Admitting favouritism on here!

It’s tough for people to admit to having biases because it’s very difficult for us to even recognize them. Believing that one fighter or group of fighters is better than another is not necessarily bias...could just be an accurate assessment.

 

For me, I'd say the younger years is when I was impressionable and named favorites; paying attention to certain boxers.
Today I pay attention to boxing. In other words, I can't quote individual stats on fighters like I use to. No Alzheimer yet!
Rather because I am more in-tuned with fighters abroad & not excluding weight classes. So rather than use my memory up reciting a few fighters, I spend time reciting fights from all weight classes and eras.

And I don't think the so-called golden era is better or lesser.
Its like trying to compare a 'creator' versus a 'perfecter'.
Ray Robinson created. Ali perfected.

Dr.J Julius Irvin created the lay up from around the rim. Lebron perfected it.

Jimi Hendrix created the idea of using feedback Steve Vai perfected it.

The creationist can't beat the perfectionist, but the perfectionist didn't create. They cancel each other out IMO.
And that's how I view the old era versus the new, no bias or favorites possible.


-

 

There are conscious biases, and unconscious biases.

A person who is particularly knowledgeable about a give era, is likely to rate the fighters of that era highly relative to other eras, simply due to knowing the context of their fights.

A contender that he/she has a good estimate of, will be a forgotten name to others.

 

Loved the soccer references McGrain!!! it seems you've could've used Diego twice to still bring your point home... i.e. the second clip could've been the "Hand of God" type vs. the "Goal of the Century" type.

 

Sorta, but I think the causal connection is a bit different than that. People who already have an emotional attachment to a fighter or an era, and who are already inclined to believe that certain fighters were extraordinary, will likely end up learning more factual information about those fighters and their eras.

 

LoL well played.

 

In my experience, the factual information raises more ships in any given era, than it lowers!

 

Just got back from a 2 week vaca so haven't been following anything. But I too favor the old timers and for me it is because of the toughness and experience through activity that I feel prevails over the 2 or 3 fights a year bs … But all in all, if you don't check your bias at the door as best as possible, why post at all .. for the most part

 

We are all guilty of it in some degree or another. But at least here in the Classic, the posters are far more logical, reasonable and open to different views than those on the General.

 

If somebody comes on and shits all over an old timer in favour of an artificially enhanced confirmed drugs cheat is it ever really favouritism to defend the old timer?

As Janitor says, if the guy favouring the modern guy demonstrates absolutely no knowledge of the other fighters records, films of his opponents fights then what worth is his actual side of the debate?

And as Unforgiven says it’s only fantasy anyway.

 

Why apologize for showing favoritism? Without it, it would be rather dull here. Show your cards, don't worry about it.

 

I would say my bias is towards the old timers and great fighters who've had more fights. As much as I think Sugar Ray Leonard, Pernell Whitaker and Floyd Mayweather were brilliant fighters, can a fighter with 40-50 fights in an entire career really be favourably compared to a fighter with 150-200 fights when both were fighting at the top level of the sport in their respective eras? I don't think so.