Battle of the Williams, Carl The Truth Williams vs Cleveland Big Cat Williams.

@Entaowed

Still going at impossible 2 part length - - still with no meat.

"Nurse....nurse, come quick. Code Blue on the injured Narc Socio in bed 4, frothing rage cannot be arrested.

As they say, ENOUGH delusional ROPE to ….works every time……your attempts to pontificate to other posters and expound on false moralities has been about you, not the posters in question - you have a HISTORY.


I know that you feverishly and compulsively typed out your last post - ANOTHER 2 post, psychotic rant - in the AM hours ,. - and you know it too - Compulsive, much? Certifiably so. Projecting much? Always. Rattled? Definitely.

I see you’ve stolen the ambulance I rang for you. I’ve had to call the cops. to apprehend and haul you back where you belong. I mean literally, FFS - that’s the place, Funny Farm Sanitarium - there is also a duty of care to protect the community.

I didn’t preclude at all responding to and putting straight further posts by you that have been imbecilic and acutely false in content.

My stating Yeah, DROP IT - was an obvious response to your own directive - and the problem is? - Ah, you were pontificated to and in CAPS - narc says ouch! - and you yourself have posted since - YOU said it first? LOL, that is so child like -actually I said FIRST to move on to other discussions - but you know, your Glen Close act continues…..peoples, LOCK UP your bunnies for God’s sakes…..funny how you say anyone can go back and read but you didn’t confidently suggest same in respect of the countless times you were proven wrong re the ACTUAL subject at hand - and you’re even wrong here anyway.

You just HOPED that you could invoke the old God complex and expound on false moralities without being reigned in. Wrong again.

You are a LIAR as has been already proven, on multiple fronts during the course of the discussion re the subject at hand and in your side winding pseudo psychology of which you are clearly unqualified.

You are MIRRORING big time - a strong attribute/trait of the narc socio. I said you implied and had lost equanimity - you denied it - and via my own query, you said you saw no loss of same re myself. Since then, you’ve subbed in the term “triggered” for “loss of equanimity” , falsely claiming it back at me - with no meat - and stating you noticed an “edge” previously - LOL, could you be any more of a LIAR? NOW claiming that I am arranging things to fit my narrative - the false accusation falls into the same category of your MIRRORING - I already previously stated and illustrated specifically your bending simple definitions, reversal/modifying on statements in an attempt to mitigate and even try and remove the question of your obvious ERRORS. Clearly, as I described you is AKA: re-arranging facts to fit a false and more preferred narrative for yourself. And it’s a practice you faithfully adhere to.

You’ve compromised yourself in terms of honesty which I have proven - and NO, despite your ignorant and false claims that o have not done so doesn’t require me to repeat myself - and now you suggest I be honest with myself…LOL, mirror, mirror on the wall….not dishonesty issues here.

You’re not pedantic. A pedant wouldn’t make as many mistakes and misstatements as you made re the subject - led by an agenda and not the facts.

I’ve addressed ALL relevant discussion points - even given your signature off point detours into the Golden Ratio, etc - And you do love typing out APE FACTOR, ad nauseum, wherever you go, LOL -

There’s a clear MO on your part - don’t address or deal with the current and specific point at hand - just reply with all manner of off point stuff - burying your errors deeper into the history of the thread - and then play as if you can’t find stuff or that you are disinclined to search. LOL, could you be any more lame in debate?

Another recent example of narc patho lying - your claim that you "peacefully" suggested that we just drop it - a tag line you typed after another painfully long and inane narc rant. No, you just hoped that your hypocritical parting comment would avert my highlighting your cr*p speak. Wrong again.


Let's see, accusation of a being a wife beater/abuser OUT OF NOWHERE vs my comment re your several times use of the finger waving emoji. Hmmm.

Knock, knock, Hello McFly, BIG difference between the two statements here. Yet, who's bemoaning and crying the the most - YOU, as if you were savagely attacked personally while at the same time, acutely unaware of your own output. And your own self identified insecurity re shoulders - nothing to do with me. LOL.

