What's Your Opinion On George Dixon?

If I can get access to that specific info, I will. That's a whole lot of researching to do, but I think I can find the time in the near future. I need to level out a bit. Some nice reading should do the trick.

 

Pea I wouldn't give any info to Cotto20/BoxingGloves1/IranBarkley, the guy is a f'n dick.

 

I do not doubt tha there were lots of controversial decision for various reasons, but i have to question whether the colour card is overplayed in these games. Dont get me wrong, i understand the racism of the time, and i am sure there may have been one or two racially based decisions, but i just have not seen any evidence that colour has played much of a role in boxing decisions throughout history. Certainly nowhere near as big as corruption has played. Even if you look back at the most racially charged events, in history the colour card was not really that big (from a scoring card perspective). Johnson Burns could have been a ND since the police were the ones that actually stopped it. Jackson, Langford, McVey etc all had decision wins against white fighters (from Memory). What evidence is there that decisions in the ring were racially based rathr than just plain old fashioned corruption?

 

Him again, eh? Jesus ****ing Christ....

A simple word of advice to him, then. You don't need to be so adamant about proving your worth that you make account after account, each appearing more knowledgable based on what you've learned recently, in the attempt to finally gain acceptance. Just show your improvement from day to day. Learn, but make sure you know what you're talking about before getting into a long-winded debate about it otherwise you'll just look like a jackass. Trust me, I know from experience.

 

I know Boilermaker holds a similarly high opinion of Dixon, I'd like to hear at least a snippet about why you yourself rank him so high when you get the chance.

 

Why would i care about my post count? Means nothing.

I do do research on the old timers, i just dont read one or two articles on a guy and then declare myself a 'huge fan of theirs' or an 'expert' on them like someone on here. Alot of the old timers that i have researched i wouldnt feel comfortable debating them as i really dont know enough about them hence the 'I need to research them more' posts or my questions about them.

Also enjoy making another account next week or whatever you sad ****. I'm sure you will just speak the same amount of **** and still be a dick then, no matter not your username. And before you spout some **** off about what is my problem this is -

You came on here originally then crtisised me unprofoundly and started making personal remarks about me, before saying i was a nobody and a **** boxer which your entitled to your opinion but you used this as an insult which i find quite sad. I then called you on this and you denied making the comments - which you blatently did. And then tried to make a new profile and suck up to me. Your a snaky piece of **** and by my guess your about 12 years old and if you are in fact older than that it just shows what a sad **** you really are.

Right thats this thread back about Doddy Dixon

 

Well thanks McGrain, was abit childish by me anyway.

 

This :deal

Greg, that was not a childish rant by any means either, as McGrain says you don't need to defend yourself, but I do think he needed to be told that. I actually admire the guys enthusiasm, shame he can't mould that in with something approaching decorum.

 

He is enthusiastic just abit of a dick if i knew what decorum was i would agree completly

 

don't get it, guess I'm not smart enough.

Etiquette Greg, is that helps

 

thanks