# CHB's Most Knowledgable Poster Comp - 24 hours left to tie up 1st round!!!



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

This is the first competition of its kind on CHB and we are gonna root out the boys from the men.Basically 32 of you will enter, you will face of in a knock-out rounds until we reach the final and a winner is crowned.

In each round you and whoever you are paired with with be given a particular topic about boxing to debate. You will each get 5 reply's. Once the starter has posted you must wait for your opponent to respond before making your next post.

This will go on until all ten posts are completed within a set 24 hour time limit.I will gather judges who will vote who they feel put across the better argument. After debating other posters who are not involved in the contest can also vote, if they give reasons, and that will also go towards selecting a winner.

Now who wants in?

Contestants

Side A 
@*Bajingo* v @*Abraham* 
@*Sportofkings* v @*turbotime* 
@*Vic* v @*MichiganWarrior* 
@*PityTheFool* v @*LittleRed* 
@*bballchump11* v @*Hands of Iron* 
@*SJS20* v @*Luf* 
@*The Undefeated Gaul* v @*1971791* 
@*Bogotazo* v @*Teeto
*
Side B
 @*Dealt_with* v @*Brownies* 
@*DaCrooked* v @*Cableaddict* 
@*Flea Man* v @*dyna* 
@*Roe* v @*Rexrapper 1* 
@*TBooze* v @*GPater* 
@*Masters* v @*12downfor10* 
@*McGrain* v @*Vano-irons* 
@*Danny* v @*Batkilt

Round 2

Side A
@LittleRed 
@Luf
@teeto @Vic

Side B
@McGrain 
@12downfor10
@dyna @Brownies @TBooze

*Rules (I'll post this in OP as well.

Should we do it without time constraint so as people can access it easier. I mean as long as no one takes the piss then it should be ok. If people let me know if there are times they can't do then ill do my best to arrange around it.

I think each battle should take place in a separate thread, we could keep it in here but then we'll have to do one at a time to avoid confusion and it could take ages while people wait around for their match.

It'll be a five post each debate. I'll pick who goes first. I've tried to keep open questions but there are some that are choice so whoever draws first will get the first pick, second person has to make an argument the other way.

Scoring is based on who puts the best argument across, so judges cant pick a winner based on the answer they agree with but rather who executes their argument better.

If any fibs are discovered then you can use them to destroy your opponent. Its harder to stop this in the last post because they dont get a chance to defend so blatant lying will be marked down on. If its just that you were mis-informed on something I'll leave it up to each judge on whether you can get a pass.

No one get involved int he debate until both guys have finished each of their five posts then discuss away. its unfair if someone starts blasting info out that can be used against their opponent and i'll get the mods to get involved to delete posts that some idiot will inevitably post inbetween.

I'll gather up three judges who will give 20% each. Forum members will decide the other 40% - they must give reasons though and if they are shi


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

I'll have a go. Favourite for a first round exit like but why not :good


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

I don't know much.. but I'd kick anyones ass who dares to debate against Loma :lol:


----------



## Bajingo (May 31, 2012)

Yeah, not expecting to go very far but I'll give it a go.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

Sure.

After a two year hiatus, it's probably time I put a little effort into a post or two.

Let's go...


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Your in Gaul.

Come on people @Vano_irons @Flea Man @*Bogotazo* @*Bladerunner* @*Teeto* @*Cormac* @*scribbs* @*Yiddle* @*ScouseLeader* @*scribbs* @*LittleRed* @*AlFrancis* @*Vic* @*Bajingo* @*bballchump11* @*Bryn* @*Pabby* @*Kally* @*DonBoxer* @fuckmymindsgoneblank


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

@Hands of Iron


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

ok fine :yep, but I'm calling out @turbotimeand @Sexy Sergio ( L E O N )


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

Cools. I'm in. I'm calling @Boxed Ears. Or @Flea Man if the topic is Ricardo Lopez...


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Y'all added.

Keep calling mofos out


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

It'll have to be Boxing history I suppose?

Some of us prefer the technical side of it, the analytical side; but that mostly comes down to opinion as opposed to trivial fact.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> It'll have to be Boxing history I suppose?
> 
> Some of us prefer the technical side of it, the analytical side; but that mostly comes down to opinion as opposed to trivial fact.


yeah if you ask me about some historical shit that happened in the 50's, then I'm screwed :yep


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

SJS20 said:


> It'll have to be Boxing history I suppose?
> 
> Some of us prefer the technical side of it, the analytical side; but that mostly comes down to opinion as opposed to trivial fact.


Its who gets their opinion of better. Obviously if someone is telling fibs and they get called out on it then they are pretty much goosed but I think a whole range of questions from current, modern, historical, rulings, amateur, promotional, rules, technical etc should be added to find out who is the all round champ.

I'll fully clear all the rules up as soon as we have a full tournament and give time for questions etc so everybody goes in knowing what the score is.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> yeah if you ask me about some historical shit that happened in the 50's, then I'm screwed :yep


That would be awesome. :yep :yep

I wish I had time to brush up on shit though. I haven't been talking boxing in... a long time. :-(

If it's historical, @Flea Man @Bladerunner are going to wipe floor with motherfucker's faces. Technical, it'll probably come to @Bogotazo @SJS20 and @Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (fiend) and you in the final four. :lol:


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

LittleRed said:


> Cools. I'm in. I'm calling @Boxed Ears. Or @Flea Man if the topic is Ricardo Lopez...


Good times. :lol:


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> That would be awesome. :yep :yep
> 
> I wish I had time to brush up on shit though. I haven't been talking boxing in... a long time. :-(
> 
> If it's historical, @Flea Man @Bladerunner are going to wipe floor with motherfucker's faces. Technical, it'll probably come to @Bogotazo @SJS20 and @Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (fiend) and you in the final four. :lol:


yeah, there should be a mix in there :yep. You've got a lot of knowledge in a lot of different areas.

It'd be fun to see the underrated @Relentless too :hey


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

I'm in.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

@Zopilote is another one good for historical.

In terms of everything, @JMP is one of the most knowledgeable I've come across.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

@Masters
@Dealt_with @MichiganWarrior


----------



## r1p00pk (Jun 13, 2013)

@Bogotazo should get in on this


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

I reckon it should be of the "who beats who" or "who is the greater" variety.

Only problem is if the guys pitted against each other actually agree.

Like if say it was lomachenko v Mayweather @130 we'd all be stating the case for Floyd to win, right?


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

@MichiganWarrior is underrated. He single handedly argued for Floyd over Roberto Duran for a good six pages on ESB. I think that's when JMP said he was "done" and walked out. :rofl


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Many good names mentioned but for technical knowledge, @Bogatozo has to be a front runner with SJS in the youngster's category.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> @MichiganWarrior is underrated. He single handedly argued for Floyd over Roberto Duran for a good six pages on ESB. I think that's when JMP said he was "done" and walked out. :rofl


I think MW's other "stuff" tends to make people forget that he knows his onions.
Good mention.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

@GPater

He can breakdown a fight pretty good.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

I don't do any teaching here, it's all of the guys that have been tagged in these threads that are the smart guys. Would like to see them go at it.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

Watching all HBO Legendary nights, then moving on to the Beyond the Glory shows.

Come at me bros.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> That would be awesome. :yep :yep
> 
> I wish I had time to brush up on shit though. I haven't been talking boxing in... a long time. :-(
> 
> If it's historical, @Flea Man @Bladerunner are going to wipe floor with motherfucker's faces. Technical, it'll probably come to @Bogotazo @SJS20 and @Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (fiend) and you in the final four. :lol:


You can dig out the history books and articles with anyone here,so let's not sell shit short here.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Someone try and argue Hagler > Sweet Pea or SRL ducked Pryor. :ibutt


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> You can dig out the history books and articles with anyone here,so let's not sell shit short here.


Yep he's pretty good for a Mexican...


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

@Vic


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

The guys from historical know shit loads about boxing.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> Watching all HBO Legendary nights, then moving on to the Beyond the Glory shows.
> 
> Come at me bros.


Which poster almost got the chance to shatter the most famous glass jaw in boxing?

(Just an easy one to get you warmed up.I know you'll give me a shout out in your acceptance speech)


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

I can have a go if it's boxing history debates


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> Yep he's pretty good for a Mexican...


People think it was Peg Leg Morgan who was the link between the AB and La Eme,but it was actually Hands.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> You can dig out the history books and articles with anyone here,so let's not sell shit short here.


Eh, I used to be alright. My prime was shorter than Tyson's though. Plus I was going to see how long I could go without posting once I hit #999 :lol:


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Eh, I used to be alright. My prime was shorter than Tyson's though. Plus I was going to see how long som could go without posting once I hit #999 :lol:


No way.Some of the stuff you sent me in PM's alone would TKO some of the names mentioned here.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> Which poster almost got the chance to shatter the most famous glass jaw in boxing?
> 
> (Just an easy one to get you warmed up.I know you'll give me a shout out in your acceptance speech)


Me when I saw Amir Khan at Bluewater :happy

Of all currently active American fighters, who had the most accomplished amateur career?


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> Me when I saw Amir Khan at Bluewater :happy
> 
> Of all currently active American fighters, who had the most accomplished amateur career?


I'm not going to cheat, so the obvious answer would seem Ward.

But I suspect that's too easy, and I'm too hard to go and google it.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> I'm not going to cheat, so the obvious answer would seem Ward.
> 
> But I suspect that's too easy, and I'm too hard to go and google it.


It's actually Antonio Tarver...


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

SJS20 said:


> It's actually Antonio Tarver...


And it actually wasn't you.
If Tarver doesn't come back I want an apology.


----------



## 1971791 (Jul 14, 2012)

.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

1971791 said:


> I don't actually know anything about boxing, but woo, let's go for it.


I like this guy, he has spunk.

:conf


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Ok @1971971;Which boxer in the avatar in the post directly above yours is the greatest fighter the world has ever seen,regardless of what some of the know fuck alls on here say?

I'll give you a clue;He holds a win over Marvin Hagler.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

Yeah add me in sounds fun!


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> Ok @1971971;Which boxer in the avatar in the post directly above yours is the greatest fighter the world has ever seen,regardless of what some of the know fuck alls on here say?
> 
> I'll give you a clue;He holds a win over Marvin Hagler.


Antufermo looks different from how I remember


----------



## Boxed Ears (Jun 13, 2012)

LittleRed said:


> Cools. I'm in. I'm calling @Boxed Ears. Or @Flea Man if the topic is Ricardo Lopez...


Truth be told, I'm really more of a Zorbing man, myself. This same kind of thread on the Zorbing forum, I'm there, and I'll win.


----------



## 1971791 (Jul 14, 2012)

.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

1971791 said:


> What? Morales never beat Hagler.
> 
> EDIT: Whoops, above. Then it's SRL.


That was a good and very timely edit!


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Antufermo looks different from how I remember


That happens a lot when you're used to seeing a guy with a beard for so long then he shaves it off.
Good spot.


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

Boxed Ears said:


> Truth be told, I'm really more of a Zorbing man, myself. This same kind of thread on the Zorbing forum, I'm there, and I'll win.


This will go down with Wills-Dempsey, Armstrong-Burley, and Edison-Tesla as a duck of the highest cankerousness!


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Oh you know I'm in.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> No way.Some of the stuff you sent me in PM's alone would TKO some of the names mentioned here.


Yea, but I'm a bodybuilder now. :lol: _'So what?'_ .. Problem is I tend to get overly obsessive over one thing at a time and do nothing but cram information and knowledge in, pretty much disregarding everything else. Boxing History has sort of come and gone... It's still there, but I have to be interested in digging it out 100% or not at all. I'm just not into it right now. :verysad


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Sorta sad in a way... I used to fucking have dreams about different fighters resumes and 'ATG' rankings :rofl You were there Pity, turbo was around. It's how you became my dude's. Could kick that boxing shit every day, at any hour. Could be at a bar or football game and I'd be replying to threads n shit on my phone. :lol:


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

This looks insane.







I'm in.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Sorta sad in a way... I used to fucking have dreams about different fighters resumes and 'ATG' rankings :rofl You were there Pity, turbo was around. It's how you became my dude's. Could kick that boxing shit every day, at any hour. Could be at a bar or football game and I'd be replying to threads n shit on my phone. :lol:


:lol: Hijacking threads all damned day.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Okay, @Chatty, @The Undefeated Gaul, count me in...


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Lol this will be fun


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

turbotime said:


> :lol: Hijacking threads all damned day.


Ruthlessly.

But we kept it boxing in the beginning. More recently, not so much. :lol:


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

@*PityTheFool* you in?
@Hands of Iron? you confirmed entry?


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> @*PityTheFool* you in?
> @Hands of Iron? you confirmed entry?


I'll put myself up for humiliation mate,because I can't live with the likes of Flea and I refuse to cheat.
But fuck it.I'm in.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

@Wallet @Roe @dyna @robpalmer135 @adamcanavan @JamieC @Chacal @GazOC @dftaylor @BoxingAnalyst @Danny @Marvelous Marv @Jdempsey85 you want in?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> I'll put myself up for humiliation mate,because I can't live with the likes of Flea and I refuse to cheat.
> But fuck it.I'm in.


