New Ideas for the New Mods

Discussion in 'Classic Boxing Forum' started by RoccoMarciano, Dec 20, 2007.


  1. RoccoMarciano

    RoccoMarciano Blockbuster Full Member

    2,892
    16
    Jan 15, 2007
    Keep this section as nothing post 1980's, please!

    Classic does indeed mean Classic, doesn't it?

    Most real boxing historians, of which there are one or two in this section of Eastside, tend to rate a real classic boxer after a period of time. While more modern boxers generate posts, they aren't classic boxers in any real sense to wannabe historians.

    So, if new moderators are in the works, I would like to keep this section in the realm of post analysis. 20+ years or so isn't to much to ask regarding this section of the forum in my view.
     
  2. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,790
    47,643
    Mar 21, 2007
    It doesn't allow for modern day/historcal comparisons in the wider sense.

    "Those who don't understand history are doomed to repeat it" - that is a two way street in my view. Those who study the past to the exclusion of the present risk becoming obsolete. There's nothing wrong with Classic the way it is.

    Also, Classic is the only section to have retained a moderator.
     
  3. RoccoMarciano

    RoccoMarciano Blockbuster Full Member

    2,892
    16
    Jan 15, 2007
    I tend to not agree, with all do respect McGrain. There are some in this section of the forum who really are boxing historians. They get cluttered with threads about modern day boxers in my view.... My point is to let them really form an opinion about boxers from the 1980s and before before moving along.

    I mean Maywether wins, and posts about him end up in this part of the forum. It's great that Floyd won, but keep him in the sections he belongs in until later. I don't know of any boxing historian on this forum that has really rated Floyd... they will, but including him at this moment in time, in the classic section, is very premature.

    This part of the forum is really meant for boxing historians. Current happenings do not apply. That's the only point I'm making.
     
  4. enquirer

    enquirer Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,206
    26
    Mar 18, 2006
    I agree with macca. We need to have overall context,and the classic section can put the modern fighters in their real historical standings.
     
  5. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,790
    47,643
    Mar 21, 2007
    I think I understand what you are saying - but people know where to look, and everyone has their area of interest. However, there is no reason at all why learning about the past and the present should not go hand in hand in my view - there is a very heavy lean towards old timers on this board, and that's the way it should be, but i do not think it is not proper to discuss the history of the heavyweight division without being able to discuss Iron Mike Tyson - it just doesn't make any sense to discuss the history of something without taking into account the thing that altered that history so.

    The one thing I will say is that we might have people with real knowledge and interest in, say, Johnson-Jeffries, a real expert, arrive on the board and count 7 threads about Mayweather and see another one about Tyson and another about Duran-Leonard III and think, "not for me".

    But I still must insists studying the history to the exclusion of the present almost always leads to irrelevance.
     
  6. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,790
    47,643
    Mar 21, 2007
    How on earth do you put Jack Dempsey into his proper historical standing without taking into account the rise and rise of Mike Tyson, you know?
     
  7. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,644
    44,044
    Apr 27, 2005
    I totally agree as well. I enjoy seeing big wins by a guy like Mayweather or other being debated over here. Many great reads can result, including mythical matchups, and we also get a good breakdown of the significance of the win according to those on the Classic Forum. With Flod's latest we had good debate from both ends of the spectrum and i found it both enlightening and enjoyable.
     
  8. ChrisPontius

    ChrisPontius March 8th, 1971 Full Member

    19,404
    278
    Oct 4, 2005
    :good

    Sometimes i see the classic forum as a more intelligent version of the general forum but with the addition to look further in the past. Of course, your average boring frustrated old man like Red lowers the average IQ significantly, but still.

    It would be ignorant to ignore everything post-80's.
     
  9. McGrain

    McGrain Diamond Dog Staff Member

    112,790
    47,643
    Mar 21, 2007
    Having said all that, I like the tone of the thread.

    It's good to have a discussion about the nature of the community on occasion.
     
  10. enquirer

    enquirer Boxing Addict Full Member

    3,206
    26
    Mar 18, 2006
    On a side note,its really funny when someone from the general forum comes on and rubbishes duran,robinson,ali and others whilst making the case for floyd,wlad or jones as the GOAT....
    After a few replies to their posts i normally do this: :patsch .
    This is like the classic forums' secret handshake. :lol:

    I also really enjoyed the classic forums opinions on modern fighters like calzaghe and floyd as JT commented earlier.
     
  11. RoccoMarciano

    RoccoMarciano Blockbuster Full Member

    2,892
    16
    Jan 15, 2007
    I suppose this is true, but it is only speculation until guys like you and others can form a solid opinion. Otherwise it is just the meaningles bantering of the day. Floyd could get starched during his next couple of fights in a horrible fashion..... do we talk about him then, John? Yeah... next thread, how big of a piece of shite is Mayweather... Kinda excludes him from a Classic forum.

    You are still correct to a point, I just think a waiting period is agreeable.
     
  12. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,644
    44,044
    Apr 27, 2005
    But what about a Whitaker, who is discussed daily in here. He fought thru the 90's and your method would have discussion on him ruled out. Unless you mean starting time, but where do you draw the line, really.

    I'll say this, 90's fighters and even forward will always be discussed a bit in here and there's is nothing that could ever change the fact. Making steadfast rules would be impossible.
     
  13. RoccoMarciano

    RoccoMarciano Blockbuster Full Member

    2,892
    16
    Jan 15, 2007
    Of course you are correct. I was just thinking a breath of air in between would be a good idea. A concrete time frame is hard - but I still think a stop time of some sort is appropriate.. Not a complete block.... anyway, I'm thinking this thread maybe shouldn't have been started lol
     
  14. JohnThomas1

    JohnThomas1 VIP Member

    52,644
    44,044
    Apr 27, 2005
    Hahahaha, nevermind. I can see but only one thread of the ilk you worry about on the front page. The other day there may have been three, but they get a good discussion going then die out, until next time. I think you're a bit worried about not much. It's only a thread here and there mate.
     
  15. RoccoMarciano

    RoccoMarciano Blockbuster Full Member

    2,892
    16
    Jan 15, 2007
    Far be it from me to get pissed about anything, John :lol:

    Maybe they'll choose me for the next mod........:smoke