Why does Gamboa seem to get a free pass....

Yeah, that's why I'm just going to ignore him. He's another Lance Uppercut, you can't get any reasonable discussion grounds going to even set up a proper debate, it gets degraded down to opinion and insult throwing always.

**** him, who cares, he's a ****ing idiot, we agree on that.

 

Some parts of this post are very good, in regards to your comments about the improvement of modern athletes through better training technique. I think the time frames you are talking about, are too minute to have that major a difference (ten years just isn't enough). I agree with your general train of thought though, and i like the way you have put your posts together overall.

 

That's my major argument against him. I'd have no large problems with him arguing the same for fighters of 50 years ago(even if I'd disagree to an extent) but seriously, fighters from the 90's?

 

I agree with you here. Obviously my view points on this topic are well known, i'm not going to start that arguement again. I agree with some of his points, but from a much earlier time frame similar to the one you mentioned above.

 

You don't have a major argument, you're an Amsterdam groupie (who got so schooled in this thread that it's laughable he tries think otherwise)

He only comes back once it seems like you're on a front foot, but you're not at all - boring someone to death with repetitive arguments that never take into account the other persons counter argument is stupid

"Toney started fighting in 1988, therefore he must be considered primitive"

No you dingle berry, he also fought through the 1990's and into 2000's, he received the SAME benefits that the new era fighters received, although he obviously doesn't use them to the same level due to his obesity.

He prospered as much as ANYONE from 24 hour weigh ins when they came in, his fat ass often struggled to get down in weight, had they not come in, he'd have been up the ranks a lot sooner.

So stating "Oh Toney started in 1988, is he primitive too?" means nothing when Toney received the same benefits that I'm talking about in terms of increased fight science, increased nutritional knowledge, 24 hour weigh ins, etc etc etc.

The fact that you do not see the argument that 20 years is too long a period to analyse someone through footage alone is beyond me.

I can watch Bjorn Borg play Tennis from 20 years ago, I can watch him dominate his opponents and hit lovely power shots that smash past his opponents.

I can watch John McEnroe serve aces.

I can watch Michael Jordon dunk over Patrick Ewing and dominate the games.

Footage shows me that these guys are all great and should have no problems dominating in todays era cause they dominated competition from THEIR OWN ERA.

That's the key, how good were the people they were fighting at the time? Were they technology advanced?

Would Michael Jordon have as much success today against guys like Shaq, Yao Ming and the other huge giants of the game who prospered recently.

As for your earlier George Foreman argument - two points make that argument bull****.

George Foreman came back and fought opponents that cannot be considered the "legitimate heavyweights" of the era. Every 'elite' HW fighter he fought, he lost too - Evander Holyfield, Tommy Morrison, Shannon Briggs... if we dare call Tommy Morrison and Shannon Briggs elite.

He beat Michael Moorer but then Michael Moorer was never REALLY that good at HW. He beat Schulz for the only title he had, got TKO'ed by Evander Holyfield and KO'ed by David Tua.

Excellent LHW but hardly "pinnacle" HW boxer.

George Foreman would have been eaten by Tyson, Lewis or any of the other "top flight" HW's in that time period

The other reason your argument fails (yet again) is that in his comeback, George Foreman had access to the same training technology, the same improvements, the same weigh ins that all the other fighters had... It wasn't like he was transplanted from the era and bought straight into the new era... he trained in the new era before his comeback and as he was fighting, he was training with new era technologies.

Great achievement by an old boxer to do what he did, don't get me wrong, but it doesn't "prove" your theory any further than anything else you've stated.

Your theory CAN'T be proven. As reasons given above state.

 

Look, I think boxing tends to think of itself as a timeless sport and doesn't like to believe that training methods and such have had much impact.

It allows them to remember heroes like Mohammad Ali even when his career is arguably bettered by Larry Holmes/Lennox Lewis and believe that Ali was the better fighter.

Ten years is a hell of a long time in any sport, but you'll note what I've said in that I won't analyse fighters twenty years apart, ten years is a little easier but still there are intangible differences that you have to take into account.

Pointing at a guy like Toney who yes, started his career in 1988 and trying to say that it proves old school fighters are just as conditioned as new school is stupid, because Toney benefitted from new school training techniques as they evolved.

Look at any other sport in the world, combat or otherwise and see the difference in performance, how progressively performances are trumped time and time again.

To think that this doesn't effect boxing in some intangible way is silly in my view.

As I pointed below, you can look at footage of Sugar Ray Leonard dominating fighters in the 1980s and believe he'll do it today, but that's no different than watching Dwayne Chambers dominate in sprinting ten years ago, his times have since been shattered.

 

See what I mean Sweet Pea? First thing the guy wants to do is hurl an insult before posting more of the same ****, forget it, it's typical Lance Uppercut style nonsense.

 

Just answer a simple question, being that you seem a little more sensible than the other two in the thread..

How much impact do you believe 24 hour weigh ins have had on the sport of boxing?

 

It's so funny watching you cling to your friend, attempting to get some form of agreement from him so you can feel better about the fact that you were completely owned in this thread.

 

I'm just going to let this one go. He bases his arguments on ridiculous points and tries to use his rhetoric to get by, when I've handily picked apart every one of his points. What's his next opt? Say the exact same thing, but switch it around a bit. He's a clever guy, he is.:roll:

 

Pretty much.

 

You two are a comedian act aren't you? A bunch of clowns here to entertain us.

The only person using rhetoric and stating the same thing in several different ways is you. You're not even doing it that well.

Notice peoples comments in the thread? How people that I don't even know state that your opinion is being bested? Meanwhile the only people who agree with you are? Oh what a surprise, friends of yours.

Look, I don't need someone to pat me on the back or lick my ass like it seems you need, I know what's what and I've proven it time and time again, the fact that you fail to see any point that isn't drilled into you at a million miles an hour and the fact that you do exactly what I said "Argue for the sake of arguing, all night and day long" is all the proof I need to know how fragile your ego is.

I'm sorry for bruising it, papi... I'm sure you'll rebound, internet tough guys tend to have high resiliency.

 

Good one. You're now basing the argument off of what others(nationalistic pricks like Onourway and those who dislike Amsterdam like quebecwarrior) say, and even worse you only base it off what was said prior to myself stepping in and disecting those posts that were originally praised by those just looking to have a jab at Amsterdam.

Anyone that actually looks at the arguments you're presenting(that fighters of the 90's and thereabouts are primitive) will see how truly ridiculous and sensationalist what you're saying is.

This argument is done. You have your ******ed opinions, I have my reasonable, sensible, and outright obvious ones.

 

-yawn-

 

Damn bro, just cause its a forum doesn't mean u can forget to use punctuation. I m out of breath reading that ****. Good point though. Jiminz is no walk in the park.