Whats there to agree? Are you saying that you are the only one that saw it or the first to see SRR do this. A sure sign of desperation:
M. dont waste your time, the only fighter the prof is interested in and why he made the vid, it in the first place was to dump on Dempsey.
Holyfield outdoes Jack but Jack is up there. I will say that Dempsey was highly skilled in dirty fighting, and that it was done to get an edge, not like the desperation of a Tyson or Golota biting.
Very true. The alternative view shows Sharkey struggling to arise. Not grabbing his groin. Cherry picker strikes again.
How about we change Kraptons screen name to ..... "THE CHERRYPICKER". Far more appropriate don't you all think?
I detail where I think Greb gets his reputation from but whats the use in pointing out facts gleaned from a plethora of research when you are talking to slack jawed troglodytes who take everything they read in Ring as gospel. They have a magazine collection, they already know everything.
Lol. Of course it does. It also shows a green alien holding the Holy Grail and plotting to assassinate JFK. Youll see what you want to.
There is no doubt Klompton doesn't like Dempsey. He's very guarded on his films, yet he took time out to produce a foul reel. So, in this case, I guess the agenda on Dempsey trumps his usual MO on I'm not sharing any films!
I don't see and Aliens or little green men nor have I ever believed in any conspiracy theories. However I do know a cherrypicker when I see one. You're it buddy. It's one thing for a casual fan who knows no better but for a man who portrays himself as a "historian" being a cherrypicker is inexcusable and invalidates your work. It's very akin to being a liar.
The witty side of the prof, maybe you should do two things put your glasses on and take your medication. IDK how did a green alien holding the Holy Grail and plotting to assassinate JFK. Youll see what you want to", come into this discussion? Here again is an excellent example of the prof not accepting anything that contradicts his myopic view of things. You are right you dont see what you dont want to see.
You possibly underestimate Tyson, who was relatively skilled in dirty fighting his whole career and shouldn't be judged only on his more outrageously obvious fouling post-prison. Lennox Lewis might deserve to be regarded as superior to Tyson and Holyfield in the fouling department. His holding and hitting was actually a thing of beauty. The Grant fight was a masterclass.
I seem to be the only one here so far who has shown an interest in whether the kidney and rabbit punches shown in the video were fouls at all. It's an important point, but perhaps everyone here knows something I don't.
I suspect Jack "Doc" Kearns did a fine job on the 'negotiating' table, getting the rabbit punch and kidney punch to be declared good for more than one of his fights, to agree that "one arm free" clinching was acceptable, and to secure a referee who'd turn a blind eye to a few low blows (which of course are fouls under the MofQ rules).
Sure, that was Tyson's biggest moment of desperation. Lewis is a good call but let's remember that the Greatest was the greatest at many things... holding the ropes and hitting, holding and hitting, pulling down on the neck... but much like a start NBA player gets 5 steps to the rim, Ali's crimes were overlooked.
