Ray Arcel on Hagler - Hearns.

I don't buy the green argument either. SRL wasn't green when he lost to Duran and Tommy wasn't green when he lost to SRL ,, people say green, why because they lost? No, a better fighter beat them that night, period. They were already both proven up to that point and champions .. Sure you learn more and more as you go especially when you fight better guys. But boxing isn't a perfect science, it's a very fluid sport.

 

Mag, excuses, excuses, excuses. Besides, Leonard wasn't a great fighter yet even though he kod a great fighter in Benitez? More excuses, my excuse making, lying friend.

 

Mag said that also even though You're the same person, lol? Wtf?

 

I know lol

 

But he simply did not have to lie and he did. If you can't deal with that, that is your problem. The joke is that you are defending his lie(s). So sorry.

 

What you said was that you weren't that person( for no reason). Liar.

 

What I go against is that Ray was the great fighter he was when he fought Hearns in 1981.. Duran made him learn the game inside and out. Mentally and physically and to get all the details. As a matter of fact, the Hagler fight is a good indication of what Ray learned from Duran. They were proven, but Ray did improve.

 

The ironic thing is I am the most non personal person on here. I don't like to talk about people's lives or how they are. I come on here to have fun don't you? So that backs up what I say about not getting personal and not wanting things to get personal back. The fact you are going on and on about this says something about you not me. I would do it again not mentioning I was mag1965. Probably more so after this, and the question is posed to Eastside for booting me for no reason back in 2013. I am not sure who did the booting but they were on a booting trip . Getting back to the topic, you seriously think I am held accountable to you for not saying I was mag1965? You take this message board stuff way to seriously. I come here to discuss boxing and not talk about my personal issues or who I am. What I think this could be, and I don't know for sure. But could it be about losing the argument about Duran, so you have to talk about me being a liar to break down some sort of foundation about me, since I do believe what I say about Duran? Before the liar thing came up you tried to say I was a excusemaker, which is what I said about Duran. And if this is a personal thing, this demonstrates to you (something you don't seem to understand) exactly why I did not say I was MAG. Some of you guys get far too bent out of shape for a message board. It is not about me and it is not personal. I don't care if someone mentions Hearns. I will discuss it and then sign off. I like to prove points about boxing. Learn to discuss things, and if you are losing the argument admit it. I would if I was losing. I wouldn't mention well this guy lied about not being mag1965 and now he is pernellsweetpea when I am losing. That is rather immature wouldn't you say? Honestly. no offense, but I think your tactics here to maybe win the argument in regards to Duran by getting leverage with another topic did not work. You tried to get leverage one way-first you tried the excuse maker tactic and that didn't work since the issue was Duran making the excuses and I mentioned it, so you went for the liar thing when you asked if I was born in 1965 and that is not working because not mentioning who I am on a screenname meaning nothing. . Did I make my points about Duran that strong where you felt you had to get personal to get leverage to take away my argument? My arguments stands because I made good points. I expect you guys to make good points and you usually do. All of you. I had not qualms about people not making good points. And I never get mad, even now this is just discussion although I want to talk about boxing not this But about boxing?. I enjoy it. Honestly, and no offense but I think your tactics here are rather obvious and hypocritical since it shows dishonesty to the topic that you have to go personal or try to win an argument in light of the fact you are acting shocked someone would lie about something as innane as a boxing screenname. Win it honorably and not personally. I don't get personal. I just try and talk about the boxing and what I know. If you cannot prove he was a top 10 ATG fighter with discussion, bringing me into it will not win the argument. I don't think it has. I still say Duran to me is not an top ten ATG fighter with his wins. His wins.. He fought everyone, but his wins are lacking. The Ray win was good but as you see here many people think as I do that he was not the great he was later, yet they are not saying he was green like I have said.

 

I'm defending his position on it's none of your business if he was Mag or not, lied about it or brushed you off, and it has nothing to do with boxing, which you are clearly missing. You are somehow equating this with now he is no longer credible here, which you have stated.… This position you are taking with him is the logic of a little kid. So if there is anyone who is discrediting themselves, that would be you.

 

Thanks for the reply. Yes I agree that this has gone on to long. I believe that everyone is an equal here, no matter if they have been posting for 10 years or 6 months. And everyone has a right to live their own lives. Pea is fine poster himself, imo, and knowledgeable about the era, whether I agree with him on certain topics or not. I will let it go. And I do apologize for slingin' mud

 

