Bias and favoritism

I strive for the same.
The biggest problem I see with most arguments is exactly this.
Often you'll hear fighters criticized for inconsequential things, who are held to an unfairly higher standard than others.

 

Some do it simply because they have other agendas totally unrelated to boxing as motivation.

 

Well, I'm a Patterson 'nut-hugger' so I guess I can be a tad biased but I think I'm overall fair and objective in posts about him. I only lash out and criticize posters when they bring up the glass jaw 'rap' which makes me angry. Down a lot! Back up a lot! Was he ever in a face down puddle out like a light? Never! Did he ever want to quit in a fight because of absorbing extreme punishment? Never? Many of his knockdowns were 'flash' ones or off-balance ones due to his leaping style. He NEVER got KNOCKED OUT! OK his knee was still on the floor against Sonny at ten (ONCE!)
So no! I don't think I'm biased against the fastest HW that ever lived! (insert smilie)!!

 

As far as biases....I think most fans are simply more familiar with certain fighter...but yes I am a little partial to above fighters and guys like gans...nelson...Armstrong...the great Langford maybe most of all....Johnson......thanks

 

I used to be extremely biased in favor of my boxers. Meaning I critiqued other fighters without holding my favorites to that same standard. Or I will give slack or justify my fighter without offering that same grace in a critique of another.

Anyway I think as I am getting older (turned 48 today), some of that has softened and given way to wisdom (I hope) and perhaps a more even keeled approach, as well as greater appreciation for ALL fighters.

So bias is minimal but I am sure that my opinions still come through the filter of my preferences and must impact them in some shape or form.

Sorry to make a short reply long....ahhhh the ramblings of an old man

 

Bias and prejudice is all part of human nature though. Even trying to be as objective and unbiased as possible, your still going to have your favourite boxers /fight and that's going to affect your opinion. Like if you say your favourite fight is Ali v foreman, and I say, what are you talking about its a **** fight, then that s going to **** u off. But I'll think I'm right and you'll think you're right, so there s no way to be unbiased. If you get my meaning?

 

Impossible!

 

Well my favourite boxer is Bruno and he's rarely mentioned on these boards so it doesn't really come into it at all.

In current boxing my favourite boxer is the underdog so that changes every fight.

I'm probably the least biased poster on this site.

 

Lennox would wipe out the next 5 best HW's before breakfast and anybody that says otherwise is just a hater!

 

I have in the past suggested to some other posters here that we should try to become more objective and unbiased and do away with all favouritism.
But no will commit to that.
Excuse-making favouritism and blatant hero worship is a comfortable refuge.
I feel we should try to break free from it and become more enlightened.
I can't do it alone though.

 

I'll let you into a little secret. Lennox Lewis is nowhere near my favourite boxer. In fact I was rooting against him when he fought Frank Bruno. Weirdly, I think I actually liked Lennox more after he got knocked out by Oliver McCall but even after that I never really had any great emotional attachment to him.

I liked guys like Bruno, Benn, Prince Naseem, Calzaghe, Hatton, Fury, Haye, AJ a lot more than Lennox. But by and large, I think those guys get a fair shake round here (perhaps Naz is a bit underrated and AJ a bit overrated... although AJ is still relatively early in his career).

But with Lennox, people act like calling him a top 10 ATG is being fair, that's like me saying Wlad makes it into my top 100 all time HWs, it's an absolute insult! And you know it is!

I'm a fair man, and when I see injustice I have to call it out, I'm compelled to, so when people dish out these backhanded insults, saying Lennox is top 10, I have to call it out.

If you don't have him in your top 2 or 3, you are simply not being fair to the guy. Look at his achievements with a fair mind for God's sake, only Ali beats him. People are saying guys like Holmes or Frazier or Wlad or Foreman or Holyfield or Tyson or Bowe are better! Give me a break, how can you say that with a straight face?

 

^ Thar we go.

 

I have him top 5 in no particular order.

Thing is, while you can make a case for ranking him as high as #1 ... you can ALSO make a case for ranking him much lower.

Fanboys of all stripes simply don't want to see the negative case against their favourite fighters and concentrate on the positives only. That's not how a serious evaluation should be conducted.