isnt it stupid!!

Ummm, all the preparation in the world can't compensate for a body that doesn't respond to the mind like it used to.

What do you call Ali against Holmes? Unprepared? Losing to the better man?

 

Not really - by this reasoning, Trevor Berbick was the better man out of him and Ali, and that is blatantly ludicrous.

 

Nuff said. Close thread and OP please go and delete your account and start over.

 

I think Ali should make a comeback now, there is no such thing as being shot. Give him adequate time to prepare and should be fine. I'll fight him, and if I win I'm just the better fighter.

 

It's stupid when it's a loss that MARKS their fall from greatness. Like Roy being "shot" begins the second after Tarver KO's him, for example. Total bull****, and notice how it comes from his hardcore, pathetic and blind, fans. Nevermind that he won a fight with the same guy at the same weight and would now only be a bit better adjusted. These are the words of himself, his camp, and his FANS right here on ESB, uttered collectively as a whole, BEFORE Tarver said the line that will haunt jones and his loser-ass fans to their ****ing graves: "YOU GOT ANY EXCUSES TONIGHT, ROY"? :yep

I think Roy actually had enough in the tank to possibly beat Tarver in their THIRD fight, but he was still too scarred mentally from his devestating KO, as he was too afraid to take chances. His stamina was not terrible and his hands were fast when he threw them for most of that fight. He was just too cautious and weary of Tarver. He was declined at this point, obviously, but he wasn't ****ing SHOT until after his long lay off and return for Badi Ajamu and Hanshaw.

However, when a few years go by around the mid to late 30's of a fighter's career and he's looked noticeably worse for awhile, it's legitimate. So Roy was indeed shot when he lost to Joe.

 

Ali was at 100% when he fought Holmes and Berbick. Really, being near 40, taking all that punishment in his career, having a thyroid condition, and already suffering from Parkinson's and slurring his words doesn't matter. Ali had just as much time to prepare as Holmes.

 

Roy wasn't shot when he lost to Tarver, but he was clearly on the slide. The drop from HW clearly affected him, he was lethargic in the first Tarver fight. His workrate was terrible, his reflexes had diminished, and he was just nowhere near as energetic as he once was. Even though he won the fight, he looked awful doing so. Shot? No. Sliding? Yes.

 

Haven't u heard? De la Hoya has been shot for years. You'll probably still keep buying his fights.:rofl

 

calzaghe-jones should not be mentioned in the same leauge as pac-hoya.

yes its stupid in pac's case because every fighter that pac ko'ed are shot. from barrera to morales and now dela hoya. it's a stupid excuse from those who doesn't want to give pac the full credit.

 

in that case, floyd is an awful of a boxer. he just managed a SD from a hoya that is shot for years already.

 

I will buy that, although what I do not buy is fans of Roberto Duran who say Duran's win over Barkley proves he was the greatest fighter who ever lived, and then when you say, well then Hearns demolished a legit fighter who was champion 5 years before in a weight class below where he beat Barkley in 1989, Duran fans will say Duran was washed up when he fought Hearns half a decade before the great win over Barkley. Duran fans pick and choose when he was washed up and what excuse they use. He was great when he won and washed up when he lost. :? The washed up excuse is used by fans of a fighter to take away from another man's win over their hero. I always thought Roberto Duran at 32 when he fought Hearns was not washed up- he fought another 35 times and 17 years more. I think he lost fair and square and he was WBA champ at the time, and excuses should not work. And Duran fans also want to say how great Duran was to beat Davey Moore in 1983, He beat Moore a year after Benitez outclassed Duran and a year before Hearns demolished Duran. But when you say, ok fine, but Hearns beat him at the same division a year later at his weight and championship, oh well Duran didn't train for Hearns. Which is the same excuse Duran used for the 2nd.Leonard fight or Benitez or Hearns. Whenever he lost to a legend he made up that excuse. Seems like Duran never trained for the best fighters he fought. Odd to not train for the better ones, and train for the ones you have a good style to beat like Moore and Barkley. I ranted here. But Duran fans are the worst at using the washed up excuse. If a fighter is shot then the proof is he will lose his next few fights and look terrible and not have much in the gas tank. It is sort of funny how if Oscar comes back and wins by knockout over Mora for example, then we have to question if he was shot for Pacman. It will start to look like Pacman was great and Oscar just made an excuse. Fact is Oscar went 12 with Floyd not too long ago and it was a SD. When Duran kept on fighting after Hearns for years and years, I started to think, well Hearns did win that fight legit. Although I knew that already. The excuses for Duran at the time in the 80s started to look questionable. He beat a legit guy who keeps fighting. Duran hurt himself by fighting on in a way as Oscar will. Then the excuses do not work as well.

 

I think people are taking it too personal with Pac-man's legacy and the DLH fight. For one Pac was already considered P4P #1 fighter and he wasn't favored to win. Do you think he would have dropped in rankings or lose his legacy? I don't think so. It was a low risk fight with high reward for Pac. Pac is always going to be remembered as a great for this fight, even if DLH wasn't considered to be at his best. People just want to know why DLH, the expected favorite to win the fight (not better p4p) did not win. Was cause he was shot, old, weight drained, what?

It's too hard to say if DLH is shot now. I don't think he was shot going into the fight. I think he was on the slide from age and inactivity, but the weight drainage had the worst affect. Say DLH bumps back up to 154 and looks healthy and meaty and knocks Mora out. I think it would be a case for the weight drainage argument. On the other hand we don't know if being weak at 147 and getting womped on did any irreparable damage to DLH's body that Pac-man is the one to have made him shot.

 

MAG that is a huge slab of writing, so I just read the first bit. Duran wasn't shot by any means against Hearns, he never would've beaten Hearns IMO. Terrible style matchup, against a naturally much bigger man.

 

I agree. Roberto Duran would never have beaten Thomas Hearns.