Since it is about me I don't think it is well deserved at all because he was mentioning excusemaking before that screenname issue came up-in response to me saying Duran was an excusemaker-which he is. And saying liar the way he did in that last post, was childish and saying he is fine long term poster ( which is insignificant to how he is as a person since a boxing message board at least to me is inpersonal), yet hearing him talk like that does put his credibility in question for me since he is changing the subject away from Duran. I think so anyway. We are adults here, and if you mention what I did when I was young interviewing boxers and trainers saying I was a reporter, then what he does now and his approach to getting leverage is significant also, and moreso since this is now and this is about discussion and not wanting to probably lose an argument or being frustrated. It is just a message board. As for Duran. As a matter of fact, I have read book reviews were people say his excuses on his losses in fights ruins the book. They actually said this. The Duran issue is what I want to talk about and not me since this is what we are here for, and it turns about me. even talking interviewing people when I was in my 20s I mentioned it because it was something funny and amusing and I figured you guys on here would relate to loving a sport so much you do anything to get close to the fighters. I never hurt anyone doing that, and I wanted to talk to boxers I loved to get into it. My interviews are pretty good. especially the one with Lou Duva. He was a great guy as were most of the boxers and trainers I interviewed. It was a good experience. That was for fun and any judgement on that is rather ridiculous since I was talking about being young and stupid and having fun which really did not happen too much when I was younger. I even woke up Ferdie Pacheco and he was a class act and we talked late. I forget what fight that was could have been the Hearns/Olajide fight with Moorer Melo on the undercard at Taj Majal April 1990... I would figure you guys never did things like that or had fun when you were younger if you find that offensive? This is why someone should not get personal on here because people come up with this high and mighty attitude because they can. They are not being honest about who they are, so why would I? This is not personal.. I say it again.. This speaks for itself and this whole discussion answers the question why I did not say who I was. and I would do it again over and over again. Moreso now. .. I want to talk boxing on here and have fun. If you guys don't then we are at different places. There are different ways to silence people, and using other issues to undermine a person's knowledge is not honest, which is my point about this. Something tells me most posters are here lied about something in their life and all are not in the Priesthood. As for the boxing board here, I think what I say here bothers some posters yet this is why we are here. And I think what bothers people is I don't have a complex reasoning on Duran and all time great top 10. I use a rather simplistic reasoning. If Duran did not beat all time great fighters, how can he be rated top 10 all time great. And I still say it and always will. Even when I said I knew Duran would beat Barkley in 1989, people say that is not true. So they don't know me well enough to know if I would lie about that, why do I owe honesty on who I am. There is hypocrisy. I tell you one thing, my friends who have known me 30 or 40 years would know when I say I knew Duran would beat Barkley, they would say, he absolutely thought that. They know what I say I mean.. I am into dates.. Always have been. My friends would also know I would say I was not MAG because I don't want to get personal and have to talk about myself on her. And look what is happeing. It doesn't bother me much, I can talk about this all day I guess because I know who I am. As far as my friends go, the fact is, when I have discussed topics they will argue and I will say. no it happened this date at this time. People who know me say to the others, don't argue with him you will end up being wrong. I am big on detail. Facts. Which is ironic people try to undermine me on that since that is my forte. Even when I write about the past, I do not elaborate on anything. I say it like it happened. Which is why this topic of right and wrong and high and mighty on a boxing message board where I don't even say my first name is amusing. I am going around and around in circles here. This is rather funny to me, not annoying. Because I know that I come to the message board not being personal with people and to have fun, and even when I do that people want to turn issues into personal things because they don't like my opinions.. So if they want to wind me up or get me defensive so be it. Humans are funny and hypocritical. But it is all amusing. I don't take it personally as much as confused at the lack of fairness, especially on that booting issue in 2013. Confused that people who profess honesty and credibility are not seen for what they are exhibiting. And the question to eastside is still. why was I booted in 2013. They will probaby boot this name now. I still have checkhook boxing, but that is a rather unpopulated site. And I still say. Why is Duran rated top 10 ATG? After all this that is still the genesis for this conversation on credibility.

 

I appreciate your support. I don't think you were talking against Clinton. I don't think I was either, but I do see it differently than he does. I think he tried to undermine my voice by mentioning me personally, giving credence to why I did not say I was MAG. His behavior explains it, since it is the same behavior as other posters of the past who keep harping on some side issue not relating to the subject with an attitude like well you did this or you said this, or Clinton with his , liar liar liar sort of immature approach.. or Duranimal or would insult me outright. Which was actually rather funny.. And I always ignored it because I thought, well I will take the high road. And even that does not work. Apparently. If they don't like what they hear, they want to get personal. And I don't get personal on here much. If I do, it is after being judged because I didn't admit to be mag1965 or Pernellsweetpea. How ridiculous is that for adult men to argue over? Somehow this message board has become the Priesthood board for honesty and not the boxing message board. I don't know anyone on here, and certainly I don't think my name matters. You guys don't know my first name, yet I owe people explanations why I didn't say I was mag. When I had that name, eastside booted me. I would have had maybe 60.000 posts by now, but I sort of stopped for awhile. So they booted me and then I was supposed to be honest about who I was knowing they might boot me again. That supported what I thought this is not personal and it doesn't matter who I was. Who wants to deal with that, since I knew it was somewhat personal whomever booted the name so why make myself into the story-yet I still believe the thing about Duran or about Floyd or anyone. I have strong opinions about boxing and they will not change. That is one thing not great about me, I do not change since I saw what I saw and I feel it is embedded in my mind... As for the MAG name. I wrote eastside a decent message later asking why they booted me and then asking for the name back and they didn't respond.