Would You Rather Be a Skilled Boxing Historian or Analyst?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Slickstar, Jul 5, 2012.


Page 1 of 2
  1. Slickstar

    Slickstar Crisp This Full Member

    7,094
    5
    Apr 27, 2011
    :think
     
    Slickstar, Jul 5, 2012
    Slickstar, Jul 5, 2012
    #1
  2. Vidic

    Vidic Rest in Peace Manny Full Member

    13,207
    11
    Nov 23, 2010
    If by skilled you mean, thinks everyone born post 1964 is ****. Then I'd rather be a successful boxer turned analyst.
     
    Vidic, Jul 5, 2012
    Vidic, Jul 5, 2012
    #2
  3. john garfield

    john garfield Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,826
    105
    Aug 5, 2004
    ya got the best hybrid in the sport on ESB, S89 (Springs Toledo)
     
    john garfield, Jul 5, 2012
    john garfield, Jul 5, 2012
    #3
  4. Vantage_West

    Vantage_West ヒップホップ·プロデューサー Full Member

    20,873
    647
    Jul 11, 2006
    rather be a skilled boxer. without whooping coughed lungs
     
    Vantage_West, Jul 5, 2012
    Vantage_West, Jul 5, 2012
    #4
  5. wordisbond

    wordisbond Active Member Full Member

    1,454
    17
    Sep 22, 2009
    I'm gonna go with analyst because it would be easier to get steady pay that way. I'm sure you can make money putting out books a la Burt Sugar, but I would love to cover fights for a living and make a decent career out of it.
     
    wordisbond, Jul 5, 2012
    wordisbond, Jul 5, 2012
    #5
  6. Bogotazo

    Bogotazo Amateur Full Member

    31,382
    1,136
    Oct 17, 2009
    I think Analyst. By having the tools to dissect, I can unlock new understandings from today, yesterday, and predicting tomorrow. With history, I can learn a great deal, but it doesn't mean I'll know exactly what I'm seeing. But surely the two are related.
     
    Bogotazo, Jul 5, 2012
    Bogotazo, Jul 5, 2012
    #6
  7. antonio8904

    antonio8904 Atheist Full Member

    6,138
    1
    Oct 19, 2008
    Analyst. Meaning you'd be current and relevant with the sport and people today.
     
    antonio8904, Jul 5, 2012
    antonio8904, Jul 5, 2012
    #7
  8. daprofessor

    daprofessor da legendary professor Full Member

    12,240
    15
    Sep 1, 2007
    i'm both.
     
    daprofessor, Jul 5, 2012
    daprofessor, Jul 5, 2012
    #8
  9. H .

    H . Boxing Junkie banned

    12,826
    3
    Jan 20, 2007
    why not both?
     
    H ., Jul 5, 2012
    H ., Jul 5, 2012
    #9
  10. Phanekim

    Phanekim Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,929
    8
    Jan 6, 2007
    analyst./
     
    Phanekim, Jul 5, 2012
    Phanekim, Jul 5, 2012
    #10
  11. Slickstar

    Slickstar Crisp This Full Member

    7,094
    5
    Apr 27, 2011
    I'm not saying it's impossible, but many people on the general section of the forum tend to strongly lean towards one or the other.
     
    Slickstar, Jul 5, 2012
    Slickstar, Jul 5, 2012
    #11
  12. dpw417

    dpw417 Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,461
    350
    Jul 13, 2007
    analyst...alot of historians are plain crazy.
     
    dpw417, Jul 5, 2012
    dpw417, Jul 5, 2012
    #12
  13. bballchamp11

    bballchamp11 Poster of the Year Full Member

    2,378
    1
    Sep 8, 2011
    easy question. It's like asking if you rather be a sjs19 or Leon vs a popkins?
     
    bballchamp11, Jul 5, 2012
    bballchamp11, Jul 5, 2012
    #13
  14. Hook!

    Hook! Proud member of team G. Full Member

    9,463
    1
    Jun 25, 2011
    :lol:
     
    Hook!, Jul 5, 2012
    Hook!, Jul 5, 2012
    #14
  15. Jacquot

    Jacquot Cruiserweight Paper Champ Full Member

    510
    4
    May 18, 2011
    I'm a historian. My analysis skills when it comes to boxing kind of suck. I'd rather just be honest about it and stick to observing the current and studying the past.
     
    Jacquot, Jul 5, 2012
    Jacquot, Jul 5, 2012
    #15
Page 1 of 2