My Dad's Top 10 Heavyweights

Well, I've told some of the young kiddie posters here on ESB who think they know something about boxing, that I own video-tapes that are older than these young kids who post in 2010.........
thumbsup

MR.BILL:hat

 

How does that feel?

 

shut up, fat Stifler

 

MRBILL's nowhere near as old as he seems.
The way he talks I'd guess he was at least 65.

 

See here for proof of the kiddie jackass......:bbb

MR.BILL

 

Age 43.... But I've been down the block by myself on a few occasions......

MR.BILL

 

im only messing with ya, bra. But you do look like a tubby steve stifler

 

I was 195 pounds there in camp with George....... My weight while in-shape at that juncture was 168....... I was puffy.......
:deal

MR.BILL

 

"boils down purely to opinion"

No. It doesn't. Opinion based on facts is a supported opinion. Opinion concerning head to head fantasies are unsupported. They can be based on anything and there is really nothing to discuss or evaluate because they are based only on opinion. We see these all the time---"Tua murders Dempsey, Marciano, Frazier, etc"---expressed on this board.

The difference is like talking to a friend and telling him you have a pain in the back and he tells you the pain is caused by arthritis. An unsupported opinion. You go to a physician and he does x-rays and runs tests and then he gives his opinion. The physician's opinion is of much more value as it is based on facts.

 

I disagree.
The value given to a particular set of "accomplishments" (as most people here measure and discuss them anyway) rests not on X-Rays or tests, but ultimately on opinions and value judgments.
Even some of the "facts" are ultimately based on opinions, (and often other people's opinions).

I see it all the time on here people arguing the worth of accomplishments with each other. If it was like an X-Ray or a scientific test they'd be hardly any room for debate. (You'd get 90% consensus here, allowing for the hardcore 10% of complete loons.)
I see you and others discussing things like which fighter beat the most number of "RING magazine rated contenders", a brilliant example of factual matters that are based on a very subjective and notoriously imperfect set of opinions.
"Quality of opposition" is another tricky area that always features in discussions on "accomplishments". Quality of opposition is determined with a huge dose of opinion, and the disagreements over it are impossible to resolve.
Quality of performance, "dominance", the merits of decisions, the worth of a quick KO compared to a commanding points victory over same opponent, for example .... all these things come up in the mix of discussing accomplishments, and all these things are almost completely based on OPINION. Informed opinion, yes, but the same can be said of people who talk head-to-head fantasy match-ups, whose picks are always backed up with some sort of "reasoning".

 

I think this deserves a bump, really interesting.

 

This sounds like a long blast to the past.