 @Flea Man hasn't entered yet


----------



## Roe (Jun 1, 2012)

Yeah, sure. Sounds fun :good


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> @Flea Man hasn't entered yet


I'm happy to stay in mate,but I've just gone over the rules and the 24 hour thing may be a problem for me as it's the summer holidays and I have my youngest a lot ATM.

But no excuses.If I die,I die.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> I'm happy to stay in mate,but I've just gone over the rules and the 24 hour thing may be a problem for me as it's the summer holidays and I have my youngest a lot ATM.
> 
> But no excuses.If I die,I die.


I'll get subs in just in case and I'll let everyone know when they are up in advance so as they have at least an idea whether they can be free or not then it might be easier to fit them around people if needed.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> I'll get subs in just in case and I'll let everyone know when they are up in advance so as they have at least an idea whether they can be free or not then it might be easier to fit them around people if needed.


Ok mate.Sounds good to me.


----------



## scribbs (Dec 8, 2012)

Chatty said:


> Your in Gaul.
> 
> Come on people @Vano_irons @Flea Man @*Bogotazo* @*Bladerunner* @*Teeto* @*Cormac* @*scribbs* @*Yiddle* @*ScouseLeader* @*scribbs* @*LittleRed* @*AlFrancis* @*Vic* @*Bajingo* @*bballchump11* @*Bryn* @*Pabby* @*Kally* @*DonBoxer* @fuckmymindsgoneblank


Sounds interesting but will have to decline as not online much nowadays (don't have iphone) & don't get much spare time. Cheers for invite tho :good


----------



## adamcanavan (Jun 5, 2012)

Chatty said:


> @Wallet @Roe @dyna @robpalmer135 @adamcanavan @JamieC @Chacal @GazOC @dftaylor @BoxingAnalyst @Danny @Marvelous Marv @Jdempsey85 you want in?


Dont wanna embarrass myself :lol:


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Come on guys if I can enter it anyone can


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Yeah man. This aint a history of boxing contest, its about everything, you may get a modern question and fuck some of those history buffs up. I'm not gonna pick questions, I'm gonna put them all up so you can see and then draw them out of a hat.

You'll be drawn from a hat as well and it'll be two separate draws throughout so two sets of 16 will be kept from each other unless they meet in the final.

Plus it's a laugh, if you get beat, so what.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

@McGrain @heavyweightcp @Dealt_with @Vano-irons @sim_reiss @gasman @One to watch @TBooze @BigBone @Batkilt


----------



## Wickio (Jun 3, 2012)

@Flea Man by default.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

I'm in


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

you [email protected]


----------



## The Brush! (Jul 18, 2013)

Yall need a Brush Trivia contest...


I'll start, it's the Brush!!! It's me!!

Who was the GBOAT?


----------



## Masters (May 20, 2013)

I'll probably get blown out before @Luf , but wtf , count me in.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

What's this @Wickio @Chatty ?

Can I fit it around my uber busy lifestyle?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> What's this @*Wickio* @*Chatty* ?
> 
> Can I fit it around my uber busy lifestyle?


Its a debating comp. 24 hour time limit on each round but i'm sure we can figure time restraints out between people if need be.


----------



## DaCrooked (Jun 6, 2013)

Count me in. DaCrooked KSAB!


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Well...
I've already been mentioned so I better join in before I get accused of ducking.

I'm going to KO every contestant like a prime Zuri Lawrence. (No really, I'm going to rack up as many KO wins as Zuri Lawrence did)

Rip me

I'm in


----------



## Masters (May 20, 2013)

dyna said:


> Well...
> I've already been mentioned so I better join in before I get accused of ducking.
> 
> I'm going to KO every contestant like a prime Zuri Lawrence. (No really, I'm going to rack up as many KO wins as Zuri Lawrence did)
> ...


They IP banned me. Im out. No duck.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Masters said:


> They IP banned me. Im out. No duck.


wat? 
:huh


----------



## Masters (May 20, 2013)

dyna said:


> wat?
> :huh


 @Jay , why the IP ban?


----------



## From Russia (Jun 5, 2013)

I wanna see Michi vs Cumshot, it would be like retarded gatti vs retarded ward


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> @MichiganWarrior is underrated. He single handedly argued for Floyd over Roberto Duran for a good six pages on ESB. I think that's when JMP said he was "done" and walked out. :rofl


Thankfully there's a post limit for this one.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Masters said:


> @*Jay* , why the IP ban?


Your not banned mate, your in the comp, 2nd draw - which ill do once filled up.


----------



## Pimp C (Jun 3, 2013)

I'm undefeated in boxing debate.:deal


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Pimp C said:


> I'm undefeated in boxing debate.:deal


I take it your in then


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

I'm in, but hope that I'll at least have heard of the boxers I'll have to talk about haha. :lol:


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> @MichiganWarrior is underrated. He single handedly argued for Floyd over Roberto Duran for a good six pages on ESB. I think that's when JMP said he was "done" and walked out. :rofl


Sure as hell I´ll moider dat bum !


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

I got @LittleRed???
I shoulda stayed banned!!


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Gonna be good to see how this works out


----------



## Vano-irons (Jun 6, 2012)

Vano's in, fuck Flea Man




















(Love you really bro)


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> I got @LittleRed???
> I shoulda stayed banned!!


:hey

In all seriousness you're quality and know your stuff. No one is safe here!


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Thanks man,but when I go on the historical/classic,there are one or two posters who will draw me to a thread just because I see they posted on it.

It's no consolation whatsoever that you're one of them! This damn rotator cuff....can't...type....


----------



## Danny (May 31, 2012)

Fuck it, I'll give it a go if I still can. I hope the topics are all things I can debate with my inside-out knowledge of Boxrec.


----------



## Rexrapper 1 (Jun 4, 2013)

:lol: I'm going to get killed but I will give it a try if a spot is still available.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

IDKSKB - But pretend I do. :audley


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Yous are in


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

So we're seven short?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

SJS20 said:


> So we're seven short?


yeah but we've nearly filled up in less than 24 hours so I guess they will fill up quickly
@Pimp C hasn't confirmed his place after laying down a challenge and @Flea Man hasn't entered yet so that could be down to 5.

I'm suspecting a fair few of the people tagged haven't even been online yet too.


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

I'm gonna FUCK you all up.

Unless this is happening next week, when i'll be in Amsterdam.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

The hell am I gonna disagree with Teeto about?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

McGrain said:


> I'm gonna FUCK you all up.
> 
> Unless this is happening next week, when i'll be in Amsterdam.


I'll work your rounds around it


----------



## Batkilt (Jun 6, 2012)

Chatty said:


> @McGrain @heavyweightcp @Dealt_with @Vano-irons @sim_reiss @gasman @One to watch @TBooze @BigBone @Batkilt


I can see me struggling with the time limit as I'm working constant overtime right now, but fuck it, I'll give it a go.


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

Chatty said:


> @McGrain @heavyweightcp @Dealt_with @Vano-irons @sim_reiss @gasman @One to watch @TBooze @BigBone @Batkilt


If there is still space, I will do it.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

McGrain said:


> I'm gonna FUCK you all up.
> 
> Unless this is happening next week, when i'll be in Amsterdam.


Then I can be there to fuck you up :ibutt


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

All added. 4 spots left


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

Some of these matchups on Side A are class:lol: Vic vs Michiganwarrior and Bajingo vs Abraham are brutal one sided ass rapings, but Bogotazo vs Teeto, Sjs20 vs Luf and Pitythefool vs Little Red are going to be good and close from what I remember from these guys posts:yep


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Bring it on, @Bajingo. How does this thing start?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

I'm gonna start knocking up the first round questions while we wait for the final competitors to join.


This must be fierce cause there has been over a thousand views but only 28 participants so far


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> I'm gonna start knocking up the first round questions while we wait for the final competitors to join.
> 
> This must be fierce cause there has been over a thousand views but only 28 participants so far


Bunch of pussies with no balls they are.


----------



## Brnxhands (Jun 11, 2013)

i would but forgot so much over the past years, weed head memory. i use to know a lot about the history but forgot alot. i barely pay attention today to the game even today


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Side A's questions are completed and assigned. I'm gonna sit a write a clear list of rules and how this is scored before I let the battles commence.

i also need two judges for this - anyone want to throw in some recommendations.


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

dyna said:


> Then I can be there to fuck you up :ibutt


...in a debate?


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

@McGrain I see you bad man.

Enjoy the 'Dam. 
@Chatty I'm in.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Y'all better hope you don't get drawn against me 'Is Ricardo Lopez the greatest fighter below flyweight' topic @LittleRed :yep


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> @McGrain.


I got not one fucking word to say to you until this is over.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Great idea! This is going to be epic. I'm going to choose someone at random and hype the shit out of them.


----------



## Twelvey (Jun 6, 2012)

Count me in if you need more people chatty, I'll be less use than kally in a brothel but I'll try.


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

Luf said:


> @GPater
> 
> He can breakdown a fight pretty good.


I havent done a boxing post in years :lol:

Have to start getting back into it :lol:


----------



## Batkilt (Jun 6, 2012)

GPater said:


> I havent done a boxing post in years :lol:
> 
> Have to start getting back into it :lol:


You posted about the shambolic mess that is the IBHOF, if that counts. :huh


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

McGrain said:


> I got not one fucking word to say to you until this is over.


It's on.


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Y'all better hope you don't get drawn against me 'Is Ricardo Lopez the greatest fighter below flyweight' topic @LittleRed :yep


:ibutt


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

LittleRed said:


> :ibutt


Though as I always say I don't know anything. I could get merc'd by a bum if I get hit with a topic I know nothing about, of which there are many.


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> Though as I always say I don't know anything. I could get merc'd by a bum if I get hit with a topic I know nothing about, of which there are many.


True. I said realistically, no one is safe. No matter how Scottish they might be.


----------



## Relentless (Nov 24, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> yeah, there should be a mix in there :yep. You've got a lot of knowledge in a lot of different areas.
> 
> It'd be fun to see the underrated @Relentless too :hey


naw man i can't discuss boxing seriously here without getting out of character.


----------



## Batkilt (Jun 6, 2012)

LittleRed said:


> True. I said realistically, no one is safe. No matter how Scottish they might be.


I'm totally fucking Scottish mate, and I know I'll get knocked out early doors.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

@LittleRed Well McGrain smashes me to pieces in the 1st if that is what it's based on.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Batkilt said:


> I'm totally fucking Scottish mate, and I know I'll get knocked out early doors.


:lol: Not true, you're good.


----------



## Batkilt (Jun 6, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> :lol: Not true, you're good.


I appreciate the kind words. I've always been analytical, and genuinely enjoy watching fights not just to score them or enjoy them, but to see what each fighter is doing, what works and what doesn't etc. Add that to my love of history and boxing is the sport for me.

It's harder to keep track of all the recent "world" champions over the last twenty years or so now though! Wonder how long it'll be before it's the "big five," rather than "big four" so called "world titles". :rolleyes


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Batkilt said:


> I appreciate the kind words. I've always been analytical, and genuinely enjoy watching fights not just to score them or enjoy them, but to see what each fighter is doing, what works and what doesn't etc. Add that to my love of history and boxing is the sport for me.
> 
> It's harder to keep track of all the recent "world" champions over the last twenty years or so now though! Wonder how long it'll be before it's the "big five," rather than "big four" so called "world titles". :rolleyes


I'm the same as you in that respect. I follow MMA mlre than boxing as my modern sport, still watch boxing obviously, but my 'main' sport is MMA.

Although I watch more old boxing than I watch MMA, and more than I watch movies/TV. Only thing that gets more a look-in than old boxing is music and that's only because I've got headphones on most of the time, being that I'm walking far more than I've say down.

I am terribly disorganised at the moment though.


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

@Chatty do we get time to research a topic or is it just put on us? Also are our replies timed to make sure we're not just googling info?


----------



## Batkilt (Jun 6, 2012)

Teeto said:


> @Chatty do we get time to research a topic or is it just put on us? Also are our replies timed to make sure we're not just googling info?


If it's timed that's going to make it nigh on impossible for me, as I only post at work when I'm on a break or skiving. I can't really commit to any specific time frame other than between 12:00 - 12:45. :lol:


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

I can't wait to kick some ass.


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

Batkilt said:


> You posted about the shambolic mess that is the IBHOF, if that counts. :huh


It is though.

Im the past it ex-top contender here, im going to Bobby Chacon all these cunts


----------



## Batkilt (Jun 6, 2012)

GPater said:


> It is though.
> 
> Im the past it ex-top contender here, im going to Bobby Chacon all these cunts


Aye, it's a bit of a joke at times.

And Chacon is one of my favourite ever fighters. No word of lie.


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

Batkilt said:


> Aye, it's a bit of a joke at times.
> 
> And Chacon is one of my favourite ever fighters. No word of lie.


Same here man, you better be backing up my arse.

