Do you get irrationally angry when your favourite fighters are criticised?

Do you remember how incandescent you got when you thought Manuel had told you Jose Napoles left jab, straight right, left hook (the old 1, 2, 3) was better than Louis's?

This content is protected

 

Very nice!

I can’t tell you how many times that little Spanish man lit me up!

P4P, he was one of the greatest agitators that I’ve ever known.

And see, you’ve vindicated me. Sybil was just about to jump in and side with Manuel. It was obvious that I was “dealing with it” very nicely on my own.

Gawd, that woman tasked me. You’ve opened up a Pandora’s Box now…I feel like going outside and lashing my car with a tree branch.

 

What gets me annoyed is more the reaction from fans of other fighters' when I criticise them. Something as simple as calling No Mas the unprecedented quit job it was is "hating". That came from a poster who managed to utter the absolute preposterous "no wonder Duran quit" as it was friggin' Ali-Holmes.

And posters who have Tyson as some broken shell at 24, not to mention when he faced Holy, and get all hot and bothered by the notion that Thomas looking like a pretty fit 50-year old against Tyson had something to do with him having been a heroin addict and not being very dedicated after that either.

And there are always more of them. Now we have someone who thinks Tyson-Holmes was a good representation of how an 8-10 years younger Holmes would have fared. And of course he thinks Tyson was past his prime four seconds after KO'ing Spinks...

To paraphrase Newman: "There are always more... They never stop coming".

So, yeah, that annoys me a bit. But wouldn't call it irrational. And it keeps me energised, almost makes me feel young again at times. And at times very old.

 

I only get upset when it is Joe Louis...

...or Muhammad Ali...

...or Jack Dempsey...

...or Evander Holyfield...

...or George Foreman...

...or Rocky Marciano...

...or Lennox Lewis...

...or...or...or...or...Yeah, I get upset sometimes, but I control it...mmm...most of the time...maybe.

 

Referee Octavio Meyran from Mexico.

 

Ah yes, Octavio - The Human Atomic Clock.

His motto was - “Stop watches are for sissies!”

When I was an athlete at school, Octavio used to be my personal timekeeper for 100 m sprints.

He had me thinking I was breaking Olympic and World records left, right and centre. I was only 12 at the time.

 

Nice one!

Shay, it seems it might perhaps be a much shorter list if you nominate the fighters you don’t get upset over when they are criticised.

I’d be interested to hear some of those names.

For me, say what you will about Tyson Fury - whatever the negative comment, I’d assume it will be true and that he more than likely deserves it.

Ngannou is gonna Shock the World! For 2 rounds he’s gonna fight like a carbon copy of prime Mike Tyson.

That will be all Francis needs to chop down The Gypsy King.

Ngannou’s ring entrance song - “It’s going down...I’m yelling Timber...”. Lol.

 

Guilty

 

A bit of heat to a discussion is fine - as long as it doesn’t drag out and no grudges are held.

It simply reflects some healthy passion.

When the Hater vs Nut Hugger lines are trodden out - they mean nothing - they carry absolutely no weight in their own right when rational evidence in support isn’t provided otherwise.

If you feel someone is biased toward or against a particular fighter , it should be easy enough to knock down their arguments point by point - if you’re inclined to put the work in.

That type of deconstruction will speak for itself without need for a blanket summation of the opposing parties ulterior motives.

When it comes to Mike Tyson, I’ve copped the Hater tag a few times - it seems to be a more commonly applied label even when it involves any reasonable and fair criticism of Mike.

I obviously did like Mike as a fighter - he was a great fighter. One shouldn’t have to preface that fact every time out when they are simply applying objective and equitable analysis.

Actually, it just struck me, if one does exercise the so called hater mentality, it’s perhaps more often directed at the fans of said fighter, not the fighter themselves.

I will say, I think Mike gets afforded a few too many excuses - but Mike himself isn’t the chief perpetrator - at least by this time, Mike is very even handed about his career and how it went down.

I’ll say one thing - in over-deference to his incredible hand speed and punching in deadly combinations, the appreciation of Mikes sheer, single punch power has suffered and has become somewhat underrated over time.

Curiously, even Mike, possibly in part due to deliberate self deprecation, has been party to that particular underrating of himself.

His power was fearsome in its own right - perfectly aided and abetted by his speed, accuracy and punching in combination.

I don’t think he catches prime Holmes with same but the right hand that dropped Holmes for the first KD was huge - it wasn’t even on the chin, rather it hit Larry’s left temple - if it was right on the chin, it might’ve been all over right then.

If he was hit with that same punch, of course prime Holmes would have greater resilience to deal with it - even if it still put him down.

Shavers’ punch that dropped Holmes was absolutely on the button - within the context of Earnie already being a consistently huge puncher - it was Shavers’ very own Sunday punch - in terms of execution, timing, accuracy and with all the power Earnie could muster.

Larry goes down as if gun shotted to the head - but then he arises like Lazarus. Unreal.

At best, Holmes upheld a helluva chin, sublime will and excellent recuperative powers in complement. A very important ingredient to an ATG aside from skillet.