If it is true that Evander uses PEDs, then he has no heart. Not in the way you think

It makes you think, though. He was on steroids against Ruiz. And against Batchelder. And if i'm not mistaken, against yet someone else. Who wasn't he on steroids against?

Margarito is only proven to have cheat, or better put, tried to cheat against Mosley. No one except for himself and his piece of dog**** trainer know whether he used the same "performance enhancer" against Cotto or not. But consider this: Cotto was a slight favorite and undefeated. Mosley was a solid underdog. If he used the bricks against Mosley, then there's a pretty good chance he used them against Cotto, too - if not others before him. But we'll never know. For me this is reason not to rank Margarito.

The difference, though, is that it's a LOT easier to get away with steroids than with concrete gloves. We can be pretty sure none of Margarito's key opponents had a "fair" fight, but there's a good chance many of Holyfield or Toney's opponents were juicing, too.

Alright.

Let's examine this hypothetical:

You're a talented boxer who won an Olympic gold medal. You're 15-0 and facing a 30-20 tomato can who you know doesn't train. He's fat. He's working 50 hours a week in the factory. Unlike him, you can train 4 hours a day and have perfect (legal, not PED containing) nutrition. You fight him, first rounds are give and take, but then he tires while your extra training kicks in and you continue to beat him badly, and he dies as a result of a subdural hemorrage.

How do you feel?

Look, I agree that there should be stricter tests for PEDs. But boxing is brutal, no matter how many rules you lay down. No one cares about all the journeymen who take horrible beatings for the love of the sport, or often just for money. Champions themselves end up no different in most cases. Boxing is not fair. What can you do?

If your point is that PEDs cause unfair matches, then you might want to look in other factors that are way more prevelant in causing uneven fights.

What can you do?

If you have 3 pieces of candy and you catch your son "stealing" the last one, but two of his brothers could've taken the first two, do you lay full blame on the one you catch? Okay, not a perfect analogy, but I think you can agree that it's a slippery slope.

 

I'm with you here. I would not like to see Margarito on any card I'm paying to see. I'd like to see him banned from boxing. For good.

Again, such potentialities do not and cannot morally justify criminal/destructive/unfair conduct. I think that a level of certainty is required before extreme measures are taken -be it by American forces in Iraq in 2002, a man accused of murder, or a boxer with access to PEDs.

You're tougher to pin down than Pernell. Where's my answer?

Here's my answer....

I'd feel no better than Ezzard Charles did after his hands killed Sam Baroudi. But I'd feel worse if my hands were exponentially heavier due to banned artificial enhancements. The remorse of being a boxer would be exponentially magnified by my secretly gaining an unfair advantage.

Baroudi died because boxing is dangerous. Boxing is the culprit there. If Ezzard cheated and artificially enhanced his power, then HE would be the culprit.

How do you know that I haven't?

It is not slippery, Chris, there is a clear and sensible response that can be recommended to any parent. The son who was caught stealing candy will be held accountable for the candy he stole. That is simple justice. The other sons who were not caught will see in his consequence a warning of what will happen to them if they continue to steal. It would not be justifiable to hold the other sons accountable for something that they 'may' have done. However, they now have an example that should function as a deterrence. If it doesn't, then their chances of accountability get better with every subsequent candy stolen.

They'll get theirs. To allow the son caught stealing to avoid consequences as you seem to recommend is a *******ization of a simple precept.

What can we do. You and I can begin by shining a light on the problem and not mincing words about its wrongfulness.

"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

~ Edmund Burke

 

Far too much self-righteous moralizing on this thread for my tastes.

 

Evander Holyfield is 47/48 years of age.

And is still here in the game of boxing, at 46 years of age. He beat the biggest heavyweight champion of all-time, and should of been crowned Heavyweight Champion of the world for the 5th time.....and the oldest heavyweight champion of all-time.

The man simply personifies consistency and heart, its a great shame that a legend is doubted.

Forget guys like Manny Pac at Floyd Mayweather for the moment.......Evander Holyfield is a legend when it comes to boxing.

And he's still here.....

You can count on the thumbs of a boxing glove, how many fighters are willing to die fighting, going out like a warrior.

Yeh that's right, there is only one thumb.

And there's only one Evander Holyfield...!

 

"When men first come into contact with crime, they abhor it. If they remain in contact with crime for a time, they become accustomed to it, and endure it. If they remain in contact with it long enough, they finally embrace it, and become influenced by it."
--Quoted by Napoleon Hill

Time was when a cheater was unequivocally seen in the shame-filled light of a cheater.

Now a cheater is "ill", "needs help", "is a good person." Oh, and "everybody makes mistakes." On and on.

It would be great if a kid could look at the heavyweight champion of the world and know that if he did the physical work and ate right, made the honorable choices and lived a clean life, he could grow up to occupy such a place someday.

Moral clarity has become so fogged up that escaping detection of illegal activity is now seen as reason for patting yourself on the back. This used to be done in the shadows, with a corresponding twinge of remorse. Now it is done in the limelight, to the admiration and moral apathy of millions.

The 20th century's final decade saw baseball sluggers way past their physical peak begin swatting cartoonish homers to make a mockery of the record book, and pro boxers routinely begin taking on dimensions, speed and power province of only the greatest fighters of all time. These circumstances require every fan to make a choice and take a stand: applaud the spectacle or resist a trend that would eat away at and destroy the foundations of empires and our better nature.

