firstly let me say i am flattered that you have seen fit to spend half of your free time composing a virtual thesis on an argument with yourself! apart from the fact that i had to drop an acid half way through reading this little epic just to create a little gusto in my sails to enable me to absorb every carefully thought out sentence,i came to one conclusion you are creating an argument with yourself and yourself alone.. now if i remember rightly this thread questions the supposed decline in american boxing a fact which you have clearly overlooked and appear now to be comparing fighters from different eras!!that is the jist of your infinite diatribe right?(i refuse to read it again my will power is just not that strong) ... now your paranoia and slight tendancy towards melodrama would be humorous if it werent for the fact that i know im talking to someone who really believes what they say and is almost dogmatic to the exstent of neuroticism! now i could go over every point you have made and post ESB's version of the magna carta but the facts you are rambling about and my hidden agendas and whatever else exsist only within the confines of your head again i state you created an argument with yourself on a thread that simply wasnt about the points you make,my view on them can be found throughout the thread in responses to other posts who diverted the issue!i refuse to repeat myself i was quite optimistic about your posts, as you show a sincere knowledge and a fair amount of intellect,i thought to myself this forum needs more of this kind of stuff if only we would employ a little more patience.lol.... BUT THEN I READ YOUR LAST PART about tua and ike,which apart from the fact i nearly choked on my beer laughing at you hypocrisy,agenda,sensationalism,reasoning,bias, etc some of the things you label me with!!it in itself was self exsplanatory as to your way of thinking,no more can be said other than you lost all integrity and showed yourself up for the fool you are. p.s stop shouting.
the sport has declined so much in america that ESPN would rather cover professional gambling than boxing. the ppv concept, while paying these great athletes more, also narrows down the sports audience down.
I don't believe the fighters are in a decline but the quality of the fights we are given absolutely suck! Floyd Jr. left a division of high quality opposition at 147 when he retired. Now all we'll ever hear is, "He was scared of Cotto/ Margarito/ Clottey/ Williams/ Berto!". When I don't believe he was or is afraid of any of them but I look like the dummy in an argument trying to defend him. Prison forced Tyson to fight Holyfield & Lewis when he was on the decline. Bowe/ Lewis never happened. Holyfield / Lewis was late. Jones/ Calzaghe is way over due. What the **** is this DLH/Pacman ****? Do they think we're stupid? He should be fighting Campbell or Juan Diaz or Marquez again. Oscar should be fighting the Beasts at 147 or 154 for that matter. Hopkins is fighting all the right guys but even a B-Hop die hard has to wonder what the Executioner has left in the tank. Give us Calzaghe/Glen Johnson. Hatton/Holt. Rafael Marquez/Vasquez over and over again! Dawson/Hopkins. **** like that! By the way Hatton/Pauly should be a good one!
I hope boxing declines alot more, to the point that it resembles what UFC is now. I mean imagine if the fighters are forced to fight more often, and are also forced to fight the best of their own division, instead of fighting 2-3 times(max) a year and on top of that NOT fighting the best in their division. Why do **** do we all these crappy PPV **** fights that are supposed to be FREE?
There is absolutely no need to diverge into petty semantics when the points I drew upon were really quite succinct. The argument was quite simple - we have yet to see an Eastern European (and Cuban for that matter) display the same kind of skillset we have seen in the past from the fighters I mentioned. Your response was simply to shift concentration away from skillset and focus on popularity and media coverage. The very fact that you cannot, or for some reason refuse to, refute any of the points I specifically made leads me to believe that you do actually realize what I'm stating is correct, and that you would rather shift attention to petty semantics as you've rambled on above. If I'm wrong in your interpretation, then why not address the argument directly? Give specific examples and references to any fighter you wish. Please stop your petty semantics and address the arguments. I will address yours: Ike Ibeauchia was a heavyweight with a lot of promise (along with David Tua at the time). You really need to go back and watch David Tua vs Ike Ibeauchia in it's entirety. Ike possessed a stiff, powerful jab and great power with both hands. He was the only person to spectacularly KO Chris Byrd in 5 rounds, the same Chris Byrd that went the distance with Wladimir Klitscho a year later. Many "what-if" stories were written after he was hauled off to jail, because he showed a level of talent and characteristics indicative of a fighter not only capable of winning a belt, but perhaps dominating as well. Now, I don't know why you spilled your beer laughing, but perhaps it may have something to do with a dearth of boxing knowledge. Did you see Tony Thompson vs Wladimir Klitschko? Sorry, but I see a much more aggressive, powerful Ike Ibeauchia using his heavy jab to make Wladimir Klitchsko uncomfortable and eventually setting up a KO punch. Let alone the other bums in the heavyweight division. As far as David Tua, I was referring to the very same Tua that fought Ike and previously, when he was very aggressive and came to each fight weighing in the 220's. Not the Tua that suddenly changed strategy and diet, weighing heavy and throwing one punch at a time (starting with Lennox Lewis). Perhaps you need to look at some of this earlier fights as well.
Sadly, you're absolutely correct. Better to lead the sheep to football (although I'm one who loves both) because instead of blood being in your face, you've got 20 pounds of pads and a billion dollar empire out and covering up much of the damage that it causes. So, you wind up with millions of parents who have no problem signing their 7 year old up for football even with a significantly higher injury and death rate than who will risk being called "negligent" by taking him to a boxing gym.