Classic Boxing Blind Spots

............Most of us here are reasonable, intelligent folks that are able to keep an open mind and realize and admit both the good and bad in what we see in boxing history. Most of us can admit that so-and-so was a good fighter even though we don't like him, and we may also admit to having our opinion swayed by emotion from time to time.

We must then also have our blind spots, those ideas of ours that are somewhat irrational and perhaps have no basis in common sense or popular opinion (not the same thing, mind you), but that we cling to fervently. What are yours?


Mine are........

I despise heavyweights. They are afforded far too much attention for what they do, and by definition they are far less skilled than their lighter-weight counterparts. I tend to look down on those that post of nothing else, as I see such behavior an indicator of a lack of imagination and an inability to see outside the norm. There's plenty better out there, folks, have a gander.


Vinny Pazienza. I'm sorry, he was nothing but tough. Couldn't fight his way out of a paper bag. He sucked. He is living proof that you can get a lot of mileage out of being ethnic and a ****ing loudmouth.

 

...........Interesting; would you say that this is a result of being more exposed to other historical fighters, or just more intense study of Tyson?

 

.........I like this. I actually think he was the #1 heavy, but a far, far cry from the best ever. Nice to see another poo-pooing convention.

 

.........Okay.

I am actually on the other end of that; I give him more credit than I used to, and I think we're probably meeting in the middle on that opinion from opposite directions.