discussion but I don´t want to go through this again. Third, it was not my intention to write an essay on this to include everything, so I simplyfied it. And I don´t want to come off as superior. I am.

I doubt a fighter like Jeffries was afraid of anyone. He just followed the rules of his time. Remember he fought black fighters before he was champ. With Dempsey it was more his management than himself.

 

Yeah, no need to go into all this. I don't condemn either Jeffries or Dempsey, but I'm certainly more impressed by Greb. To put it in another way.