Golovkin tribute thread

Yeah I know, they're very predictable.

 

Not sure if youll see this Nonito, but when I went to see if you had responded awhile back to my reply to you saying that I was a hypocrite if I watched Cotto vs Geale, I saw that the thread was deleted by someone... for no given reason.

Seeing your posts here reminded me of it and this was my response (taken from google cache)

Not that you probably care to read it a month late


Your post was aimed at me for calling people out who are vocal and open about defending various activities that hurts the sport, saying that I am also part of the problem for watching the fight and hence if I choose to watch Cotto vs Geale, I am a hypocrite.





--------------

Youre quality Nonito, a good poster, Im not offended by the post.

-----------------

So that you don't have to read a novel, my most simple response to your post would be -

Really? We are going to ignore the actual values of the various temperatures of hypocrisy by making it as simple as 'if you contribute anything to the situation then it completely bars you from speaking up for its values or opposing those that vocally support their decay'. If that's the case, no fan, journalist, ref, trainer or fighter should EVER oppose any decay within boxing or speak up too loud for its greater potential, because the truth is every single person connected to this sport is in some way, in some form, on some level, contributing some minor support towards what infects it.

I completely understand what youre saying, and you definitely have a point to a degree, but overall its a pretty simplistic and completely doomed way of thinking, imo.

-------------

The more in depth post, if you have the inclination to read....



We keep coming back to business, realism, and the -understanding of those concepts- being confused with actively defending them over standards (because, like it or not, when one is vocal exclusively for one over the other, then you are championing one over the other, regardless of how you may feel otherwise)

It seems to me you don't separate, for whatever reason, the acknowledgment of realism, the acknowledgment of business, and the understanding of these mechanisms that in large part drive the sport, with outright defending them when they overtake standards. You seem to want me to accept what Cotto is doing because I understand the greed behind it. Understanding something, and defending it, are not a packaged deal.

You agree in principle with me, but then defend the debasement of the sport in support (not just the acknowledgement, but the support of) of greed and sell outs, not just financially or just vocally, but both.

-------

Of course I consider realism. Its my consideration of realism that has me do exactly as you say, which is tune into fights that shouldn't be happening (for the most part. Believe it or not however there are plenty of fights I do boycott... no, Cotto/Geale will not be one, so your point stands. I wont tune into HBO for it, but I will see it regardless, which is indeed lending support in some form) My consideration for realism there being in that, if I only tuned into non bull**** fights, Id be left with half a sport. So, my compromise, my consideration of realism as a factor within the sport, is that I still follow it as a whole, despite itself. That is my compromise. That is me considering realism. The fact that I haven't completely abandoned this sport due to the enormous shadow of corruption and tragedies, is my constant considering of the realisms behind it. Why? Because it wins by default. Whats the alternatives? If I want to combat corruption and greed within boxing by boycotting all that is associated with it, well then Nonito I might as well give up the sport right now. The other alternative is... what, be silent?

One can say that following the entirety of boxing, while trying to be vocal against its flaws and calling out those in support of its erosion is hypocritical, and ultimately, you aren't wrong . But being a boxing fan that truly knows the pulse of the sport, and at the same time boycotting all that is wrong with the sport, simply isn't reality, which again is the realm you keep saying Im not dealing in.

So, having established that

Are you then suggesting that there are not temperatures when it comes to supporting the sports erosion, and that every and all trespasses into hypocrisy (because let me tell you, each and every single fan, writer, coach and fighter, becomes a hypocrite on some level in this sport if we go down that road) forbid one from trying to speak up for a better sport?

So you think that being a die hard boxing fan (following all fights and fighters) you automatically forfeit your claim to rally for standards within the sport? Is that what you are saying? Because that is indeed the destination of the road that is 'total boycott of what is bs within the sport' After all, any following of any sort of a bs match is indeed supporting it. And any following of any kind, of any fighter who partakes in bs matches, is in its own way supporting them, by contributing views. And supporting a promoters future shows who has dabbled in any way with corruption within the sport is also contributing to it. Ect, ect, ect.


Your line of thinking there, while has 'a' point, its ultimately flawed and lacks the very thing you claim Im not taking into account, and that is, realism.

No, I am not going to pull a total boycott of every matchup that is bs, every fighter that is involved with the bs, or every promoter that has had its hand in the bs. If you think that should disqualify me from trying to be in vocal support of whats good in boxing, and calling out fighters and fans who rally for whats bad in it, then so be it. I think if you followed that line of reasoning in your own life, you probably shouldn't speak up in the future of half of the immorality you may find yourself opposing. A dim road indeed.

That's like saying I shouldn't call out bogus decisions, because I knew going in that the judges picked had been involved in corrupt decisions before the fight took place and yet I still watched, or I shouldn't call out the lack of fighter purses on certain cards that I watched, since I still supported the card by watching, or that I shouldn't call out refs that have a habit of borderline reffing because I chose to watch the fight knowing that beforehand. That fighters shouldn't speak out about corruption because hey they are making their living in the sport knowing how debased it is. ect, ect. None of those have much basis in reality.




One must have the intellectual navigation, and the 'compromise of reality', which you so champion, to be able to understand the difference in burden between vocally supporting and literally defending the these actions in public forums, in articles, and in media, while calling people who want to see divisions unified as 'stupid', and those who rally against it while contributing as little as they can while still having their fingers on the jugular of the sport as a whole.

And if we as boxing fans wanted to play the hypocrisy game, the truth is every single person connected to this sport is in some way a hypocrite on something. You, me, and everyone in between.

 

And for someone who wants to always bring up being realistic and the business side of the sport, you should be the last person suggesting Lara as an opponent... considering the open rift between Haymon, PBC, and HBO.

If Golovkin cant fight off of HBO, and Lara cant fight on HBO, then what exactly is the point of bringing him up as an available opponent, when hes obviously not an available opponent? Unless someone just wants to play a game and pretend that none of the realities of the situation matter.