Sonny Liston vs Rocky Marciano

No, we didn't agree it was a misleading expression anywhere but in your fever dreams.

You think the existence of the phrase "style advantage" is proof that "young historians" believe "one type [of style] never beats another type"?

That is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever read on this forum.

 

That's fine, loathe away. You can loathe anything you like. I think you fundamentally have misunderstood what is meant by it, and there's no better illustration of that than this exchange. But loath any expression you want.

But making up some weird background where "young historians" think that one style can never beat another style because the phrase exists is abject nonsense. It is apparent you completely made this up.

It's so telling. I completely ignored you for two years, and the first post I read of yours in god knows how long contains made-up gibberish because of your personal feelings on a very minor issue. I'm not absolutely convinced that's a coincidence.

 

This is also completely wrong.

It doesn't imply it, it flat out states it. What is not implied is that by its existence is that "young historians....think that one [style] has no chance against another [style]" which is what you wrote.

Absolute gibberish.

 

it's the incredulous ness I love.

Yes, "style advantage" means style advantage. The words "Style is an advantage" have almost no meaning though, in relation to boxing.

Why would "style advantgae" mean "strength advantage"? Please try and think before you type, I don't think you meant to say any of this.

Success of a style depends on many, many, many more things than these two things. A style advantage can be a tiny advantage or a big advantage. Again, I don't think you really understand what it means, despite having it explained to you in detail.

The words "style advantage" assume some other meaning when you read them, assuming you are not trolling.

It's not a "blanket expression". You just work very hard to make it so. You have done for a decade now, it's absolutely mad.

 

No.

Instead, try extremely hard to hold on to this:

You said that the phrase "Style Advantage" proved that a group called "Young Historians" believed that style was the final deciding factor in determining winners - and that certain styles were undefeatable by certain other styles. You typed that.

https://www.boxingforum24.com/threads/sonny-liston-vs-rocky-marciano.648636/page-45#post-22344367

Now try to understand how lunatic that makes you look to this forum. Really try to remember that you believed it, or pretended to believe it, and instead of explaining yourself or admitted you were getting carried away, you've tried to move the goalposts, change the debate, and made additional bizarre claims that make no sense.

Have a think about it.

Or explain it. If i've been hard on you, explain who "young historians" are. Link to an article or news story or that shows a young historian claiming "tyle terms to describe boxers and beliefs arose that one type never beats another type. "

Just one. Anywhere. Ever.