Things about Classic Boxing Discussion That **** You Off

......this thread proves that any comment about anything can start an argument with people eventually ending up making comments on the intelligence and fight knowledge of others.


..as sweet pea pointed out the thread asks us to list our pet peeves. simple enough. so if poster A says his pet peeve is.....whatever....how can someone come on and argue with him? it is HIS PET PEEVE. he has every right to it. one of my pet peeves is seeing rocky marciano being called a great fighter. now, you may disagree with my thinking that he was not. you may post all the comments you want to the contrary...you can talk about his punch, his undefeated record, etc....but you cannot claim that it is not ONE OF MY PET PEEVES!!!
now....let's just wait for the marciano worshippers come on and say rocky was one of the greatest..was even THE greatest and that i am nuts...which has nothing to do with this thread. even nuts, if that is your conclusion..have the right to have pet peeves.

thank you.

 

Stuff like that doesn't really bother me anymore. I guess you could say I've evoloved past it being able to "get my goat" anymore on a boxing forum.

I guess all that superior nutrition, training, etc.... etc.... really have helped me on a boxing forum :good

 

I could not say first-hand with great certainty, as the footage is not good enough to judge, but by accounts of other fighters, writers and experts, absolutely.

I'm not saying he could walk into a ring and knock out Klitschko - But I think he could compete against men of the same size, perhaps with modern training he could beef up for the demands of the heavyweight division.

I've seen Gene Tunney fight, and he is a fantastic boxer, with a very solid resume - If he was amazed by a geriatric Corbetts ability while sparring with him, then Corbett must be pretty good.

If you do some research on Corbett you might find there is a lot of respect for his ring philosophy and style, which paved the way for boxing specialists like Jack Johnson and Gene Tunney, among others.

 

By the way, it seemed your original post was directed at me because you quoted my post and brought up Roy Jones specifically.

Are you saying the only fighter you hate to see denigrated is RJJ? If you had posted "I hate to see fighters denigrated etc etc" rather than specifying RJJ, whom you frequently accuse me of "hating" (everytime I mention him, really) then I would not have thought the comment was directed at me.

I still think you're a little irrational when discussing certain fighters, e.g., RJJ, the aformentioned demonstrates you can't bare to see him badmouthed, and subjectivity clouds your objectivity.

 

No, not at all. I hate to see him badmouthed because of my high opinion having watched him. When someone writes Jones off in a head to head matchup with someone like Harold Johnson, it irks me because it's ridiculous. I don't nuthug Jones, I have a high opinion of him having watched him fight and seen what he's done. Therefore I will argue in his favor when I think someone badmouths him unjustly.

 

I've also seen him fight and will argue my perspective as I see fit. So we're no different :good

 

I am the opposite; it annoys me when people take as fact the opinions of the likes of Fleischer, a very flawed and biased man IMO.

 

How every almost every time a ATG heavyweight list is made and 95 percent of the lists have Holmes in the top 4-5 people still say he is the most under rated heavyweight champ ever :huh

 

Lester Bromberg could be just as bad. He rated the heavyweight champs (article from the 80s) and gave Louis an 'A' for ring movement and 'B+' for chin AHEAD of Ali, whom he gave a 'B' in both categories. :shock: atsch

 

I agree. I thought the exact same thing.

 

That's a good one.
I've noticed that too.

 

Noone takes them as "fact", I've never seen anyone with a heavyweight list similar to Fleischers - But he saw these fighters in the flesh, and you didn't, so his opinion is worth consideration.

Noones opinion is fact.

 

If I remember right, Dempsey also praised Jack McAullife based on exhibition sparring with him, that he's very good, for his age. If you have seen the footage of that sparring, you'd have a laugh. It's more about expressing respect to old-timers, who might have been their idols.

 

I'd considered this possibility too.

Maybe it's best if we just stop trying to figure out how good pre-film fighters really were.