The Ten Calzagments

Please Blockhead, we just don't bother with brutally owning you like we did earlier this year because it gets nowhere, you leave for a few weeks and come back with the same regurgitated nonsense.

The solution is that you are leaving for six months, but we still expect you to post under 'yesihavearm' occassionally, even though that's a slightly different personality.

 

Does he even debate anything? Because all it looks like he does is TELLS people how it is and how wrong they are. Somehow Amsterdam manages to stick his head up his own ass...atsch

 

You miss my point.

Giving the correct answer to such an obviously easy question provides little or no real test.

With the exception of Roy, Joe beats anyone at SMW.

 

It's because we reside in absurdity.

 

Whilst it is true that Amsterdam and China_hand_Joe are proselytising, you would have to be blind not to see that they are good, objective analysts!

 

So he's a ***** AND a hack? atsch

 

*****? He just makes things interesting around here! Hack? No way! Amsterdam thinks for himself, 100%!

 

The reason Amsterdam goes over the top is because he says:

1. some of those were gift decisions
2. the only reason why his opponents are rated as highly as they are is because of circle-jerking and hype of the American boxing establishment
3. Taylor has had a few picked fights against opponents whose style he could deal with

...sure, this is just the state of play in boxing, but it doesn't make it right. Sure Taylor is good, but he is not as good as he thinks, or as good as he is usually ranked to be.

 

Notwithstanding my little bit of hyperbole with Amsterdam, I believe that while Joe might struggle with any of the mentioned fighters, he would prevail.

Joe was not at prime when he defeated Eubank. One of them was nearing prime, the other, slightly past it.

He would defeat Toney in the same general way Roy did, but maybe not as convincingly.

BHop's recent victory over Winky neither adds or subtracts from my estimation of him at prime. (It DOES add to the longevity portion of his legacy, bigtime) but Winky was a natural 154 and slightly past his best.
Prime for prime at 160, BHop stops Winky.

I agree that BHop might have proved the most dangerous to Joe's 0.
Then again, Toney might have been more of a challenge.

 

Magnum is the most knowledgable poster on the site bar none, he's league's above everyone here, I try to learn the most from him, even he thinks my Taylor hate is ridiculous.

Magnum's assessment of Taylor's abilities however are similiar to mine, the guy is rarely wrong when sizing a fighter up if he's seen plenty of tape, Blockhead is leaving for six months, plain and simple, Magnum picks Pavlik also.

You have to agree Decebal, some of this just gets too amusing.:yep

 

Oh...that's pure entertainment and propaganda! You find it funny too, so what's the problem? However, in between all that artifice, there lie certain facts: circle-jerking, bias against non-American fighters in the rankings, ranking by resume and NAMES defeated, dodging of non-NAMED non-US opponents by American NAMES, fighting NAMES instead of live threats, etc. These are serious, objective issues!

 

I am surprised that they don't find your style amusing! What's wrong with making a serious point well in an amusing manner, on a forum?:huh

 

There is nothing wrong with it, they just don't recieve it well, plus it helps to actually seek to understand the many facets of this great sport.:yep

By the way, Cuculain, I agree with all of that, peak Hopkins gives Joe a rough fight.