like him or hate him he is a character and the world needs more character.he is no larry merchant tho
Bert Sugar is a bullshitter. A classic old school pundit, but one with little ability to make distinctions in class.
He should be respected for one thing if nothing else. The way he took on Don King and the sanctioning bodies when they tried to strip James Douglas of the title and reinstate Tyson as champion. Sugar was instrumental in forcing the sanctioning bodies to back down. As with Nat Fleischer, you have an old school guy with old school views, but you have to look at what they did for the integrity of the sport.
You're entitled to your opinion, but just because someone is on TV and/or a big name doesn't give them more credibility than anyone else. Sure, I trust his views over one such as yourself, but I take a lot of the more educated members on ESB's opinions with a lot more credence than I do Sugar's. That's based on what I've come to know about the sport during my time studying. I'm sure Sugar knows a lot more than most of us doas far as his knowledge base in concerned (though even then I've rarely heard him speak on any but the most well loved and reknowned fighters of certain weight classes) but that doesn't equate to him having a greater understanding or appreciation of other aspects involved in the sport, such as the technical side. He seems to respect the fighters that have made the greatest mainstream impacts more than anything else, leaving little time for the unsung greats.
exactly:good he goes with all the established cliche's every time. he would have more credibility if he questiond some more of the old chesnuts and offer a new slant on things but i dont supose that pays. He feeds mainstream sports fans, its his job. sugar has humor and is tv freindly but His insight is not unique.
I've heard he's a really unpleasant individual when off camera, read a few boxing books and apparently he's a nasty, mysogonistic old ****-head. But he seems to hate the Klitschkos so I still like him.
When I've met him he has always been a great, fun loving guy who could not be more friendly with people. I think you have read wrong.
Sugar seems like he'd be a load of fun to close down a bar with. There's something to be said for that.
Bert is full of ****. Hes a bull**** artist, thats it. His schtick as a historian is so overplayed its ridiculous.
I think we all know that Berts a bit of a walter mitty and i also agree with an earlier post that just because hes on the TV doesnt mean he has any better understanding of boxing that maybe the hardcore ESB posters here. Indeed, from my short time here im most impressed with quite a few guys on here and could listen to the likes of John Garfield and the older posters all day long. But i think people should take Bert for what he is. He gets paraded out for any show about more celebrated fighters, trots out a few innaccurate anecdotes that will keep the casual fan happy, gets his money and leaves. I DO respect him as hes been around quite a while now and would be privvy to some great info (maybe stuff that cant be repeated on TV? who knows?) so i kinda let the BS go As for the cigar- is he an ex-smoker?
bert sugars teeth give me nightmares.... like buttersoaked cashews.... i can't hear what he says because i freeze when his jaw unhinges and exposes those chops
Yes. There are a number of posters on this site that have shown they know as much or more about boxing as him, and have even corrected his mistakes. Your actual question should be, "Does being anonymous mean you know less than a well-known writer/historian."
I saw him once in a NYC bar; he was sitting by himself holding that damn unlit cigar. Quite a sight, also a bit ironic as NYC had only just banned smoking in bars.