Chacon is the fucking man like, you seen Chacon vs Lopez? An amazing display of angled offense


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

Batkilt said:


> If it's timed that's going to make it nigh on impossible for me, as I only post at work when I'm on a break or skiving. I can't really commit to any specific time frame other than between 12:00 - 12:45. :lol:


:rofl we should overthrow @Chatty because of this


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

Teeto said:


> @Chatty do we get time to research a topic or is it just put on us? Also are our replies timed to make sure we're not just googling info?


I would suggest this:

Within an agreed timeframe the two competing posters send @Chatty a maximum three hundred word opening argument. When Chatty has received both arguments they are posted, and within another timeframe both posters get another 300 words to rebut and close their argument. When Chatty has received these, they are posted and judged.


----------



## Batkilt (Jun 6, 2012)

Teeto said:


> :rofl we should overthrow @Chatty because of this


La Revolución!



TBooze said:


> I would suggest this:
> 
> Within an agreed timeframe the two competing posters send @Chatty a maximum three hundred word opening argument. When Chatty has received both arguments they are posted, and within another timeframe both posters get another 300 words to rebut and close their argument. When Chatty has received these, they are posted and judged.


I know it might be getting more complex than Chatty may have wanted, but I don't think I'll be the only one with work constraints. Hopefully we can get this working so that everyone can get involved, as it's an interesting thread idea.


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

There are many questions. Hopefully we'll get some ground rules. Like are we all posting here or is this a multiple thread thing?


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

TBooze said:


> I would suggest this:
> 
> Within an agreed timeframe the two competing posters send @Chatty a maximum three hundred word opening argument. When Chatty has received both arguments they are posted, and within another timeframe both posters get another 300 words to rebut and close their argument. When Chatty has received these, they are posted and judged.


great stuff


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

TBooze said:


> I would suggest this:
> 
> Within an agreed timeframe the two competing posters send @Chatty a maximum three hundred word opening argument. When Chatty has received both arguments they are posted, and within another timeframe both posters get another 300 words to rebut and close their argument. When Chatty has received these, they are posted and judged.


Ah, legal style, this suits me. I like it :smile


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Alright guys, im on phone so cant go into great detail but itll all work out. I lnow people have work and shit going on so itll be worked out accordingly. Ill post a full ruling and give time for peoples input before we start ans we'll hash it all out.
@Teeto try and overthrow me and youll end up like che in the bolivian jungle:lol:


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

:lol: @Chatty legend


----------



## Wickio (Jun 3, 2012)

Chatty said:


> you [email protected]


Haha, I think I will have to pass. My knowledge of the sport pales in comparison to the big boys on here. Will definitely keep a close eye on this though!


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

I nominate myself! :yep

- but other than that, screw the competition itself. My vote goes to Bogotazo:

" BOGO KNOWS BOXING ! " :good


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

Honorable mention goes to:



Vysotsky

Moparfan

Eddie Chambers (of course)

Ding 

Chef

Bazooka

freddy-Wak

Brnxhands

David Allen


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

I feel like Lomachenko already

0-0, no blueprint.
Already an ATG being up there with the big boys. 
:deal


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

damn, I'm going against @Hands of Iron in the first round. That takes away half my strategy c I was going to spend my first 3 posts talking about the topic and then the next 2 discrediting my opponent.



Relentless said:


> naw man i can't discuss boxing seriously here without getting out of character.


:lol: true, my bad


----------



## Batkilt (Jun 6, 2012)

Teeto said:


> :lol: @Chatty legend


 @Chatty is for the people. :thumbsup


----------



## PabstBlueRibbon (Jun 6, 2013)

I'm predicting shattered glass everywhere.


----------



## KWilson71 (Jun 8, 2013)

can we get some vCash action on this lol


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

GPater said:


> Same here man, you better be backing up my arse.
> 
> Chacon is the fucking man like, you seen Chacon vs Lopez? An amazing display of angled offense


I watched Chacon vs Marcano recently, class !!


----------



## Drew101 (Jun 30, 2012)

Some super knowledgeable guys in this competition. Should be fun...:happy


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Draw for each side of the first round completed. Now to sit and clarify all the rules, find some judges and finalize all the questions.

Some interesting draws.


----------



## Roe (Jun 1, 2012)

Rexrapper 1 said:


> :lol: I'm going to get killed but I will give it a try if a spot is still available.


Let's do this! :bbb


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

I've never even heard of Brownies.. I'm going to smoke that no-mark


----------



## Kid Cubano (Jun 5, 2013)

bballchump11
bogotazo
the undefeated gaul
zopilote
cableaddict
boxed ears
( i wanted to add chatty but that slogan always haunting me...)


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Batkilt said:


> @Chatty is for the people. :thumbsup


Not all of the people.I can't believe he put me in against @LittleRed,who would be one of the people I would PM if I wanted to know something about the lower weights circa 1975-2013!

Why didn't I hold off for the later draw?:!:

Damn rotator cuff! You know how hard it is to type with that shi......hbgjfr vgu dkWvbfwvcdgduwvyquc7udvcwu ua


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> I've never even heard of Brownies.. I'm going to smoke that no-mark


He really knows his stuff.


----------



## Vano-irons (Jun 6, 2012)

You've actually put me against McGrain? That's like watching Spain and Germany meet in the first round! Where's the seeding process?

Fuck this shit I don't want to go out in the first round :lol:


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

@dyna You're going down son.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

Vano-irons said:


> You've actually put me against McGrain? That's like watching Spain and Germany meet in the first round! Where's the seeding process?
> 
> Fuck this shit I don't want to go out in the first round :lol:


You're unseeded. McGrain is ranked no.1. Same as why Dyna drew me


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

TBooze said:


> I would suggest this:
> 
> Within an agreed timeframe the two competing posters send @Chatty a maximum three hundred word opening argument. When Chatty has received both arguments they are posted, and within another timeframe both posters get another 300 words to rebut and close their argument. When Chatty has received these, they are posted and judged.


Much as I think that's an excellent idea mate,I'm kinda in single parent mode at the minute,and am just jumping on my phone when I get a chance,so commmiting to any time frame is a bit difficult for me until the schools go back.

To be fair to @Chatty,he has acknowledged this for me.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Vano-irons said:


> You've actually put me against McGrain? That's like watching Spain and Germany meet in the first round! Where's the seeding process?
> 
> Fuck this shit I don't want to go out in the first round :lol:


Fuck seeding, if your the best you'll beat the best from round 1.

All drew from a hat, the only way to make a real knockout tournament imo.


----------



## Twelvey (Jun 6, 2012)

This has potential to be a GOAT thread in terms of boxing knowledge, arguments, banter and it's got a competitive edge. @Masters I'm going fucking batter you, you absolute cunt fuck. (My boxing knowledge is limited and generally very poor :lol


----------



## Roe (Jun 1, 2012)

I'd like to join the club of people who are already admitting that their boxing knowledge isn't that good.


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

I'd like to put myself forward for a judge position.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Rules (I'll post this in OP as well.

Should we do it without time constraint so as people can access it easier. I mean as long as no one takes the piss then it should be ok. If people let me know if there are times they can't do then ill do my best to arrange around it.

I think each battle should take place in a separate thread, we could keep it in here but then we'll have to do one at a time to avoid confusion and it could take ages while people wait around for their match.

It'll be a five post each debate. I'll pick who goes first. I've tried to keep open questions but there are some that are choice so whoever draws first will get the first pick, second person has to make an argument the other way.

Scoring is based on who puts the best argument across, so judges cant pick a winner based on the answer they agree with but rather who executes their argument better.

If any fibs are discovered then you can use them to destroy your opponent. Its harder to stop this in the last post because they dont get a chance to defend so blatant lying will be marked down on. If its just that you were mis-informed on something I'll leave it up to each judge on whether you can get a pass.

No one get involved int he debate until both guys have finished each of their five posts then discuss away. its unfair if someone starts blasting info out that can be used against their opponent and i'll get the mods to get involved to delete posts that some idiot will inevitably post inbetween.

I'll gather up three judges who will give 20% each. Forum members will decide the other 40% - they must give reasons though and if they are shit reasons there vote wont count. The person with 60+% goes through/wins.

Any other questions?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Lunny said:


> I'd like to put myself forward for a judge position.


Lunny your in.


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

Boom. Cheers @Chatty


----------



## Roe (Jun 1, 2012)

I'd be happy to help out with some judging if you like as well. Obviously not for my battle.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Roe said:


> I'd be happy to help out with some judging if you like as well. Obviously not for my battle.


You can't because even in other battles you could be seen to have an interest in them in that you could meet any further up the line. Not that I think you would be dishonest but its better to not cross that line should someone bring it up.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

I'm gonna throw you's all the initial questions, obviously you wont know what your getting and a few might be changed before I assign them but have a look and it gives you a little bit time to do a little research into something if you have no confidence.

Who overall holds the betterMiddleweight legacy?


With the recent spurt of PEDs andallegations in the sport, what one measure would you take to clean itup?


Who is Cuba's greatest boxer (bothamateur and pro)?


Prime v Prime, who wins Wladimir orVitali Klitschko?


Who was the greatest boxer to never wina legit world championship (barring Sam Langford)?


Which boxer has the best collection ofhighlight reel knockouts?


Which boxer do you believeunderachieved the most in his career?


You can change one thing in boxingtoday, what would it be and why would this be the most beneficial tothe sport?


What was the the most unjust victory(biggest robbery) in the sports history and why?


Who is the greatest boxer to grace thesport under the bantamweight limit?


Margarito, did he load up or not vMiguel Cotto in their first fight?


You are to pick a fighter from historyto defeat Floyd Mayweather Jnr, who would you pick (must have been inthe same division)?


Should boxing bring back 15 rounds forchampionship fights?


Catchweights, good or bad for boxing?


Who exhibited the best footwork in themodern era of boxing (say 1965 onwards)?


Which 2012 Olympian not named VasylLomachenko will go on to have the most successful boxing career?


----------



## Roe (Jun 1, 2012)

Chatty said:


> You can't because even in other battles you could be seen to have an interest in them in that you could meet any further up the line. Not that I think you would be dishonest but its better to not cross that line should someone bring it up.


Fair enough :good


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

I'm really looking forward to this.
Thread's been viewed 2000 times, half of which are probably by me...


----------



## Vano-irons (Jun 6, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> You're unseeded. McGrain is ranked no.1. Same as why Dyna drew me


It's like drawing Man United away in the third round of the cup! Gutted.



Chatty said:


> Fuck seeding, if your the best you'll beat the best from round 1.
> 
> All drew from a hat, the only way to make a real knockout tournament imo.


I demand a new chairman who will pit me against someone else!


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Flea Man said:


> @dyna You're going down son.


:lol:

I'm to knock you out like a prime Zuri Lawrence would. :deal

rip me


----------



## Twelvey (Jun 6, 2012)

Good questions @Chatty, obviously some people are going to have to argue from positions they don't agree with but that'll be interesting. Imagine @Michigan Warrior arguing for someone to beat Floyd :lol:


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

I'll give it till tea time when most people will have been on and had a look at the rules etc and then i'll prob get it cracking.

:ibutt


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

Just a sample of my greatness...

Who overall holds the betterMiddleweight legacy?
Out of whom? Might want to re-word this.

With the recent spurt of PEDs andallegations in the sport, what one measure would you take to clean itup?
Olympic style drug testing, heavy penalties for infractions

Who is Cuba's greatest boxer (bothamateur and pro)?
Not gonna pretend I know a lot about Cuban boxing. Gavilan is way before my time. Guillermo Rigondeaux is a good choice, based on his amateur career

Prime v Prime, who wins Wladimir orVitali Klitschko?
If they weren't brothers? Because with them fighting as brothers, both would have held back quite a bit, but if they weren't brothers...Vitali.

Who was the greatest boxer to never wina legit world championship (barring Sam Langford)?
Hmm...fuck it. David Tua.

Which boxer has the best collection ofhighlight reel knockouts?
This is a matter of opinion, innit? My personal favorite is Mike Tyson.


Which boxer do you believeunderachieved the most in his career?
Zab Judah

You can change one thing in boxingtoday, what would it be and why would this be the most beneficial tothe sport?
Something like what happened with FMJ and Pac '09-'11 should NEVER happen again. I truly believe that is the biggest blunder in boxing history.

What was the the most unjust victory(biggest robbery) in the sports history and why?
Chavez over Sweet Pea. 

Who is the greatest boxer to grace thesport under the bantamweight limit?
Not gonna pretend I know a lot about bantamweights, but I really like Koki Kameda.

Margarito, did he load up or not vMiguel Cotto in their first fight?
Circumstantial evidence points towards yes, but it's just that. Circumstantial evidence. Cotto has had his face mangled by others. He looked worse after the Pacquiao fight. Also, Marg walked around with his wraps exposed after the fight...would a guilty man do that? People also over exaggerate what was found prior to the Mosley fight.

You are to pick a fighter from historyto defeat Floyd Mayweather Jnr, who would you pick (must have been inthe same division)?
I won't go with the obvious choices from the 80s. I think Vernon Forrest would have gave him some trouble.

Should boxing bring back 15 rounds forchampionship fights?
Hell no. For what?

Catchweights, good or bad for boxing?
Good, as long as fighters aren't forced into it. Catchweights gives us fights we wouldn't see otherwise.

Who exhibited the best footwork in themodern era of boxing (say 1965 onwards)?
Ali.

