Statements You are So sick of Hearing ...

Teddy Atlas is right. Tyson is and was overrated. Not many people say that, but he is right as rain.

But there's a group on here that works hard to denigrate George Foreman (trying to pump up Klitschko's or Tyson). They never miss an opportunity to rake him over the coals. Now THAT sounds old and empty. Sick of that (trying to pump up Klitschko's or Tyson).

 

The attitude has shifted a bit over the years but it seemed there was a time when the majority believed that Ali’s berating of Frazier was purely for promotion and that Joe overreacted to same.

But at least imo, the abuse was real and unnecessary. Ali simply had a mean streak in him and emptied out a lot of it on Joe. Joe’s only mistake, if you will, was letting that abuse consume him.

 

Bwut bwut ggg was aboided vy alot of peoplaeee!!!! most aboided fister ever!!!! ggg goat ggg goat!+]10191

 

Also that Sugar Ray Leonard, magically lost ALL of his boxing iq, and decided to stand and brawl with Durán rater than "box beautifully" like he did the second time around, SUPPOSEDLY.

The truth is that Ray, no matter which version of him, is NEVER beating an in-shape Roberto Durán, never.

 

I’m sick of hearing how Vasiliy Lomachenko is an ATG.

He was 18-3. Let that sink in — he fought 21 times as a pro and managed to lose three of them.

I agree he was a great amateur, maybe the greatest, but this isn’t amateurboxingforum24.com so take that somewhere else, please.

He was good for his time, but it’s a fight-twice-a-year, a belt hanging on every tree time. He was a construct of what people who have no real idea, understanding nor appreciation of boxing history and what greatness really is … consider to be greatness.

It’s like saying some TikTok star is the greatest musician of all time because they plugged a beat into a computer and someone did a funny dance to it.

“He’s the Matrix! He’s the Matrix!” That’s all well and good, but he is not an ATG professional boxer.

 

The real truth is that the ‘In-Shape Roberto Duran’ is a creature more rare than Bigfoot.

Ray Leonard > Roberto Duran because he was dedicated to his craft and he also wasn’t a quitter.

You know what illustrates the biggest difference between Leonard and Duran? It can be seen and understood in a simple contrast.

Right after Roberto won the Montreal fight, Ray and his wife flew to Honolulu. Leonard wasn’t even sure he wanted to ever box again.

On his second day there, not in training at all, no fight on the horizon and unsure at the time that he would ever set foot in the ring again, Ray Leonard went for a jog on the beach.

What do you think Roberto was doing at that exact moment after WINNING the fight? On his 50th beer or tequila? On his 14th pass through the all-you-can-eat buffet loading up another plate of pancakes and topping them with ice cream? Probably either guess has a good chance of being correct.

It was on that run that Leonard decided he wanted another piece of Duran — he called Mike Trainer and said ‘I don’t care about the purse, give Duran whatever he wants and make it happen.’

Left to his own devices, Roberto would have pissed away the WBC title and lost to Roger Stafford or Randy Shields or Maurice Blocker when he waddled into the ring for a title defense the next spring rather than be stripped.

 

If I remember correctly he said something like the book was trash the author got everything wrong which is why he wrote his own book. He was very very dismissive of the book

 

Often the subject of books say things like this without ever reading the book — someone tells them something is in there and maybe it ain’t quite so (no room for nuance). I could be thinking of something other than this book but I remember Duran being furious that someone wrote that he smoked marijuana with a prostitute (or hook-up?) while he was married … he didn’t deny being with the woman but said he didn’t smoke weed, just drank lol.

I just can’t put a lot of stock in a blanket repudiation of a book rather than specifics and an explanation of how he says whatever really went down.

Not particular to this book, but someone could say a book about them is ‘full of lies’ but doesn’t mean every sentence and every word is a lie, right? Like a politician gets accused of having an affair and the report has the truth but somehow got the wrong hotel … well then it’s ‘untrue’ in the eyes of the politician even though he’s guilty of the assignation.

I want to say I read that book a long time ago but don’t recall any particulars. I don’t seem to still have it. Do you have any idea what the more damning ‘allegations’ are, or how Duran ‘set the record straight’ in his book? I seem to recall (and please feel free to correct me) that Roberto still didn’t give a believable explanation in his book of why he quit versus Leonard … and if he’s going to dodge the elephant in the room, I can’t see how it’s worth reading. It’s like Wyatt Earp writing a book and not telling his side of the Gunfight at OK Corral, haha.

 

This content is protected

 

"Buster Douglas only had one good performance vs Mike Tyson"

No he didn't he was fighting at a good level between 1986-1990 going 12-1 beating the likes of Greg Page, Trevor Berbick, Oliver McCall.

And Douglas's performance vs Mike Williams where he dropped his opponent 3 times with a jab was just as good as his performance vs Tyson.

 

Buster Douglas was a good contender with a great plan that’s all that happened, Non ATG’s are actually pretty good at there profession funnily enough… if you fight frequently (which Tyson was back then) S happens take a look at Toney, Duran, Maxim etc.

 

That unconventional fighters have no fundamentals.

That world champion level fighters have no heart.

That x fighter has a glass jaw when they go over 30/40 fights, facing a myriad of styles and world level fighters and get stopped - all of a sudden they have no chin.

That a plethora of fans, often with no real life boxing experience, martial arts experience, gym experience, know the sport, how to analyse a fighter's record and a fighter's style without nuance or understanding of what it takes to reach a level of greatness that most of us will never comprehend.

That Johnny come lately gets catapulted to the very tops of historical greatness with less than a dozen fights at true world class, elite level when there's ample of prior fighters with more extensive records, better calibre of opponents, but they just don't have the low number of losses or the all-glorious zero losses on their records.

That boxing somehow evolved in the space of 10 years when in truth, in certain skillsets, boxing has seen steady devolution since arguably the 50s - 70s.

Today's fighters climbing through several divisions and being titlists but never being the man rivals and eclipses the likes of Fitz, Armstrong, Walker, Langford etc. when today's fighter is climbing down three of today's divisions using weigh in rules to their advantage and then going back up to their natural fighting weight when realistically, they've only gone up 2, maybe 3 of the original 8 weight divisions, yet they're heralded as 5/6/7 weight division 'legends'.

 

You take in a friend who's fallen on hard times, you give him money, campaign for his right to fight, this that and the other... And then he shoots your dog (metaphorically).

Ali shot the metaphorical dog in this situation, and the fans don't mind if it's for publicity. But that's just how I see it (metaphorically).

 

Good to see you back, banned? Or do you have a life?

 

I wouldn't say I have a life, but I do a lotta stuff... So BF has taken a position at the back of my internet vault. I think the thing that consumes me the most now is reading.