You cant have an opinion if you have never boxed

I think it depends on the context - I often see it used towards people who criticise heart/bravery of fighters. I think in that instance it's fair enough.

I think it becomes silly if it's being used to say you can't have an opinion on boxing at all if you haven't boxed. In that case, taking out the heart/bravery thing, you'd have to apply the same rule to all other sport which would be ridiculous.

Fowler is terrible for it isn't he, but I think that's mainly down to him being very very insecure.

 

I don't think the fact you haven't boxed means you are clueless. How many of the best fighters have become great coaches? There are a number of excellent trainers who didn't have any/much of a career as a fighter. It's generally a line trotted out when people don't like what they're hearing or can't refute a point in my opinion, it's lazy. It's a bit like getting into a debate about the economy with someone and rather than refuting what they say, just turning around and saying "well I did an economics degree so what do you know", despite the fact that person has spent years reading the financial press and investing in stocks and shares as a hobby.

You do get a lot of clueless idiots, so maybe that is where it comes from. Think people get fed up of the trolls and just punt out that line.

 

I'm more interested in the arguments people make than their claimed life experience. Often when someone is shutting down an argument on the grounds their opponent lacks experience they're actually seeking to change the topic because they don't have a good answer to the point being made.

It's also clear from numerous boxing commentaries that being a good fighter doesn't neccesarily make you a good boxing analyst. Conversely, there are fighters who weren't the best who turn out to be very good at calling a fight.

 

It's like saying you can't have an opinion a piece of music unless you compose pieces and/or play an instrument yourself.
Or you can't have an opinion on films unless you make films yourself.
Or any piece of art, for that matter.

OR ..... you can't complain about that **** wall the building firm built for you unless you're a bricklayer yourself.

etc.
etc.
etc.

 

Normally I'd say just ague the point and don't detract by going after someones credentials in any topic not just boxing, it just makes your own position sound weak. As someone else mentioned if someone is criticising a fighters heart or bravery than I understand why people would bring it up, personally, I'd just not engage them in conversation and let them be an idiot.

 

People who have never even learned how to box often have no idea what they are watching from a tactical or technical point of view. But of course everyone can have an opinion, just doesn't have much weight behind it when the opinion is that guy is **** or fecking knock him out.

 

Curtis Woodhouse is the worst for this, spouts some sh*t that fella. Like has been previously said, there’s a big difference between your average bloke at the pub shouting knock him out watching an AJ fight to someone who’s a keen follower of boxing but has never boxed more than hitting the bag or pads at the gym

 

Absolute bollocks ! Insulting or criticism towards a fighter for certain things like someone before has put is understandable , but having an opinion or being a boxing fan doesn’t count if you have never been in the ring is absolute rubbish ! I have been around and trained boxing throughout my life but the most knowledgeable boxing people I know couldn’t fight sleep! But you could talk boxing with them all day everyday.

don’t want to stereotype here but it seems the scouse boxers love the opinion doesn’t count because you have never boxed i.e Bellew Fowler Paul Smith, but then these same guys want to ram home there opinion about things they no **** all about I.e politics for one ! It is quite funny to be honest.

 

https://pics.me.me/boxing-f-be-like-if-i-were-him-i-would-17458196.png

 

Of course you can have a valid opinion. It's when you're questioning fighters hearts etc and talking like your opinion is fact that bothers them. And let's be honest, a pro fighters opinion carries more weight than a forum posters ever will, that's just common sense.

Don't really get the politics analogy as politics is something that directly affects us every day of our lives, we all have real life experience of the effects of politics on our lives. Boxing doesn't do that. It's a niche combat sport.

 

Agree with OP. Curtis woodhouse uses that a lot because he often cannot explain why he thinks he's right. By his own logic anyone who got farther than him in the pro ranks immediately knows more than him and he must stand down in that argument...

Don't get me wrong, since I've been training\sparring there have been things I've learned that I wouldn't have otherwise but that doesn't mean I'm necessarily right when discussing something with someone who has never boxed. Plenty of these historian types have never boxed and yet know a damn load more than I do about the sport.

 

Boxers are like any other sportsman. The paying public pay their salaries so they are entitled to voice their opinion, even if it’s non sensical.

 

Did Enzo Calzaghe ever box?