You said in ref. to yourself: Big Smart, Good, - in ref. to me, you followed with BAD. I replied that you were Small, Dumb. Oh gee, someone catch him, another direct hit on the narc socio, straight through his false, plastic wrap thin veneer. Such a sensitive, hypocritical flower especially relative to his own outgoings. Outdone, on an even playing field, that's all there is to it.

You've mentioned your upbringing several times since my initial, stand alone and CLEVER comment. I mean, the preceding wife beater comment was a real hoot, a true ROFLMAO side splitter, not, - I addressed the comment, identifying it as weird sh*t, which it is/was - a very apt and accurate description.

If i opened up a Pandora's box with my innocent joke, a totally relevant and apt reply to your use of an authoritative finger waving emoji, well, that's not my problem of course- it would be very much yours. Your own comment re wife beating (in ALL hypocrisy) is one thing, that you choose to LIE about the true motive behind that comment after that FACT, - is another thing again and further indicative of a true narc socio.

Since floating wife beating is okay in your book, dare I wager you've might've been prev. accused of being a control freak, guilty of coercion, perhaps even bullying? Never mind, that might be too close the dog and his bone. You can plead the 5th while you meanwhile wax, unqualified, pseudo psychology - whilst exhibiting some heavy duty insecurities.

Said in your last post:-

"4) Among the meat I supplied was explaining that after I first asked YOU to cut & paste the Williams claim/quotes in question."

NO, you didn't. See, you're lying AGAIN.

This is your original statement:-

"Ironically you continually cannot comprehend that I DID comprehend from the start that you were not claiming Liston had an 86" wingspan.
I believe I said it was implausible, NOT that it was not listed as such. I am amenable to cut & paste to prove the matter, but you are mistaken that I ever confused what you meant"

I wouldn't be instructing ANYONE to read you properly. Read YOURSELF properly. . LOL, you don't even make sense - no wonder when you're forever backtracking and modifying. You' stated that you were amenable to cut and paste to prove the matter??? That reads as you providing the proof - the proof of my stating/indicating that you were confused when I provided the ref. to Liston's 86" reach (ref. in the article I linked re Liston v Machen). I NEVER stated or indicated such a thing - I asked YOU to provide proof that I did - should've been EASY since you claimed I did - you must’ve read it for yourself. You went quiet on it. You knew you were wrong. Dishonest.

Due to your lack of due address, I later put you straight, YET AGAIN, stating that you were confusing Liston's 86" reach ref. with a previously mentioned listing of 86" for Williams on another thread - NOW you've BLATANTLY modified your original question without acknowledgement of yet ANOTHER false statement on your part - embarrassing..

Here’s the thread in which I merely provided proof of an 86" listing for Williams (as indicated during the Chuvalo fight) - the one YOU confused with the Liston reach ref. Major comprehension issues on your part and/or blindly looking to “correct”. LOL.

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/cleveland-williams-vs-george-chuvalo.670477/

As to being corrected on reach vs wingspan - no concern - you know that and you miss a major point as you always do - I wasn’t wrong - as I illustrated - and I don’t use the term “listing” when there is no such thing within my knowledge - when I say a listing, there will be a listing - unlike yourself- and you have used the term reach yourself - so that’s a comprehensive fail on your part. If you want to refer to an individual upper limb - it’s called arm length. There endeth the lesson, notwithstanding any chronic and evasive word mincing after the fact.


As to your trying to find any support for your claims, you're not very successful any which way, are you?.

Repeat, there is NO reason to take you seriously or rely on your word. I can have honest disagreements, as all my posts indicate but I don't let liars pass - and none of this precludes me putting you straight as and when I please….yeah, I’ve got you pegged.

Here's a nice photographic conflation of symbolic delusions for you: Sonny/Santa.

https://www.artsy.net/artwork/carl-fischer-sonny-liston

Now run along…….you need to break your psychotic and circular attachment and , attachments evidenced in your history, not just with myself…..