 

You know, I saw that coming and I don't blame you for the comment. I don't mean to come off like that.

 

...then again...! This illustrates the problem doesn't it... for boxing itself.

 

I don't believe anyone here has made such statements.

So would I, and the same should go for his trainer.

I honestly can't tell because it's a situation so much more extreme than I've ever experienced. Sure, I'd probably be devastated. But I'd also be devastated if they guy died when I didn't cheat, but was simply outmatched. The probability of the latter is much bigger.

No, boxing is the culprit regardless. If a track runner cheats and enhances his power, no one dies. Boxing is a brutal sport, and 95% of the time, there are no fair matches, because of factors other than steroids.

So, the moral of the story in your case is: Stealing is only bad if you get caught.

 

Right.

The probability of the latter is much bigger because you are not one to cheat to gain an advantage.

Boxing is like any other sport -any other human endeavor, in that some competitors have more talent and skill and will overrun lesser competition. I see that as a fact of life.

If one mother's son bumps another mother's son out of admission to Harvard University because his standardized test score is better, that's fine.

If one mother's son bumps another mother's son out of admission to Harvard University because he purloined the key to the stanardized test, then that's wrong.

PS/Mismatches are a problem. If you would like to open a thread discussing outrage over them, I'd be sure to contribute plenty to support that. Most boxing casualties are due to mismatches, however, I see PEDs as posing great risk in much the same way and boxing has a responsiblity to do something decisive about it. About both!

... now you're *******izing my point. Stealing is wrong whether or not you get caught. That was clearly stated. The consequence is only a social group's imperfect way to express the view of that wrongfulness and perhaps teach.

I would not want to live in a world where one could be consequenced/punished for something they may have done. Assumptions ain't evidence.

 

No offense, but i'd argue that ancient Holy wouldn't have performed anywhere near as well against Valuev if he hadn't been juiced up on HGH, thus I was not angered when he was "robbed" of the decision.

 

Mismatches are part of boxing. Unfortunate by nature, but without a boxer, no matter how good, is not well marketable for a big fight unless his record is at least 15-0. Here is where MMA has an advantage, though I believe they will soon go this way too. They are already tied up in multiple organizations with fighters who aren't allowed to face each other. I don't want to spend more words on MMA, though.

Of the kids who stole, you only punished the one who got caught.

On a sidenote: I would have to think about what I'd do myself in that situation - I'm young and without a next generation.

In that case, what is your opinion on Cotto vs Margarito?

 

MMA. A friend of mine dismisses it as "scrotum sniffing." I'm no fan, though I respect the participants.

The problem of mismatches is, as you say, complicated. Warriors need fodder to hone skills and build confidence and one of the most ...beautiful... things about boxing are those times that the fodder rises up and says "I am!" My heart tends toward the aged, the infirm, the bums in virtually any match.

However, I recall sitting fifth row at the Dorchester armory in the early 90s watching a main event with Peter "Caccoon of Horror" McNeeley and some bum with love handles and a bald head who looked like a middleweight on PEDs (that's puff pastries, eclairs, and donuts). McNeeley hit him at will and I thought the man was going to be decapitated by left hooks. I was soaked with blood by the second round. Afterwards, I find out that this guy fought McNeeley three times and his record was 6-30. It was disgusting. Boxing is bad in Boston.

If I knew that all three stole, then they'd all be caught and they'd all suffer the consequences.

Funny enough, the scenerio illustrates what I do for a living.

Margarito may have been one of your hypothetical boys who got away with stealing the candy... though if so, he got caught the next time!

If you're asking what I think about whether or not he used bricks against Cotto, I don't know, though he doesn't deserve as much credibility considering what Nazeem discovered. Cotto, it should be said, does tend to swell easily and has looked like a Picasso painting before.

 

The exploitation and tragedies in boxing have gone with the territory of a sport that can only appeal to the most expendable bracket of society: young men --with health, energy and time to spare-- born into dead-end existences, enticed with dreams of glory dangled before them by self-serving vampires.

But the fan can rise up and call a dirty spade a dirty spade whenever and wherever it rears its dirty head.

Imagine a crowd protesting enough to force a halt to a clear mismatch; more handlers willing to quit camp rather than continuing to goad a wear-distressed old lion to one more fight; fans insisting on a sport clean of unfair, illegal performance enhancers.

I love sport as a vehicle to channel a young man's prodigious fire towards self-knowledge, self-control, self-mastery, and success in every worthwhile area of life.

I hate --and will always call out, at the arena, the gym, the ghetto, the boxing forum-- dirty tricks, abuse, cheating, and any other brethren dark action.

Not because I feel any better than anyone; it's just the right thing to do.

 

--Eloquent and on the money as usual by prime.

 

Of course not.

But society at large does nowadays. PEDs in sport today are a symptom thereof.

Ben Johnson, Mark McGwire, Marion Jones, James Toney, Evan Fields...

The thinking was like what we say in Mexico: Someone may feel ashamed of, say, having given a full presentation before an important client with his fly open. He is comforted and, with a wink, told, "Shame is to steal...and get caught."