In this topic, we post commonly heard stupid opinions.

SMW is currently superior to the MW division, does this help? The SMW crop is rather good, it was strong in the late 90's, weak through the early 2000's but strengthened up well recently.

Just analyse the fighters without a need for 'names', you'll see. It's one of my favourite divisions even if Calzaghe leaves, I don't feel the best at MW would have any success if they fought the best at SMW.

So it's absolutely equivalent to the other divisions, one of the best in boxing at the moment.

 

Buster Douglas DIDN'T beat a Prime Tyson.

If James Toney TRAINED he could be Heavyweight Champion.

Vitali Klitschko has no heart.

Wladamir Klitschko has no heart.

Manny Pacs Mustache is cool :yikes

 

I have him at #3 All-time Heavyweight

 

If you weren't afraid of Mike Tyson, you'd beat him.

That's part of the way to be able to beat Mike, but not the be-all-and-end-all it's made out to be.

 

I swear just 2 seconds ago I was going to post that.

Arturo Gatti is a HOF. Uh, no he's not. He had a couple of good to great fights, so what? You don't get in for having great fights, you get in for being a great fighter. There's a key difference. I think his fights are overrated anyway so hell no to that.

 

The comments that irk me are the people that roll out the excuses for fighters poor performances. The only ones that don't bother me are fighters taking fights on 2 or 3 day notice or fighting with medically verified injuries.

But when I hear someone say, "oh he didn't train seriously, or took them lightly, or he had a bad training camp," I cringe. Part of being a fighter is being ready on consistent basis. If a fighter loses focus and gets his ass knocked out and says he didn't train properly, I'm sorry but that just carries little weight with me. It really just says the fighter is inconsistent.

 

But if people dont grasp what should be obvious why do you think they will grasp some over analisis ? I mean do you think there is a need technically analize to determine size is an advantage ( VLAD or LL ) as is power (TYSON or GEORGE ) mental toughness ( ALI or MARCIANO) speed ( JONES or ALI ) or combinations of the mentioned skills ? :bbb Its all conjecture and opinion no matter how long and drawn out the analisis ! I mean sometimes saying to much is like sitting at a long wedding ceromony when people just want you to get it over already ! Cheers ! :good

 

Whats wrong with that?? :huh

 

He's a legendary Duran detractor.

 

If fighter A beats Fighter B........ and Fighter B beats fighter C......... then Fighter A surely beats Fighter C.

 

Hagler was a boxer-puncher. He was a versatile fighter who could also brawl.

For some reason, people watch the Hearns fight and the latter rounds against Mugabi, and think Hagler usually fought like that.

I can't tell you how many times I've read ridiculous statements like "Hagler was always pressuring and coming forward, wearing guys out, but he wasn't all that skilled".

 

commonly heard stupid opinion: Malignagi is NOT gay!

 

What you call "overanalysis" is just boxing knowledge and common sense. Most people can--and do--do it.

Much better than "He's bigger, so he hits harder AND has more skill".

 

Agreed

 

Lmao!

:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl

:good