Oh, and don’t take it the wrong way if I may be inclined to simply post “idiotic” or “imbecilic” at a min. in reply to potential, future rants.

My case is thoroughly proven and aside from not letting BS pass without some comment, you’re not to be taken seriously.

See how your cr*pspeak floats elsewhere. -

Now there’s the promise of a good discussion for someone else. Hahaha.,

Now, IF this post was by someone else……

CONTINUED: , please see following parts 2,3,4 and 5 - , instalment 6 in progress, you know I just can’t stop when I’ve gots the narc fever…...

 

LOL. Is that one word? Damn, I’ve screwed it up anyway.

 

It's like one of those bouts where you get engaged in other things and await the eventual judges scorecards

John L. Sullivan did once have a 75 rounder however

 

Sure Pugguy I promise that if you follow through on your threat to continue to be hateful & name calling I will not take it incorrectly. You said: "Oh, and don’t take it the wrong way if I may be inclined to simply post “idiotic” or “imbecilic”..."

I will take it like everyone else here will.
If you continue to be malicious, but instead of dealing with any specifics from a heartfelt, painstaking poster, like any

This content is protected

, I/we will see & perhaps report your words as

This content is protected

There is no justification for bringing the forum down with such personal attacks, insults, hate speech or name calling-especially when you are not being insulted, flamed, trolled-& only *you* keep impugning the other's character & honesty.

Dude, whether I enumerate my posts-as in 20 distinct points recently-or not, you *avoid* much of what I say & claim without any actual evidence that my posts lack meat.
Your throwing around words like "psychotic" & saying I am rattled comes without any reasoning.
But you both supplying a bunch of personal insults about me & what I am like in general life even including my supposed upbringing shows YOU are supremely....Triggered.

You have gotten & remained nasty.
You have shown you cannot tolerate dissent in some instances-even though I am the only one who has admitted any error, you throw around "God-Complex" & pseudo clinical pathologizing terms-because you cannot handle me not agreeing with you.
Only YOU, without cause, have accused the other of being dishonest.

When I challenge you about pasting my original comment about shoulders to show that it is absurd to read from my friendly question about what is generally preferred-you ignore it because you both cannot show that your type is-which would not bother me in the slightest-
While you insist I must be insecure about my shoulders?
"Self-identified"? I asked you first to cut & paste a single thing if you want to prove it. I did not "pretend" it was hard to find, nor do I know what comment you must mean.
But in something like shoulders, easy to find & *you* made a senseless claim I have some laughable insecurity & I asked you to substantiate, you will not do it. Maybe because you know I am right. But this is a glaring hypocrisy.

You said absolutely nothing of substance about my supposed "history" with other posters.
You cannot deny that many folks have been abusive here, nor show a single instance where I was wrong to condemn hate speech or personal attacks or dishonesty. Nor even others who supported those being unhumane & violating basic forum rules or societal standars of decency.

IF it was your old, pre-triggered self writing endless jokes related to mental institutions I would welcome said absurdity & rough jesting.
But you have proven to do this combined with petty insults & malicious statements or assumptions about who I am.
While eliding most all details-it is NOT true you do not "have time" to address any of my logical points or challenges, when you have time for a long rant which just is a bunch of unsupported tear-downs or attempt to demean.
That is sad.

Just one of many false statements you ignore when I prove them-you had not asked me not to post before-you had repeatedly said YOU were going to stop.
Then many times after those "final" posts you keep writing. I never begrudged you that.
But since you could not do what you say AND ignore much meat I provide that you find inconvenient, it is clear to any objective observer that you are...Triggered.
See I do not just make baffling negative assertions about the other guy, I show why something is True.

Now you ask me to stop posting, clearly because you are upset? Not gonna happen-fuhgettibout it.
You can practice THE highly implausible act that you are somehow "above" responding after almost certainly peppering things with more denigrating assumptions that belie such an assertion-but you have

This content is protected

to ask me not to write.
Especially after only YOU are abusive.
And you keep saying you are done, & after you doubled up on this are still writing...
THAT is "compulsive".
I would never begrudge someone the right to write-but when you are both vicious *and* cannot stick to what only you kept volunteering to do, shutting up, yet seem so brittle that you need to demand I stop responding...

That is not showing personal security, nor is it Fair Play.
That shows a "feverish" quality.
Not writing long diligently enumerated posts, which speaks nothing to my emotion-as laughable as impugning my schedule or the hour I composed them.

I said to go back & read things that you ignored. If you already said you can prove things, or cut & pasted, there was no need to, no lack of confidence.
I did NOT give a "directive" to drop it. I suggested we do so, not that you did not suggest moving on to other things.
You will likely ignore that fact too-harmless to admit, but clearly you cannot admit errors, even harmless ones.
Which makes you do things FAR worse-like assuming pathology or someone LIES without reason.

All of what you "diagnose" is without logical credibility.
Let us say I noted how the first substantial break between our responses was yours before your last post-so then spun a bunch of tales about how that proved you were so unhinged by the points I made that you became schizophrenic or did an emotional tailspin & could not function in life...
No, it is supportable how your name calling & extrapolations about my character & honesty & history shows you were emotionally triggered.
NOT make embarrassingly ugly, hateful statements about who you are...It is obvious to anyone not triggeredthat IF I cam intellectually honest with myself, I can conclude nothing negative about a slower response.

You took my encouragement for us to continue being good as a baseless cause to suggest I was upset.
Since then I have supplied plenty of "meat" about you losing equanimity.
Here is yet another example of you being triggered & not rational. Several in fact.

Someone can be pedantic & be right or wrong. You are smart enough to see that even if I agreed I was avoiding things or mistaken about facts-none of that shows someone is not pedantic.
It is as implausible that I am often *not* pedantic as a bunch of folds have described me, as it is that you can be objective here.
Another example: I said I previously saw you had an edge.
This is no extreme statement whatsoever. Someone can have an edge absent becoming nasty & abusive like you have-you could theoretically be a Gandhi or MLK or Christ/Buddha & at times have an edge-could be skilled means, not showing idiot compassion, being a wrathful Bodhistava (meaning an enlightened protector), penetrating through delusion...

Yet instead of asking me why I said that or just claiming you do not, because of that statement you seem driven to call me a LIAR.
This is a profoundly irrational defense mechanism.

In fact, that you make extreme conclusions about my character like I am a narcissistic sociopath(!) proves that you are not only extremely triggered
But makes me wonder about what is wrong with you.
.
Not like you do I presume to know, or if you even likely have any clinical diagnoses.
But when you make such an extreme, alienating, bridges-burning statement that NOBODY on the forum will have cause to agree with you about...
Yeah, we gotta wonder about you.
If it is just that you are "triggered".

It does seem like you are mirroring back some issues (a whole subscription?) back at me, but if so you would never see it.
And it just becomes two people yelling the same charge back & forth, & even if say I am as correct as if I said Trump was projecting when he calls many others a "disgrace", it just ends up as wallowing in the mud.

Here is something else you are just honestly mistaken about. But likely because you are triggered.
There is nothing wrong with the finger-wagging emoji, nor my wife beating statement.
As charitable as possible towards your intentions, you may have fooled yourself that it even *sounded* like a joke when you critiqued it by saying my parents did this to me...
Continued.

 

Anyone who cannot stop posting when they keep saying they shall yet insists the other guy has "psychotic & circular attachments"-
even using the treadmill emoji he recently deployed...Well unlike you I am fastidious in not making ludicrous & unsupported speculations about your general mental health...