Which 2012 Olympian not named VasylLomachenko will go on to have the most successful boxing career? 
Errol Spence.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

No @Bladerunner?


----------



## Bladerunner (Oct 22, 2012)

Luf said:


> No @Bladerunner?


I'll go on vacation in a couple of days and i wont be posting much, maybe another time. Good luck to all the contestants though.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Bladerunner said:


> I'll go on vacation in a couple of days and i wont be posting much, maybe another time. Good luck to all the contestants though.


where ya going bro?


----------



## Bladerunner (Oct 22, 2012)

Luf said:


> where ya going bro?


Dominican Republic and Cuba for two weeks the rest i'll spend it here at the Algarve.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Bladerunner said:


> Dominican Republic and Cuba for two weeks the rest i'll spend it here at the Algarve.


wow sounds quality that mate. I'm not going anywhere this year, bad times, spending all summer training down to lhw.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Yeah Bladerunners a bg miss from the tournament. I guess him being missing can build a rivalry with the winner going into next years event though.


----------



## Bladerunner (Oct 22, 2012)

Luf said:


> wow sounds quality that mate. I'm not going anywhere this year, bad times, spending all summer training down to lhw.


Better days will come bro dont worry about it and you're getting in shape which is always great and a good way to spend your time, hope you achieve your goal mate.:deal


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Bladerunner said:


> Better days will come bro dont worry about it and you're getting in shape which is always great and a good way to spend your time, hope you achieve your goal mate.:deal


yeah man cheers. I'm a small HW atm (or small cruiser in pro weights) but I wanna compete as a lhw so it's a boring summer atm but it'll be worth it if I can get some good fights under my belt.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Luf said:


> yeah man cheers. I'm a small HW atm (or small cruiser in pro weights) but I wanna compete as a lhw so it's a boring summer atm but it'll be worth it if I can get some good fights under my belt.


Good luck, luf.


----------



## Bladerunner (Oct 22, 2012)

Chatty said:


> Yeah Bladerunners a bg miss from the tournament. I guess him being missing can build a rivalry with the winner going into next years event though.


Theres really some quality posters participating in this and some of the questions i dont know much about, with a tough draw and the wrong topic i probably wouldnt go past the first round. Kudos for coming up with this tournament it should be a good one.Great job bro.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Vic said:


> Good luck, luf.


cheers bro :good

I still think if maradonna and messi are on form brazil will get destroyed :deal


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Luf said:


> cheers bro :good
> 
> I still think if maradonna and messi are on form brazil will get destroyed :deal


Pelé = Greb
Garrincha or Di Stefano = Sugar Ray Robinson
Maradona = Sugar Ray Leonard
Messi = Floyd Mayweather Jr

:deal


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Vic said:


> Pelé = Greb
> Garrincha or Di Stefano = Sugar Ray Robinson
> Maradona = Sugar Ray Leonard
> Messi = Floyd Mayweather Jr
> ...


:lol: 3 argentines there though, they'd deffo take the tourney down.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Luf said:


> :lol: 3 argentines there though, they'd deffo take the tourney down.


Rivelino = Duran :deal


----------



## Bladerunner (Oct 22, 2012)

Luf said:


> yeah man cheers. I'm a small HW atm (or small cruiser in pro weights) but I wanna compete as a lhw so it's a boring summer atm but it'll be worth it if I can get some good fights under my belt.


Go get them mate :bbb you be knocking bums out like Yeboah used to score goals, with ease and in great fashion, shit just comes natural :yep


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Bladerunner said:


> Go get them mate :bbb you be knocking bums out like Yeboah used to score goals, with ease and in great fashion, shit just comes natural :yep


legend :deal:


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Vic said:


> Rivelino = Duran :deal


maradonna = Fab 4 combined
messi = Robinson

pele = B Leonard
rivelino = B Walcott


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Drew the questions for each match now. Some interesting ones, gotta say. A few I am looking forward to see how they pan out. I'm ready to go. Anybody got any questions before we kick off

@*Bajingo @Abraham @Sportofkings @turbotime @Vic @MichiganWarrior @PityTheFool @LittleRed @bballchump11 @Hands of Iron @SJS20 @Luf @The Undefeated Gaul @1971791 @Bogotazo @Teeto @Dealt_with @Brownies @DaCrooked @Cableaddict @Flea Man @dyna @Roe @Rexrapper 1 @TBooze @GPater @Masters @12downfor10 @McGrain @Vano-irons @Danny @Batkilt

your match ups and rules are in the OP*


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Luf said:


> maradonna = Fab 4 combined
> messi = Robinson
> 
> pele = B Leonard
> rivelino = B Walcott


Fine, didn´t Ray ARcel say something like Benny Leonard was the smartest fighter ever ?

Zico = Ezzard Charles
Romário = Roy Jones Jr
Leônidas da Silva = Sam Langford


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

i need one more judge @Bryn


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

@Chatty, I have a question......what if I agree with something MW says ? I mean, for example, he says something and I think "well, okay, that sounds reasonable", and then I tell my opinion too but it´s not necessarily a disagreement....you know what I mean ?

It´s going to be a debate where we have to pick opposite sides....or we just express our opinions and people will judge that and that´s that. :smile

I´m fine if I have to disagree even though I do not believe what I´m talking about, it´s not a problem lol.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

@Chatty What topic have @dyna and I drawn?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Vic said:


> @*Chatty*, I have a question......what if I agree if something MW says ? I mean, for example, he says something and I think "well, okay, that sounds reasonable", and then I tell my opinion too but it´s not necessarily a disagreement....you know what I mean ?
> 
> It´s going to be a debate where we have to pick opposite sides....or we just express our opinions and people will judge that and that´s that. :smile
> 
> I´m fine if I have disagree even though I do not believe what I´m talking about, it´s not a problem lol.


I think the questions are based so that you can debate without falling into that. If you disagree I would suggest you can then refute it. If you agree then it would be daft to argue against it for arguments sake, if thats the case then you'd be better off focusing on how good your pick is and waiting to see if there is any weakness' in the next post.

There probably will be times when people are having to go against what they would have picked if they are second to post but I believe there is more than enough of an argument on two sides here to win even if you feel you got the shorter straw.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> @*Chatty* What topic have @*dyna* and I drawn?


you'll find out when its your turns to battle but i think you's will both be able to put some good info on line in it


----------



## PivotPunch (Aug 1, 2012)

Damn I didn't see the thread CHB keeps ducking me but I'm still not in my prime when there's another competition I'll be even better I'll clean out CHB.


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

Vic said:


> I watched Chacon vs Marcano recently, class !!


Yeh, really great by Chacon there, he was an absolute beast when focussed


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

We're off. I'm gonna get two matches from each group going tonight.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

I'm Boxing tonight buddy, about to go in.
I'll be done in about 3 and a half hours


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Chatty said:


> I think the questions are based so that you can debate without falling into that. If you disagree I would suggest you can then refute it. If you agree then it would be daft to argue against it for arguments sake, if thats the case then you'd be better off focusing on how good your pick is and waiting to see if there is any weakness' in the next post.
> 
> *There probably will be times when people are having to go against what they would have picked if they are second to post but I believe there is more than enough of an argument on two sides here to win even if you feel you got the shorter straw.*


So, I'm in there with Teeto right now, and this just happened from his opening post. Am I to argue something different for the sake of argument?


----------



## Danny (May 31, 2012)

My only concern is the time limit issue, 24 hours is a bit short. I mean what if I'm in a debate, the other guy kicks it off at say 6 o'clock, I respond, he's then not around that night to post again. He turns up in the morning though and he's around to debate all day but I'm at work til 6? That's then the whole period gone and we'd have made 3 posts between us.


----------



## Juiceboxbiotch (May 16, 2013)

I love this. It should be done quarterly with the 4 winners going at it in a champions bracket at the end of the year.


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

@Danny is a shit house who is scared to debate because his dad is in debt to wonga


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Fucking hell, that Teeto guy gave a great response. 

I will unfortunately have to withdraw but will compete at the second competition.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Danny said:


> My only concern is the time limit issue, 24 hours is a bit short. I mean what if I'm in a debate, the other guy kicks it off at say 6 o'clock, I respond, he's then not around that night to post again. He turns up in the morning though and he's around to debate all day but I'm at work til 6? That's then the whole period gone and we'd have made 3 posts between us.


Time limit has been wiped


----------



## Masters (May 20, 2013)

I dont who the bantomweight champ is today, let alone down through history. If k2 can tag team their division , why cant I?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> So, I'm in there with Teeto right now, and this just happened from his opening post. Am I to argue something different for the sake of argument?


Just for clarification you would have chosen BHop as well if Teeto hadn't?

If so then you'll have to pick another guy who you believe could rival (it sucks but its hard to avoid sometimes - I tried to make the questions so that there would be more than reasonable arguments for both guys to be able to win)his merits and then argue the fuck out of him. You could argue against Teeto if you wanted but imo than would be counter-productive, instead go with why your guys footwork is better and focus on his pros rather than trying to argue against yourself. If Teeto puts something you disagree with then pounce.

If its not Bernard who you choose then you should be cool as there will be a reason why you believe your guy is better.

try and remember a debate isn't always just debunking your opponent.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> Fucking hell, that Teeto guy gave a great response.
> 
> I will unfortunately have to withdraw but will compete at the second competition.


Why you out?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

@*Bajingo @Abraham @Sportofkings @turbotime @Vic @MichiganWarrior @PityTheFool @LittleRed @bballchump11 @Hands of Iron @SJS20 @Luf @The Undefeated Gaul @1971791 @Bogotazo @Teeto @Dealt_with @Brownies @DaCrooked@Cableaddict @Flea Man @dyna @Roe @Rexrapper 1 @TBooze @GPater @Masters @12downfor10 @McGrain @Vano-irons@Danny @Batkilt

Just for clarification, time limits are no longer - it seemed to be a massive block on people doing it so we'll just do without limits

Just try not to take the piss or contact me if your away from the forum for a few days plus and ill work your rounds around the time you wont be on.*


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Just for clarification you would have chosen BHop as well if Teeto hadn't?


Yes. Without a doubt. And I was almost sure he wasn't going to. Not surprised if the bastard knew exactly what he was doing :lol:



Chatty said:


> *If so then you'll have to pick another guy who you believe could rival (it sucks but its hard to avoid sometimes - I tried to make the questions so that there would be more than reasonable arguments for both guys to be able to win)his merits and then argue the fuck out of him.* You could argue against Teeto if you wanted but imo than would be counter-productive, instead go with why your guys footwork is better and focus on his pros rather than trying to argue against yourself. If Teeto puts something you disagree with then pounce.
> 
> If its not Bernard who you choose then you should be cool as there will be a reason why you believe your guy is better.
> 
> try and remember a debate isn't always just debunking your opponent.


Alright then. I have no problem with that. The wheels have already begun turning, there will be no issue. Thanks for clearing it up.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

I'm about to go Teofilo Stevenson on this tournament


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Yes. Without a doubt. And I was almost sure he wasn't going to. Not surprised if the bastard knew exactly what he was doing :lol:
> 
> Alright then. I have no problem with that. The wheels have already begun turning, there will be no issue. Thanks for clearing it up.


No problems.

Its a tough question to be fair and Teeto got of on a blinder.

BHop is a quality pick, he didn't really enter my mind though. When i was thinking the questions up I had 4-5 outstanding choices that I really thought would have been on the forefront of people's minds. Hopkins is up there though but I believe there are arguments that can beat it. You know your shit though mate, this should be an epic battle.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Chatty said:


> No problems.
> 
> Its a tough question to be fair and Teeto got of on a blinder.
> 
> BHop is a quality pick, he didn't really enter my mind though. When i was thinking the questions up I had 4-5 outstanding choices that I really thought would have been on the forefront of people's minds. Hopkins is up there though but I believe there are arguments that can beat it. You know your shit though mate, this should be an epic battle.


Thank you my friend. I already have a pick other than Hopkins that I've pretty much convinced myself is objectively correct so a lively response is well on its way.


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Hopkins would be my pick too, but there are literally a dozen good choices.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Make a case for Pernell Whitaker, Bogo....


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

These debate threads are class.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Yeah I'm loving all the ones so far. Vano and McGrain have a had a quality encounter with some excellent comebacks from both. teeto's first post really set the standard for his battle with Bogotazo. 

Looking forward to the other two of tonights taking shape.


----------



## Vano-irons (Jun 6, 2012)

Yeah this has been class so far. Really enjoying having a conversation with someone and it not end with 'yo momma'!


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

i'm off to the boozer gents. I'll get to the next post tonight if i can type or tomorrow if i can't.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

Great idea so far


----------



## Roe (Jun 1, 2012)

Might be too late to add this in but in the case of a situation where both would argue the same point, I think they should be allowed to. A debate doesn't always have to be an argument or have contrasting views.

In the case of Teeto vs Bogotazo, them both picking Hopkins as having the best footwork would be fine in my opinion, it would then be up to either of them to put their point across as to why as best as possible. Bogo could choose to go down a different route of course, as going 2nd he'd have to come up with a pretty good case to overdo what was basically already said.

Just my thoughts anyway. Love this so far :thumbsup


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Vic said:


> Fine, didn´t Ray ARcel say something like Benny Leonard was the smartest fighter ever ?
> 
> Zico = Ezzard Charles
> Romário = Roy Jones Jr
> Leônidas da Silva = Sam Langford


Batistuta = Marciano (I know he ain't on that team but he bloody should be)


----------



## Masters (May 20, 2013)

Hopkins dont make my top 5 in terms of footwork. There's more to footwork than just evading shots.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Luf said:


> Batistuta = Marciano (I know he ain't on that team but he bloody should be)


Hasselbaink = Andre Berto


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

This competition thing is a pretty good idea wonder if it could be done in other parts of the forum, in the lounge you could have ones about music, films, politics etc.

That could be cool.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Vic said:


> Hasselbaink = Andre Berto


Yeboah tko1 classic brazil


----------



## DirtyDan (May 25, 2013)

Damn at me missing this shit.. oh well.


----------



## It's Ovah (Jun 6, 2013)

Feck it. I wanted to be pitted against Masters in a Rocky vs Wlad debate. Oh well...


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

It's Ovah said:


> Feck it. I wanted to be pitted against Masters in a Rocky vs Wlad debate. Oh well...


:deal


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

Masters said:


> Hopkins dont make my top 5 in terms of footwork. There's more to footwork than just evading shots.


He does/did so much more than that with his feet mate.


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

GPater said:


> It is though.
> 
> Im the past it ex-top contender here, im going to Bobby Chacon all these cunts


Looks like I am going to have to find my inner Mancini then!


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

crazy shitfaced toot toot! tomorrow sorry van


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Sorry guys.
Just in.I know @Chatty and some of the others know I have my hands full,so I think it's only fair on @LittleRed that I try to agree on a time or some compromise.

And for Red,I'm sorry if me being late was a problem for you mate.I'll do my best on a time that's good for you.I honestly don't want to do this on my phone but if that's best time wise for you,I'll go with it.
But apologies again to you and Chatty for any inconvenience.


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

I always use my phone so I'm available pretty frequently. No need to apologize. 

Somehow I feel this is all a clever ruse. Admiral Akbar senses it...


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

LittleRed said:


> I always use my phone so I'm available pretty frequently. No need to apologize.
> 
> Somehow I feel this is all a clever ruse. Admiral Akbar senses it...


I can only type with one finger on my phone mate.I wish to fuck it was a clever ruse because I need something here!:lol:


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

And I'm on my laptop now,so I have nothing to hide behind!


----------



## Batkilt (Jun 6, 2012)

@Chatty - Would you mind PMing me when my turn is up? Just in case I'm posting from my phone and don't see the mention.

I won't be about much on Sunday or Monday, as I'll be working overtime. I'll be out and about on Saturday but I'm confident I can sneak in some posting on here.


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> And I'm on my laptop now,so I have nothing to hide behind!


I don't think we're going tonight. Chatty is asleep, McGrain is drunk, Flea is attempting to get Lopez thrown out of the HOF. typical Wednesday.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

LittleRed said:


> I don't think we're going tonight. Chatty is asleep, McGrain is drunk, Flea is attempting to get Lopez thrown out of the HOF. typical Wednesday.


You want me to pretend I'm gutted?:lol:

I'm so darn relieved I'm thinking about joining a monastry!


----------



## EvianMcGirt (Jun 9, 2013)

Kinda glad I avoided entering this now tbh, would have been way out of my depth. :lol:

Great thread idea Chatty, really enjoying reading these so far. :good

Now i'm off to read up on the whole Whitaker/Rosario/Chavez WBC clusterfuck thanks to Hands of Iron mentioning it. Had no idea of the history behind all that.

Fucking Sulaiman eh? :verysad


----------



## MichiganWarrior (Jun 4, 2013)

Honestly @Vic is a good young poster. He's talented, but im God gifted.


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

.


----------



## techks (Jun 4, 2013)

Are ducks allowed:lol:? If not how about fixed fights where I'm more protected than a guy wearing a 150 pd pillow suit:lol:? But I will enjoy watching these threads stuff like this really helps the forum. More of a fight analyst ace than a history one but will follow these series and wish the best to all and hope them and the readers learn cool stuff about the sport.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Tough go topic wise having to follow @bballchump11 .. Not sure I can continue arguing against things I completely agree with. :lol:


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

Hands of Iron said:


> Tough go topic wise having to follow @bballchump11 .. Not sure I can continue arguing against things I completely agree with. :lol:


Analyzing and finding weaknesses in your own thoughts and arguments are good way in the future of making your points that bit stronger.


----------



## techks (Jun 4, 2013)

Read through this and a bit down I missed entry. Again hope everyone well and learns a lot. This makes me eager to prove myself as a quality poster by being more active with breakdowns I'll start in fall. People who know of me know how capable I can be there.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Didn't think I'd enjoy the competition so much until faced with my first challenge. And what a challenge it was.



techks said:


> Read through this and a bit down I missed entry. Again hope everyone well and learns a lot. This makes me eager to prove myself as a quality poster by being more active with breakdowns I'll start in fall. People who know of me know how capable I can be there.


Always wondered why you didn't post more, any time you've made a technical point it's been right on the money.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Tough go topic wise having to follow @bballchump11 .. Not sure I can continue arguing against things I completely agree with. :lol:


yeah I'm not gonna lie, I feel very fortunate that I got to go first :yep


----------



## techks (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Didn't think I'd enjoy the competition so much until faced with my first challenge. And what a challenge it was.
> 
> Always wondered why you didn't post more, any time you've made a technical point it's been right on the money.


Not much when it comes to pre-60s or business side of things(other than obvious padding) but breakdowns I'm something else. Look out for "Bizarre Adventures of Techs Fight Summaries" soon. Will try to get that running late August. May alternate between modern fights(for WBF) and historic ones(for Historical). One of us(most likely Leon will start lol) will start a run breakdown threads for Floyd-Alvarez in Sept definitely.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

techks said:


> Not much when it comes to pre-60s or business side of things(other than obvious padding) but breakdowns I'm something else. Look out for "Bizarre Adventures of Techs Fight Summaries" soon. Will try to get that running late August. May alternate between modern fights(for WBF) and historic ones(for Historical). One of us(most likely Leon will start lol) will start a run breakdown threads for Floyd-Alvarez in Sept definitely.


Awesome.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Sorry guys, been to sleep, work and now about to go drop my son of at nursery. I'll be back at 1.30ish and answer all questions then, get a few more debates going and to catch up on the ones that have been going overnight. From what I've read its been completely top quality so far though, keep it up.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

@Chatty. This has been very entertaining and a great learning experience so far. Not just because of the insights provided but also because of the research I've done further to reading various points or to get an idea of how I might personally respond if asked these questions. The banter is the icing on the cake!

Well done for putting this together.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

@PityTheFool I'll put yours up tonight when I get in from football about 10ish. There is no time limit so if your stretched, don't worry just let it run over a few days.
@Batkilt I will indeed PM you when yours goes up


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> @PityTheFool I'll put yours up tonight when I get in from football about 10ish. There is no time limit so if your stretched, don't worry just let it run over a few days.
> @Batkilt I will indeed PM you when yours goes up


Ok mate.Thanks


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Part of me wishes there was some sort of post limit. It allows opening and closing arguments within a more organized framework. Otherwise it's going to feel like homework.

For the amount of effort we're putting in, anyway.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Part of me wishes there was some sort of post limit. It allows opening and closing arguments within a more organized framework. Otherwise it's going to feel like homework.
> 
> For the amount of effort we're putting in, anyway.


There is: 5 posts each


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Chatty said:


> There is: 5 posts each


Oh! I thought it was eliminated, must have misread the change to the rules, great.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Oh! I thought it was eliminated, must have misread the change to the rules, great.


nah, time limit was eliminated, 5 post limit remains.


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Who/how is the winner decided? Is it a poll or you just gonna pick?


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Judges will decide....3 judges, I believe.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

3 judges 20% each. The rest of the forum can input when I close each debate and pick who they thought won - as long as they give sensible reasoning. That will make up 40% - person with 60% + in the debate goes through to the next round/wins.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

They judge who won the debate, correct? Not necessarily whether their opinion ascribes to either man's argument?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> They judge who won the debate, correct? Not necessarily whether their opinion ascribes to either man's argument?


Yeah, personal opinion on the question doesn't come into it. Its who came across better with their argument so to speak.


----------



## Batkilt (Jun 6, 2012)

Chatty said:


> @PityTheFool I'll put yours up tonight when I get in from football about 10ish. There is no time limit so if your stretched, don't worry just let it run over a few days.
> @Batkilt I will indeed PM you when yours goes up


Cheers, mate. :thumbsup


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

Interesting.

I don't know how the fuck you are going to judge @Teeto vs @Bogotazo think it's gonna produce Leonard vs Hagler levels of controversy no matter the outcome.


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

They're great questions you've come up with dude. Thought i absolutely hated mine, that's kind of a part of it I guess, and I would have liked reading about other people talking about it.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

McGrain said:


> They're great questions you've come up with dude. Thought i absolutely hated mine, that's kind of a part of it I guess, and I would have liked reading about other people talking about it.


I tried to get a little of everything in but hold back some as well as there is another 15 matches after this round. So put a bit modern, history, technical, rules and regs, amateur etc.

Once the debate is over Ill open the thread up for peoples scoring and also people can continue to discuss it as well. hopefully anyway.


----------



## Vano-irons (Jun 6, 2012)

I've written by last post in my battle with McGrain. Epic debate that, really enjoyed it. Sounds cliché, but I don't think either of us deserve to lose


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

YOU deserve to lose 

:twisted

It wasn't really like a debate though we just agreed on everything :lol:


----------



## Vano-irons (Jun 6, 2012)

:lol:


----------



## PivotPunch (Aug 1, 2012)

Chatty said:


> 3 judges 20% each. The rest of the forum can input when I close each debate and pick who they thought won - as long as they give sensible reasoning. That will make up 40% - person with 60% + in the debate goes through to the next round/wins.


Where can we pick the winners of the debate, right in the threads after they're done?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

PivotPunch said:


> Where can we pick the winners of the debate, right in the threads after they're done?


Yeah just pick who you thought and why


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

This was a great idea. Found it odd at first but it's turning out great.


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

Great job Chatty ! The topics are great so far and the guys are playing good. I'll be happy to argue with Dealt_with, who knows his stuff and tells it like HE sees it instead of repeating other people opinions.


----------



## Guest (Aug 1, 2013)

When is @Batklit having his match?


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

@Chatty I'm not just saying this because I had to go first in my debate, but isn't the right thing to do in a debate to have the first person make their argument, then the other person rebuts, and then the person who went first gets to rebut? Meaning the person who goes first gets an extra post to rebut the arguments put to him because he was at a disadvantage due to him going first?

or no? I thought that's how debates usually work

I don't mind either way like, just asking


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Teeto said:


> @*Chatty* I'm not just saying this because I had to go first in my debate, but isn't the right thing to do in a debate to have the first person make their argument, then the other person rebuts, and then the person who went first gets to rebut? Meaning the person who goes first gets an extra post to rebut the arguments put to him because he was at a disadvantage due to him going first?
> 
> or no? I thought that's how debates usually work
> 
> I don't mind either way like, just asking


I think its pretty fair the way it is. The second person gets to close the debate but really each person should be closing their argument in their final post. if someone has an extra post and thats a bit unfair.

The other thing is whilst the second guy gets to close the debate, the first guy has first option on the pick of the debate and that can be quite advantageous so its a bit of give and take to balance it out.


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

Chatty said:


> I think its pretty fair the way it is. The second person gets to close the debate but really each person should be closing their argument in their final post. if someone has an extra post and thats a bit unfair.
> 
> The other thing is whilst the second guy gets to close the debate, the first guy has first option on the pick of the debate and that can be quite advantageous so its a bit of give and take to balance it out.


ok sweet :good


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

Chatty said:


> 3 judges 20% each. The rest of the forum can input when I close each debate and pick who they thought won - as long as they give sensible reasoning. That will make up 40% - person with 60% + in the debate goes through to the next round/wins.


First off, cheers for doing this, it must eat into your free time, and be a bit of a hassle. Not least when people keep asking questions...

Which leads me on to this:

How are you going to break this 40% down? If say six people give good reason why poster A wins over the two who give good reason why poster B wins, do you give the whole 40% to poster A, or do you break down a percentage of votes cast and give poster A 30% and poster B 10%?


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

TBooze said:


> Looks like I am going to have to find my inner Mancini then!


:lol::lol:

You will probably stop me quicker


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

TBooze said:


> First off, cheers for doing this, it must eat into your free time, and be a bit of a hassle. Not least when people keep asking questions...
> 
> Which leads me on to this:
> 
> How are you going to break this 40% down? If say six people give good reason why poster A wins over the two who give good reason why poster B wins, do you give the whole 40% to poster A, or do you break down a percentage of votes cast and give poster A 30% and poster B 10%?


Yeah the bigger share of the votes gets the full 40. A draw gets 20 each so mathematically with the judges there should always be a winner. Don't worry though cause I aint taking votes without reasons and shit biased reasons wont count.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

@Chatty
I haven't even had a chance to see if my thread's up,but I have a bit of a situation with one of the kids again so only got home this morning.I need to get a couple hours sleep as I need to pick my youngest up at 2 so I doubt very much I'll have time until tonight at earliest.
I'll have a look just now but I didn't see thread up on first page but I won't get chance to really do anything until later and depending on how things go with my older daughter.
Sorry to @LittleRed as well.I know I joked about ducking but this is a non-negotiable situation I've got and I know some of my pals on here are aware of it.I'll get on it soon as.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> @Chatty
> I haven't even had a chance to see if my thread's up,but I have a bit of a situation with one of the kids again so only got home this morning.I need to get a couple hours sleep as I need to pick my youngest up at 2 so I doubt very much I'll have time until tonight at earliest.
> I'll have a look just now but I didn't see thread up on first page but I won't get chance to really do anything until later and depending on how things go with my older daughter.
> Sorry to @LittleRed as well.I know I joked about ducking but this is a non-negotiable situation I've got and I know some of my pals on here are aware of it.I'll get on it soon as.


I didnt get anymore up as I went to a quiz after footy and we won some booze so we stwyed out till about 1. Aint had a chance this morning as the bairn has took over the computer. Ill get them up this afternoon.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Its seems because I have the audacity to actually sleep that some people are complaining about not reading the rules themselves:lol: For Fucks Sakes people just read the OP before you start waning in.

Anyway I'm up and been to the gym etc so now I can crack on with this and sort any shit that needs sorting out:ibutt


----------



## LittleRed (Jun 4, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> @Chatty
> I haven't even had a chance to see if my thread's up,but I have a bit of a situation with one of the kids again so only got home this morning.I need to get a couple hours sleep as I need to pick my youngest up at 2 so I doubt very much I'll have time until tonight at earliest.
> I'll have a look just now but I didn't see thread up on first page but I won't get chance to really do anything until later and depending on how things go with my older daughter.
> Sorry to @LittleRed as well.I know I joked about ducking but this is a non-negotiable situation I've got and I know some of my pals on here are aware of it.I'll get on it soon as.


PTF family is way more important than this. Is No problem.


----------



## Indigo Pab (May 31, 2012)

This is wassup, shout out to @Chatty for the stellar work.

If this was a couple of years ago when I had much more passion for boxing I'd be icing fools(I wouldn't, but I might've partaken).


----------



## poorface (Jun 14, 2013)

Just wanted to also thank @Chatty for running this. I was initially skeptical about the competition idea but it's brought out some excellent debates even in this relatively early stage, and the topics have been interesting and well-varied so far.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

MichiganWarrior said:


> Honestly @Vic is a good young poster. He's talented, but im God gifted.


See your ass soon, kid.

:war


----------



## Batkilt (Jun 6, 2012)

Pabby said:


> This is wassup, shout out to @*Chatty* for the stellar work.
> 
> If this was a couple of years ago when I had much more passion for boxing I'd be icing fools(I wouldn't, but I might've partaken).


----------



## Guest (Aug 3, 2013)

when is batklit having his match?


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

Whoa,

I forgot that the 24 hour limit had been dropped... I have a busy week-end so I thought I was going to get screwed in the rest of my debate with Dealt-with. Niiiice.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

poorface said:


> Just wanted to also thank @*Chatty* for running this. I was initially skeptical about the competition idea but it's brought out some excellent debates even in this relatively early stage, and the topics have been interesting and well-varied so far.


Not sure if it's just me thinking it's happened, but this competition seems to have raised the general tone of the forum too. There seems to be a higher ratio of interesting discussions to eye-rolling noise threads than there was a few weeks ago. Great stuff!


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

OK Everybody's away now. When they are finished I'm gonna post their debate in here.

So first up is Vano v McGrain

You can change one thing in boxing today, what would it be and why would it be the most beneficial to the sport?



> Vano
> 
> If I could change one thing about boxing today, I would drastically reduce the number of weight divisions we have. Currently, we have a total of 17 division, which is simply absurd. Of course, weight is absolutely crucial in boxing, but we simple do not need that many. Weight classes were introduced so fighters would fight others around their weight, and therefore be at less risk of injury. But it has gone too far. 10lb separate the bottom four weight classes (strawweight to super fly), which is just not needed. We are seeing boxers stepping into the ring facing second class opposition, rather than fighting guys who could easily move up and challenge them.
> 
> If we reduced the number of weight classes, the best would be forced to fight the best, which would be great for the fans.





> McGrain
> 
> _What the fuck happened?_
> 
> ...





> Vano
> 
> Absolutely agree. The alphabet organisations are a joke, and i'd love nothing more than to see them crumble. But, having more than one champion in a division can have its benefits. Hardcore fans and casuals alike love nothing more than a unification fight. Two world champions entering the ring to decide who is the dogs in the division. For my money, that cannot be beaten. Under McGrain's system, we would only have a champion, and a number one contender, which takes the edge off for me. I love talking about boxing probably more than the boxing itself, and having only one champion takes away from my fun. It's great to ask 10 people 'who is the best middleweight in the world' and hear 5 different answers.
> 
> Also, world titles, despite meaning little to us hardcore followers, do have their benefits. Promoters can bill their shows as world championship fights, which helps sells tickets to the public. They go away happy, the boxers receive more money, and revenue is pumped back into the sport





> McGrain
> 
> _
> 
> ...


_




McGrain

Here we see the difference between a World Champion and a "world champion". Taking a belt from the former is a sin, taking a belt from the latter is a matter of administration, as demonstrated recently by the ludicrous decision by the WBC to strip Andre Ward of his world title, and award him Champion Emeritus status, allowing them to continue to collect their fees.

Ward is almost universally acknowledged as the best super-middleweight in the world, but injuries mean he hasn't fought often - meaning the WBC have been unable to line their pockets in the same way and so they name a new champion. Just like that, and for no better reason. The corruption that surrounds that organisation - the organisation whose green felt was worn by Muhammad Ali - is particularly disgusting. Allowing them to continue to profit from our sport in preference to anyother change might be considered criminal

Julio Gudino, the manager of Antonio Rubio after his fight with WBC earner Julio Cesar Chavez:

When it came to our fight back in February for the title, Friday at the Rules Meeting the day before the fight, the Rules Meeting took place after the weigh-in in which Chavez showed up about 35-40 minutes late for the weigh-in. In the Rules Meeting, both the WBC Commissioner and Dickie Cole, the Athletic Commissioner for the State of Texas, announced that we would be doing a post-fight anti-doping test. The reason for the post-fight anti-doping test and not a pre-fight is so neither of the fighters could ingest anything during the fight that's not allowed or illegal to consume in boxing. Everybody agreed to the post-fight anti-doping test.

But that drugs test at first, seemed like it wouldn't happen. The WBC had "forgotten to book it". When Gudino insisted due to suspicious surrounding Chavez dating back to 2010, it happened. But Chavez quite probably did not piss. He was accompanied by members of his team, and no doctor, as witnessed by Suger Lee. Who fileld the sampel jar? We have no idea.

Maybe this is a coincidence, but it seems likely that Ward was stripped and Chavez was not given even the archaic piss test, or was allowed to take the test in circumstances where he certainly didn't have to if he didn't want to because the WBC is corrupt.

Gudino also notes that Chavez rehydrated 23lbs for that fight - underscoring the reason why, in modern fights, multiple weight divisions are an issue for safety. Fighters can rehydrate enough to give a 15 plus pound weight advantage over an opponent at around middleweight. Whilst these differences are smaller at flyweight as a percentage of bodyweight they are still relevant - removing weight divisions would lead to even vaster differences in weight between fighters as borderline cruiserweights boiled down to 175 to take on big middleweights that can't quite cram their way into middleweight for differences of thirty pounds and above - and probably more deaths in the ring.

This can be counteracted only by introducing same day weigh ins - another change i'd see introduced before a reduction in weight classes.

Click to expand...





Vano









Originally Posted by *McGrain* 
Here we see the difference between a World Champion and a "world champion". Taking a belt from the former is a sin, taking a belt from the latter is a matter of administration, as demonstrated recently by the ludicrous decision by the WBC to strip Andre Ward of his world title, and award him Champion Emeritus status, allowing them to continue to collect their fees.

Ward is almost universally acknowledged as the best super-middleweight in the world, but injuries mean he hasn't fought often - meaning the WBC have been unable to line their pockets in the same way and so they name a new champion. Just like that, and for no better reason. The corruption that surrounds that organisation - the organisation whose green felt was worn by Muhammad Ali - is particularly disgusting. Allowing them to continue to profit from our sport in preference to any other change might be considered criminal

Julio Gudino, the manager of Antonio Rubio after his fight with WBC earner Julio Cesar Chavez:

When it came to our fight back in February for the title, Friday at the Rules Meeting the day before the fight, the Rules Meeting took place after the weigh-in in which Chavez showed up about 35-40 minutes late for the weigh-in. In the Rules Meeting, both the WBC Commissioner and Dickie Cole, the Athletic Commissioner for the State of Texas, announced that we would be doing a post-fight anti-doping test. The reason for the post-fight anti-doping test and not a pre-fight is so neither of the fighters could ingest anything during the fight that's not allowed or illegal to consume in boxing. Everybody agreed to the post-fight anti-doping test.

But that drugs test at first, seemed like it wouldn't happen. The WBC had "forgotten to book it". When Gudino insisted due to suspicious surrounding Chavez dating back to 2010, it happened. But Chavez quite probably did not piss. He was accompanied by members of his team, and no doctor, as witnessed by Suger Lee. Who fileld the sampel jar? We have no idea.

Maybe this is a coincidence, but it seems likely that Ward was stripped and Chavez was not given even the archaic piss test, or was allowed to take the test in circumstances where he certainly didn't have to if he didn't want to because the WBC is corrupt.



:deal
Give me a petition which asks should we get rid of Suliman and his bullshit, corrupt, and vaguely racist rhetoric, and i'll sign it. HE is the problem, the LEADERSHIP of the WBC is the problem, but the actual belt isn't. Ive long expressed my hatred of the once famed Green Belt. This is, after all, an organisation that fined Dereck Chisora $50,000 after slapping Vitali at the weigh in, declaring he would never fight for their title again, yet chose to keep Floyd Mayweather, who was incarcerated for domestic violence, as their champion. These people should be held accountable, and a drastic change is needed, but let's not have the boxers suffer as a result of their negligence. I'd say keep the belts, change the leaders.


Gudino also notes that Chavez rehydrated 23lbs for that fight - underscoring the reason why, in modern fights, multiple weight divisions are an issue for safety. Fighters can rehydrate enough to give a 15 plus pound weight advantage over an opponent at around middleweight. Whilst these differences are smaller at flyweight as a percentage of bodyweight they are still relevant - removing weight divisions would lead to even vaster differences in weight between fighters as borderline cruiserweights boiled down to 175 to take on big middleweights that can't quite cram their way into middleweight for differences of thirty pounds and above - and probably more deaths in the ring.


This is an interesting point. Fighter's protection is paramount. But there should be a limit to that. Im not advocating going back to the 1920s when there were 8 classes, far from it. But that doesn't mean a reduction shouldn't happen. Do we really need 3lb separating Flyweight from Super Flyweight? 4lb from Featherweight to Super Featherweight? I'd argue that some of these classes should be abolished altogether, Strawweight and super middleweight for instance. Could you imagine how great it would be to see Froch tussle with the Middles like Sergio, GGG, Macklin, while Ward tries to outmuscle Bernard Hopkins. These are the fights the fans what to see, but they are made exceptionally difficult when we have so many weight classes.

Click to expand...





McGrain









Originally Posted by *Vano-irons* 
These people should be held accountable, and a drastic change is needed, but let's not have the boxers suffer as a result of their negligence. I'd say keep the belts, change the leaders.



If only this were viable.

If only Suliman and the WBC was the only example. 

Even criminals like Bob Arum are astounded by the corruption surrounding the WBA. He claims to have paid WBA officials to rank fighters. Judges in the employ of the WBA have claimed pressure has been exerted upon them to favour a fighter contesting their title. 

The WBO stripped Ricardo Lopez without reason, hearing or more than a cursory explanation after the autocratic Francisco Varcarcel deemed it should be so. Darrin Morris moved up in their super-middleweight rankings after his death. It is not a question of leadership, but a question of natural corruption. Corruption occurs naturally in a vacuum. Boxing's vacuum is created by the total lack of leadership exhibited by the multiple organisations which, lest we forget, are supposed to administrate boxing - that is overlooked all too often. These guys aren't just there to hand out belts like sweeties - they are there to control, to mediate, to run the sport. You could have Ghandi running one of these organisations and judges would still be bribed, golden monkeys would still be spared drugs tests, personal relationships would still define opportunities and rankings.

That's because the entities set up to control boxing do so in the pursuit of money. This has resulted in a sport "plauged by corruption, fraud and ineffective regulation" according to former Presidential candidate John McCain who has also called for a centrally regulated for non-profit organisation to run the fight game, and he is quite correct. That is key. Why should these bureaucrats, who do not even work in regulation of the sport in the truest sense of the word, be allowed to continue to leach from the sport? Do away with them and boxing will be better off overnight and yes, so will boxers.

Van, you've said that taking these paper titles away from the fighters that earned them isn't fair. You're right my friend. But for every champion earning thousands or millions, there are how many working fighters who cannot get a break, get a ranking, get the right men into the ring because of the corruption, the closed shop that protects these champions? Pleading on behalf of the champions these criminals protect at the expense of the men beneath them who cannot scrape the cash together to bribe the right people isn't viable.

Because the organisations that run boxing represents nothing less than a dictatorship of the exploiters of the exploited. And they pay for their dictatorship by taking money from the fighters they represent.

Unionise the sport; legislate the union; within a year you'll have a single governing body which can conduct an investigation into the proliferation of weight classes that can talk to, among others, fighters. Let people deemed qualified by fighters to control the fate of fighters and these problems solve themselves.


Allow criminals to continue to do so and watch the sport rot.

Click to expand...





Vano

I fail to see how only having one governing body would help reduce corruption and fraud. When boxing only had one 'world champion' per division, we still saw fighters excluded from fighting for the belt, perhaps more so than now. I'm sure you're aware that it took Ray Robinson 5 years to finally get his shot at welterweight gold against Tommy Bell. Jack Johnson had to chase the heavyweight champion around the world for his shot. I could go on.

As you say, political corruption is a major problem. But what happens if the one governing body that you crave happens to be just as corrupt as those now? That could see a genuine world class fighter completely frozen out at world level, which is something that would greatly damage the sport. In fact, it would be heart-breaking to witness. At least now, under these shoody laws, world class fighters have a chance to fight for world honours, even if the true 'champions' would rather take an easier option.

This is my last post, so I wont go into too much depth. I'd like to say this has been an absolute pleasure debating, and I agree mostly with every point you made. The governing bodies are a leach that is sucking the life out of our sport. While stripping them would be fantastic, I truly believe that reducing the number of divisions would be more beneficial to the sport as a whole, as it would allow truly great fights to happen more often, something that even four 'world titles' couldn't stop. That is, after all, why we watch boxing.

It's been a pleasure sir 

Click to expand...





McGrain








 Originally Posted by *Vano-irons* I fail to see how only having one governing body would help reduce corruption and fraud.



See baseball.

Baseball has its problems with steroid abuse and its policing (it is still miles ahead of boxing in this regard however) but corruption in the modern era is almost entirely absent compared to boxing's never-ending litany of bribery and larceny.


When boxing only had one 'world champion' per division, we still saw fighters excluded from fighting for the belt, perhaps more so than now. I'm sure you're aware that it took Ray Robinson 5 years to finally get his shot at welterweight gold against Tommy Bell. Jack Johnson had to chase the heavyweight champion around the world for his shot. I could go on.


There were multiple titles in Ray Robinson's day; NBA and NYSAC. Europe also recognised a world champion. The last time we had a single, unified title (1920) we were emerging from an era when black men were considered to be sub-human and the flyweight division was only partially recognised. These are different days.


As you say, political corruption is a major problem. But what happens if the one governing body that you crave happens to be just as corrupt as those now?


That is why, as I said in post #4 , litigation is required to control the regulatory body. But even if you are right, a body as corrupt as the WBA would still see around 60% corruption less than we endure today.


That could see a genuine world class fighter completely frozen out at world level, which is something that would greatly damage the sport.


To be frozen out at "world level", our hypothetical fighter would have to miss out on the other nine top contenders and the champion. That, to me, seems impossible. With one champion in place even the most reviled fighter in history - Jack Johnson - was able to get the title shot by beating the best consistently. It is hard for me to believe that many fighters would force their way to #1 contendership and go without a title shot. But make no mistake, extraordinary fighters would NOT get their title shot. That would happen.

But there's a reason that Chelsea, Manchester United, Arsenal and Manchester City were not ALL made champions last season. It's because, although it would have been nice, although there were many great players that "deserved" to be rewarded, although there were many fans that would have loved to have seen their team win a title. That reason is - it doesn't make any fucking sense, at all. It doesn't make sense to people. That would make football deeply confusing by undermining it at its most fundamental sporting level.

The public no longer understands our sport. Three heavyweight champions is the reason. Change it to one, the sport blossoms.

My final point:

Have you seen it? I bet you have but it's easy to miss great fights with so many out there.

Fought at one of the in-between weights you seek to abolish, this may be the greatest war ever fought. The WBC did it's absolute best to make sure it didn't happen.

Despite the fact that Chacon was its champion.

Despite the fact that Boza-Edwards was its #1 contender.

Because Don King told Jose Sulaiman he didn't want it to happen.

The fight wouldn't have been edgier, as you've claimed Van, if they both had a title - in fact, no title was on the line. This is because Chacon fought the fight as a non-title fight because he recognised the ludicrousness of his position. An organisation wanted to take his money to fight someone other than his #1 contender, a man who had previously defeated him. That organisation had at its heart not his best interests, not the interests of the sport he loves, but the interests of a convicted killer who paid them money.

Bobby told them to fuck right off.

We should too.

Click to expand...

_


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

So can we get you votes and input on this @*Lunny* @*Pabby* (you wanted in right) and then ill get all them together and announce the winner.

Full thread: http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...e-Poster-Comp-Vano-Irons-v-McGrain&highlight=


----------



## TFG (Jul 23, 2013)

Id be happy to participate in this whenever it's next on.


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

Chatty said:


> OK Everybody's away now. When they are finished I'm gonna post their debate in here.


Probably being thick, but I do not see mine and GPater's thread.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Ill double check and link you or put it up now mate


----------



## Indigo Pab (May 31, 2012)

Chatty said:


> So can we get you votes and input on this @*Lunny* @*Pabby* (you wanted in right) and then ill get all them together and announce the winner.
> 
> Full thread: http://checkhookboxing.com/showthre...e-Poster-Comp-Vano-Irons-v-McGrain&highlight=


Myself and @Lunny have deliberated over this diligently and have come to a final decision.

Do we state it here or can we be all secretive and PM you so neither man's feelings are hurt?


----------



## Lunny (May 31, 2012)

Pabby said:


> Myself and @Lunny have deliberated over this diligently and have come to a final decision.
> 
> Do we state it here or can we be all secretive and PM you so neither man's feelings are hurt?


Was a great debate to read. I thought Vano was KO'd after the first few posts but he never went down and came right back.

@vano_irons was right when he said it was like having Germany-Spain in the first round.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Pabby said:


> Myself and @Lunny have deliberated over this diligently and have come to a final decision.
> 
> Do we state it here or can we be all secretive and PM you so neither man's feelings are hurt?


Pm me and then I can announce the winner straight up


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

yall can go ahead and crown me already


----------



## Vano-irons (Jun 6, 2012)

The suspense is killing me


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Vano-irons said:


> The suspense is killing me


And the winner via Split Decision is
@McGrain

Good effort though Vano, it was a quality showdown that under normal circumstances would have people wanting a rematch but you'll have to wait until the next one to get your chance unless we have pull outs.


----------



## Vano-irons (Jun 6, 2012)

I demand a recount!!!!!! :lol:

It was incredibly close, which could have went either way. No robbery.

If someone pulls out i'll be happy to go again


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

I'm gonna end each first round match on friday at 6pm so however far people have gotten into the debate then, that will be the end of it and it will be judged from there.


----------



## Rexrapper 1 (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> I'm gonna end each first round match on friday at 6pm so however far people have gotten into the debate then, that will be the end of it and it will be judged from there.


I was getting ready to ask you about this. I thought my debate would have been farther along by now but I'm only on post 2 and my opponent is still on post 1. Thanks for the update.


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

who nex


----------



## McGrain (Jul 6, 2012)

Vano-irons said:


> If someone pulls out i'll be happy to go again


This is dodgy IMO because someone like Van could easily win - although he's already been CRUSHED (back handed compliment I guess...).


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

if there's any pullouts or slowass people in the later rounds, @Vano-irons and the loser of @Teeto and @Bogotazo should be the first fill ins


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Yeah I think if theres any pull outs in the later rounds then we'll pick the guys who did best in the round prior


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

24 hours to finish as much as you can guys


----------



## sugarshane_24 (Apr 20, 2013)

dafuck, i just went idle a few weeks and there's this excitement. get me in on the wildcard or the next league will ya


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Seriously what is the time limit? Sport of Kings I love him but got damn.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

turbotime said:


> Seriously what is the time limit? Sport of Kings I love him but got damn.


6pm tomorrow

I'll just take into account where we are in the posts. I think loads are gonna bow out on a whimper to be honest but otherwise it would have dragged on years.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Well I hope ya'll like public executions on a Friday :bbb


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

Dealt_with must be too buzy to respond to my 3rd post, but we've both written a lot in those 3 posts each and I think we've shared our opinion well enough. I'm OK with leaving it as it is, as I won't be much available to respond tomorrow.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

So this probably means I have a win over Fleaman...


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

dyna said:


> So this probably means I have a win over Fleaman...


I'm guessing so


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> I'm guessing so


1-0
No blueprint, the Lomachenko of debating :deal


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

Chatty said:


> 24 hours to finish as much as you can guys


Oh dear, GPater is not going to be able to post a response to my initial outlining of our debate, until tomorrow evening. I had no issue with this, as I thought there was no time limits... It seems a little unfair on GPater, that I might get through with one post; I might become the King of the cheap win!


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Do we get to know who our judges are @Chatty? How do you pick them? Are they non-contestants?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Brownies said:


> Dealt_with must be too buzy to respond to my 3rd post, but we've both written a lot in those 3 posts each and I think we've shared our opinion well enough. I'm OK with leaving it as it is, as I won't be much available to respond tomorrow.


Sorry about he delay mate, I've replied.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

Fuck it, im out lads, pulling a No Mas, could nae be arsed anymore, and turbotime's put more effort and probably has the better argument to.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Damn Kings steps down. Good stuff mate, you're still a beast and I was worried for a bit :yep


----------



## ApatheticLeader (May 17, 2013)

I wasn't actually aware this was happening. I'd have wanted to be involved. 

Oh well.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Going through some of these threads is like doing sixty days with Hugh McIllvanny as your cell mate.
Sterling efforts indeed.


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

TBooze said:


> Oh dear, GPater is not going to be able to post a response to my initial outlining of our debate, until tomorrow evening. I had no issue with this, as I thought there was no time limits... It seems a little unfair on GPater, that I might get through with one post; I might become the King of the cheap win!


I got a reply in this morning, shame as we could have had a good debate.
@Chatty any chance of an extension at all?


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

When do we find out who the winners of round 1 are?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

GPater said:


> I got a reply in this morning, shame as we could have had a good debate.
> 
> @Chatty any chance of an extension at all?


Yeah yous were last up so have the rest of the weekend


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> Sorry about he delay mate, I've replied.


No problem, good job !


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

Bit gutted I wasn't around to get in on this. :-(


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

O59 said:


> Bit gutted I wasn't around to get in on this. :-(


I honestly thought of you as one of the young guns who could do well in this.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> I honestly thought of you as one of the young guns who could do well in this.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Luf said:


> When do we find out who the winners of round 1 are?


 @Chatty?


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

@Chatty

me and TBooze are finished


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Sorry guys, my com has been knackered so aint been able to get on. I've just sorted it out so ill get round 1 sorted and judged tomorrow.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Eagerly awaiting.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)




----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Who necks? !


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Bit surprised @Flea Man did a quit job so early.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Yall can call me the Can Man, because anybody CAN get it. AmeriCAN, AfriCAN, DominCAN, MexiCAN, Puerto RiCAN, anybody CAN get it


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Who necks? !


----------



## Tyler-Durden (Jul 31, 2012)

bballchump11 said:


> Yall can call me the Can Man, because anybody CAN get it. AmeriCAN, AfriCAN, DominCAN, MexiCAN, Puerto RiCAN, anybody CAN get it


Are you an American or an American't ? :hat


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

The suspense is killing me. I need to know if I can go on or not.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Tyler-Durden said:


> Are you an American or an American't ? :hat


depends on who wants to know :hey


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> The suspense is killing me. I need to know if I can go on or not.


It is going to take a long time to sort it out. Chatty wanted to do it, so lets give him a couple of weeks or so, I am sure the second round matches will be up.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

TBooze said:


> It is going to take a long time to sort it out. Chatty wanted to do it, so lets give him a couple of weeks or so, I am sure the second round matches will be up.


Wait, is he the sole judge? If so he can take his time. I thought he was appointing people and just collecting results.


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Wait, is he the sole judge? If so he can take his time. I thought he was appointing people and just collecting results.


He is not the sole judge that is in part why it is going to take some time. He needs the opinions of the other two judges, plus he needs to correlate all the debates, and get the opinions of the masses. That is quite a bit of work!


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

TBooze said:


> He is not the sole judge that is in part why it is going to take some time. He needs the opinions of the other two judges, plus he needs to correlate all the debates, and get the opinions of the masses. That is quite a bit of work!


Oh he's also a 3rd judge himself. That is quite a bit of work indeed.


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

What happened with me and bogo when I was away then? Did one of us go through or is there two more rounds?

I saw his reply but I will have to read it later because its huge!


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Teeto said:


> What happened with me and bogo when I was away then? Did one of us go through or is there two more rounds?
> 
> I saw his reply but I will have to read it later because its huge!


It's over. Do not post again.


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

@Bogotazo

fuck mate I don't want to!

It's like at the end of Rocky-Apollo 1

'ain't gunna be no rematch'

'don't want one'


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Teeto said:


> @Bogotazo
> 
> fuck mate I don't want to!
> 
> ...


:lol: I know, I know. It was a bit painful.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Teeto said:


> @Bogotazo
> 
> fuck mate I don't want to!
> 
> ...


Yeah,but we all know how that panned out.
I'd have no problem reading another thread like that last one.Best of three lads?


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> Yeah,but we all know how that panned out.
> I'd have no problem reading another thread like that last one.Best of three lads?


well it was a bit heavy going but of course I'd love to discuss something with Bogo down the line at some point, I think in general discussion me and him would generally agree on most things and have the same amount of praise for most fighters. The heated debate just comes about when it's a competition.

I think we should until after this competition now though.


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

happnin?


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

I'll get back on it this afternoon. Had loads of work on this week and been to hospital and shit but sorted now so ill get judging and sorting round two out today.


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

sound man just wondering


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

I feel another Super 6 tourney coming on...see you in 2014 :lol:


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> I feel another Super 6 tourney coming on...see you in 2014 :lol:


:lol:


----------



## Rexrapper 1 (Jun 4, 2013)

turbotime said:


> I feel another Super 6 tourney coming on...see you in 2014 :lol:


:yep


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

bump


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Any update on progress?


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

Five posts which actually took some thought

FOR NOTHING?!


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

I'll do it now lads, right this minute.

Sorry about that, got loads of work on that I wasn't expecting so gotta put the cash first. I finished all my jobs yeasterday and dont have any work on till Saturday so no reason why I cant get the second round up and running now.


----------



## Collie (Aug 16, 2013)

O59 said:


> Bit gutted I wasn't around to get in on this. :-(


Me too.Although I probably would have ended up feeling like Donaire after the Rigo fight, demoralised after a wide schooling!Its a great idea though and makes for some interesting, informative reading.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

OK some more results
@Luf beats @SJS20 @LittleRed beats @PityTheFool

both close battles with some real good stuff in them
@dyna beats @Flea Man via no show


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

This is suddenly nerve-wracking.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> This is suddenly nerve-wracking.


Most of yours is sorted, as soon as Lunny has time to read through everything we'll be able to put someone through in yours.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

Much like Hagler after Leonard,

No Mas.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

:bbb


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

:sad2


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

:err


----------



## Joe E (Jul 29, 2012)

@Johnstown :lol:


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

hello


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Did you win Bogo?!


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Did you win Bogo?!


:conf


----------



## Danny (May 31, 2012)

I'd forgotten all about this. :lol:


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> :conf


UK judges :-(


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> :conf


Sorry about that thing we discussed Bogo.I lost on points.:-(


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

@Chatty

I just counted all the votes up in the me vs bogo thread (first vote is post #99 ) and we both have 12 votes each


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Teeto said:


> @*Chatty*
> 
> I just counted all the votes up in the me vs bogo thread (first vote is post #99 ) and we both have 12 votes each


Yeah we're just waiting on @Lunny to settle it mate


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

Chatty said:


> Yeah we're just waiting on @Lunny to settle it mate


oh shit yeah, there's judges as well

so it's all down to Lunny's opinion now? How nerve racking :lol:


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Teeto said:


> oh shit yeah, there's judges as well
> 
> so it's all down to Lunny's opinion now? How nerve racking :lol:


Yeah theres a few ready to be finished off.

Then Ill give them more to judge, was hoping to have it capped off by the weekend but it just depends on how busy people are. We still got four months to finish it so its cool and it'll quicken up after this round.


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

Chatty said:


> Yeah theres a few ready to be finished off.
> 
> Then Ill give them more to judge, was hoping to have it capped off by the weekend but it just depends on how busy people are. We still got four months to finish it so its cool and it'll quicken up after this round.


yeah, me and Bogo threw out a lot of text there to be fair, so no wonder it's taking a while for the judges to get through

how does it work % wise?


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Holy fuck it's all down to @Lunny !!!


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Teeto said:


> yeah, me and Bogo threw out a lot of text there to be fair, so no wonder it's taking a while for the judges to get through
> 
> how does it work % wise?


Judges 60 and then 40 from posters votes.


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

Chatty said:


> Judges 60 and then 40 from posters votes.


a nice mix of the people and the authorities, working together, like blending democracy with dictatorship, it's like Gaddafi


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

:laddafi1


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> Judges 60 and then 40 from posters votes.


Where do the posters get a chance to vote mate?


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> UK judges :-(


:lol::yep



PityTheFool said:


> Sorry about that thing we discussed Bogo.I lost on points.:-(


No worries, you made me proud.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> Where do the posters get a chance to vote mate?


Just in the threads. Only posters who aren't in the comp for fairness but anyone knocked out can vote in the next round.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

In probably the closets debate this far @Teeto scrapes past @Bogotazo


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

Chatty said:


> In probably the closets debate this far @Teeto scrapes past @Bogotazo


thanks for the info mate


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Congrats Teeto.


----------



## Danny (May 31, 2012)

:lol:

By the way, it was kind of bogus to close the debates when some users didn't have the time to respond even when it's taken so long to get the results. Just sayin' yo.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Agreed. I'm taking weeks in my next round :lol:


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Congrats Teeto.


great debate mate


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

Danny said:


> :lol:
> 
> By the way, it was kind of bogus to close the debates when some users didn't have the time to respond even when it's taken so long to get the results. Just sayin' yo.


lol you take ages because your dad owes too much to blockbuster
@Lunny


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

@TBooze defeats @GPater


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

@Vic defeats @MichiganWarrior


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Bogotazo said:


> Congrats Teeto.


:lol:

You were both top drawer Bogo.It was a joy to read and if there could be a draw I'm sure this would've been it.

And very well done @Teeto


----------



## Teeto (May 31, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> :lol:
> 
> You were both top drawer Bogo.It was a joy to read and if there could be a draw I'm sure this would've been it.
> 
> And very well done @Teeto


:good thanks man


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Well played teets!


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

Chatty said:


> @Vic defeats @MichiganWarrior


Good, good.....:yep


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

Chatty said:


> @TBooze defeats @GPater


 @GPater had the disadvantage of going second, which in our subject was huge...

That said, roll on round two!


----------



## Indigo Pab (May 31, 2012)

@Bogotazo and @Teeto was awesome but awful to judge. Myself and Luns actually had to work together on the judging of that one. You're both wonderful, yet cruel people.

*salute*



turbotime said:


> UK and Irish judges :-(


Fixed.:eire


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Pabby said:


> Fixed.:eire


Same damn thing!


----------



## Indigo Pab (May 31, 2012)

turbotime said:


> Same damn thing!


It's not. At all.

It's like saying Mexico and the States are the same.

Or Ukraine and Russia.

Or....any country and another country that isn't the same country.


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

yall can crown me already


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Pabby said:


> It's not. At all.
> 
> It's like saying Mexico and the States are the same.
> 
> ...


It's a part of the United Kingdom :bart


----------



## tliang1000 (Jun 5, 2013)

obvious > BS


----------



## Indigo Pab (May 31, 2012)

turbotime said:


> It's a part of the United Kingdom :bart


No it isn't.:lol:

Clue is in the name - *Republic* of Ireland.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Pabby said:


> No it isn't.:lol:
> 
> Clue is in the name - *Republic* of Ireland.


Like people believe that though.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

@Brownies defeats @*Dealt_with*


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Chatty said:


> @Brownies defeats @*Dealt_with*


:lol: Seriously?

Brownies is probably all round more knowledgable than me about boxing so it's a good decision for the competition going forwards, but tbh I thought I absolutely dominated him in that debate.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> :lol: Seriously?
> 
> Brownies is probably all round more knowledgable than me about boxing so it's a good decision for the competition going forwards, but tbh I thought I absolutely dominated him in that debate.


Judges got paid off by Johnstown's welfare check


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Thought @Brownies edged it as well. Shoulda took Gavilan


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Thought @Brownies edged it as well. Shoulda took Gavilan


Aren't you one of those who thinks that two olympic gold medals has no impact on a fighters 'greatness' though?
I defined greatness, I defined Cuban boxing, and I looked at it with a holistic viewpoint taking both the pro and amateur game into account. The answer was obvious and I made that clear with my definitions and my explanation, while Brownies just mentioned his favourite Cuban fighter. More people think that the amateurs mean nothing though so I guess that did it. Try telling a Cuban boxing fan that Napoles is greater than Rigondeaux and you'd get laughed at, plus he was a pseudo-Mexican (Which is obviously another plus for pro-pro posters). I think that both the 'Kid's were a better choice than Napoles in that debate.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> *Aren't you one of those who thinks that two olympic gold medals has no impact on a fighters 'greatness' though?*
> I defined greatness, I defined Cuban boxing, and I looked at it with a holistic viewpoint taking both the pro and amateur game into account. The answer was obvious and I made that clear with my definitions and my explanation, while Brownies just mentioned his favourite Cuban fighter. More people think that the amateurs mean nothing though so I guess that did it. Try telling a Cuban boxing fan that Napoles is greater than Rigondeaux and you'd get laughed at, plus he was a pseudo-Mexican (Which is obviously another plus for pro-pro posters). I think that both the 'Kid's were a better choice than Napoles in that debate.


No. :conf


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

I would have said napoles as well tbf. He's one of the greatest full stop, never mind just from Cuba. Was a good debate that I like it.


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

Wow, thanks to the judges. 

To Dealt_with : it was a pleasure to discuss the subject with you. I wish we could see you in the second round, you're really the kind of guy who can make someone rethink about what he used to believe... if that makes sense.

To Turbo : Gavilan was my first choice but I didn't want to spend 5 posts making excuses for the fights he lost. Napoles was a safer... and maybe better choice in my opinion.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Luf said:


> I would have said napoles as well tbf. He's one of the greatest full stop, never mind just from Cuba. Was a good debate that I like it.


Fair enough. But did you vote for Brownie because he shares your opinion or because he made the better argument, and backed it up?
As I said with my comment in the Teeto-Bogatazo debate, you have to frame the debate, then make your argument within that. You can agree with Brownies pick but I won that debate hands down.
What's the point of this competition if it's simply a case of stating the more popular opinion?


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Brownies said:


> Wow, thanks to the judges.
> 
> To Dealt_with : it was a pleasure to discuss the subject with you. I wish we could see you in the second round, you're really the kind of guy who can make someone rethink about what he used to believe... if that makes sense.
> 
> To Turbo : Gavilan was my first choice but I didn't want to spend 5 posts making excuses for the fights he lost. Napoles was a safer... and maybe better choice in my opinion.


Likewise Brownies, as I stated I believe you're in a better position going forwards than I would be with your overall knowledge. I do believe 100% I won that debate any way you want to judge it, but please don't take that as a sign of me disrespecting you.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> Fair enough. But did you vote for Brownie because he shares your opinion or because he made the better argument, and backed it up?
> As I said with my comment in the Teeto-Bogatazo debate, you have to frame the debate, then make your argument within that. You can agree with Brownies pick but I won that debate hands down.
> What's the point of this competition if it's simply a case of stating the more popular opinion?


I didn't vote coz I wasn't allowed. I agreed with brownies but I felt your argument was more convincing.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Luf said:


> I didn't vote coz I wasn't allowed. I agreed with brownies but I felt your argument was more convincing.


"I've followed this thread intently and really enjoyed both sides of it and just because i side with @Brownies that doesn't mean that @Dealt_with didn't put forth a tremendous argument."

I think that counts as your vote mate :lol:


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

I would have went with Brownies for what it's worth, though DW made a brilliant case.


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

Dealt_with said:


> The answer was obvious and I made that clear with my definitions and my explanation, while Brownies just mentioned his favourite Cuban fighter. More people think that the amateurs mean nothing though so I guess that did it. Try telling a Cuban boxing fan that Napoles is greater than Rigondeaux and you'd get laughed at, plus he was a pseudo-Mexican (Which is obviously another plus for pro-pro posters). I think that both the 'Kid's were a better choice than Napoles in that debate.


Well, Napoles is not even my favorite cuban boxer ! :lol: I don't know, when we talk about greatness and things like that, I try to look at the whole picture and not make that much difference between the different eras. I thought he showed the greater and longer dominance over his peers, but I agree that others could claim that title.

I can't help but think of Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain and John Lennon when I see your choice of Rigondeaux. He's great, but he's greater because he didn't have the time yet to become an old boxer getting knocked out at 38, trying to claim one last belt... Call me crazy with my analogies, but Lennon wasn't a much better composer than McCartney but he didn't have the time to become an old aristocrat. We've only seen the best of Rigondeaux and I'd like to look at the whole picture before getting over-excited. His gold medals were great achievements, but I don't know... What does it really means ? