In ye olden times, this forum had occasional debate championships. I propose the following: A member of the pro Carnera faction will argue AGAINST Carnera's legitimacy as a decent champion. His opponent, who will be arguing IN FAVOR of Carnera, will be a poster who believes (outside of the context of the debate) that Carnera was actually a poor champion. In other words, each party will be arguing against his own position. The winner is the person who changes the most audience minds at the end of the debate, as determined by poll. I will offer my refereeing services to the parties, should they be interested. Any takers?
The pro Carnera faction can always elect its best representative. And help prep their guy for the match, if they're not the one selected.
Yeah, it would be cool if it caught on. The main thing we're waiting for is somebody from the anti-Carneristas to sign on. We already have one, possibly two, contenders from the pro-Carnera side.
I am middle of the road, pro Carnera if forced to fall one way or the other...but my knowledge of this time period pales to some posters above. I was watching Godfrey vs Carnera last night since we are talking about him. The picture is Fuzzy but did not look like a low blow to me... I guess I will wait for the George Godfrey debate and why he was excluded from the 1929 tournament, whether he deserved a win against Carnera...And why I have a picture of an Arena Magazine from 1932 with Godfrey on the cover asking what chance he has against Schmeling...
I don't. I may not agree with you, but I welcome anybody who will put their honest opinions out there, without being rude to other posters.
When you get right down to it, what's the point of going onto a forum and discussing boxing? For fun. For the competition and challenge. To learn a little more about boxing, share a little banter, and maybe come up with new insights that the other guys haven't developed before. But mostly for fun.
When I look at the arguments against Joe Louis, I always think that I would have done it very differently, if I were arguing the same opinion. It shows the distance between two groups, if they don't see the same weaknesses in their respective arguments!
Also, this. Speaking as the volunteer ref, I want to see how each group approaches the opposite position when they have to look for strengths in it. Especially if they see completely different strengths.
To each his own but I don’t really post here for competition or challenge, or enjoy arguing for argument’s sake (I know that might surprise some people...). Good luck with this one though—sounds like it could be interesting if people take it seriously.
Thanks. Yeah, the forum debates had a lot of interest and participants way back in 2006/2007. I think there's something about boxing that appeals to a lot of people's instinct to win internet arguments, whether or not they go into the forum with that in mind. As for the spectators, I think they'll learn a little more about boxing history along the way. And probably hear different perspectives from the ones that inundated the forum previously, since the participants are coming from the opposite sides. I like your idea in the other thread of weekly forum fights, too.