But confining myself to this conduct, this is not healthy-or normal.
Nor is suggesting absent both popular opinion or any evidence that I have a bad "history" here sensible.
Nor is it ethical (& woefully hapless to actually shut anyone up, only effective at breeding acrimony) to

This content is protected

anyone to DROP IT.
I do not critique you for not helping to condemn the trolls & abusers-that service by me is only a virtue.
I wish that you had not put yourself on their level.
Either your sincerity OR rationality is suspect when you were friendly & uncritical of me until triggered & then pretending (to yourself) that I am some kind of Monster-when only you are abusive.

Of course the wife-beating comment & outraged ****** was just a JOKE: like your extreme funny farm & other being crazy comments/they are coming to get you...But only YOU are making certifiably crazy statements that are NOT intended as being absurd & playful like I am a "narc socio". That is completely different, & it amounts to you "projecting" like this...

Undeniably my whole wife-beating jesting story-& explicitly reading the context-was how absurd such textbook fallacies are.
Did you really not know that I was making a broader point & joking absurdly, not remotely suggesting you were even violent, let alone married?

It is crazy to think that I could (or would) credibly accuse you of domestic abuse.
Just as it is insane that you now seem to be actually wondering-then pseudo-withdrawing-that "dare I wager you've might've been prev. accused of being a control freak, guilty of coercion, perhaps even bullying?"
All based upon you being triggered by my absurd statement.
Notice I am not pulling a "Puggy" & implying that you might actually abuse woman, lol!

But IF you respond-especially in detail & ignoring many points-it is extremely reasonable that I reply.
I never told you not to, but if despite you "first" suggesting we do, you must respond-it is not healthy nor good conducive to good relations to mind if I reply.

Especially if you keep saying things like I am a LIAR-& in caps.
Again when only you stoop to such levels, it is audible that only I do not get triggered.

As for this: "Big Smart, Good, - in ref. to me, you followed with BAD"...One cannot know what comment you mean with this-nor is saying "bad" wrong if you did something bad-& you used more insults than you copped to above, such as insecure.
Actually it is certainly possible I am any of these things, or even a wife-beater: but you had NO REASON to assume any of this.
Any more than I can believe it likely you are say racially prejudiced, homophobic, a serial killer...
But you pull out the (Hell's Kitchen, my abode) sink when you are Triggered.

You made another mistake saying I originally asked you to supply the Williams statement.
That does not mean this was the first thing I said on the matter. I was asking you to supply what you were claiming/talking about-then you kept asking me to dig it up.
Me saying I was amenable to cut & paste proof indicates what I subsequently said-asking you for it. I did not "go silent"-you kept insisting I provide the evidence.
What is worrisome is that while either of us could be mistaken on the material facts, only YOU assume the other guy is lying.
Not that this is really tangled & either one of could be confused-but that the other guy is LYING.
This is Wrong-again in both senses of the word.

So if I also volunteer-after you floated (nay said you WOULD, which I never insisted you live up to) tapping out a few times-OK let's drop it, that can possibly be read as me hoping you would not call me on cr*p?
See that is a nasty assumption.
Does it not make more sense to assume I was saying fine, let us do so-yes following your suggestion (nor remotely a "directive" IS peaceful.
And it is FINE to keep responding-but you seem unable to stop, since only you keep volunteering you will-but it is senseless-& the opposite of "peaceful"-to conclude I though I was writing nonsense & playing games.

You make mistakes like saying me using the word "reach" for wingspan is part of a comprehensive fail-this kind of language is war-like & literally missing my point.
I rarely use reach instead, my point is that my correction of you constantly using it instea of wingspan would be trivial.
your own point about listing was correct, I acknowledged it-& explained I never was trying to communicate I saw the 79" source directly.
But assuming someone is correct is no big deal, & if it was really ME who had trouble admitting using the wrong word, I would not have said so-with equanimity.

You have finally supplied some "meat" with the relevant text re: 86", thank you.
It seems from what you included that i was mistaken about what you thought I was saying.
As for whether I agree about the source of my confusion, I will have to review the whole thread to see what you mean.

I hope you are not to triggered to see that you assuming I was either lying OR despite only me admitting a mistake must have a "God-complex" was incorrect-& came from a malevolent, totally unjustified cynicism about my decency & character.

 

Oh, Bruce Almighty! You little "smiter", you.

Now, giving yourself even more rope - as if any further was needed??? LOL.

Another, tortured, compulsive and clearly triggered, 2 part, imbecilic and idiotic rant. And abusive as per your own reckoning. Indicative of your unraveling notwithstanding denials.

Now that is sad and pathetic.

Check your own T & Cs if you want to complain in ALL hypocrisy about the above perfectly accurate descriptors. Unless you prefer deference to your own glossary of terms - " foolish, inane, ludicrous, delusional, absurd, troll, evil, wife/partner beater" etc, etc. Just as well we ALL aren't as hypocritically inequitable, sensitive and indignant as you obviously are, resorting to consistent and hypocritical overreaction . Should I patronizingly pat you on the head also to to placate you, say there, there and then tell you to go run off and play? You like to hide behind "well intended" emojis too. LOL.

I made no threat. Another, emotionally wrought and false narrative. I forecast a potential, min. reply as and when applicable - and it is certainly applicable. I post as and when I see fit and looking to waste no further time on the likes of you - but I'll put you straight as and when I am inclined.. You falsely framed it as a "threat" to introduce your own actual threat. Such transparency.

I didn't "finally" provide meat. I've provided meat all through the discussion. At each turn, you've just changed your "story". In my last post, I disproved your OWN statement/claim/accusation re :Liston 86" , the ONUS for which was on YOU to prove - but you didn't/couldn't because you were WRONG. Now you have seamlessly moved from stating the "Liston 86"" to the "Williams 86", modifying your orig. mulit part claim without acknowledgement - so dishonest. All I see are further "confused" expressions, including a laughable equivocation on the term "edge". - in line with your well practiced MO that I've already highlighted. You still bring nothing to the table. It never ends, eh...?

Sans my exercising due reply as I see fit to any further delusional falsehoods from you, I am NOT interested to discourse on any other subjects with you going forward - too easy and very NON compulsive, very NON obsessive, very UN mean, and so VERY normal - the actual, proverbial proof in the pudding.

 

That he did. And all he got for it was a lousy DRAW. Apparently it got too dark. When do the lights begin to dim and go out here? Hello, is anyone even out there watching or judging this? Are you crazy!! More interestingly, over 42K tickets sold for Warnie's farewell. Amazing. There's also the FOTC - Sonny Bill Williams vs Barry Hall, okay, not quite FOTC - just the fight of the moment, bold prediction: Barry Hall by decision.

 

Hall reckons he has to knock him out to win. I think Williams stops him tho he didn't look too good in his last fight.

McGrain and rummy keep the lights on around here 24/7 mate so father time is your oyster.

Should be one heckuva farewell.

 

So much for my “bold” prediction, LOL - Joe Louis would be proud of my prognostication skills. For Hall, 45 yo is a crazy age to be climbing into the ring, SBW isn’t that young himself.

I couldn’t see the shot that put Hall down for the first KD - not to suggest it wasn’t legit - def. saw the follow up punches that def. put Barry on ***** street and down for several more KDs.

Yep, the farewell should be great - 2 hour memorial service - tickets are/were free btw, I incorrectly assumed that they cost money.

 

The first KD was very very flaccid. Perhaps Hall with his age and tough fight with Gallen can't take it anymore. At any rate he should now stay out of the ring. Williams - Gallen just got a whole lot more intriguing. Williams is pretty tough and classy.

Good to see him going out in fine style.

 

Agreed on all points. Bring on Williams v Gallen.

 

A divisive matchup due to the style matchups.
Carl Williams is getting the better of the boxing, but Cleveland Williams does have success due to his explosiveness, he closes the distance fast with his quick hands and feet, lead hooks body and head and counter rights, and amongst that, he ends up catching Carl with his chin in the air and takes him out, could be a fake jab to the body and comes over with a lead left hook, could even be a counter right, but Cleve is going to find that chin.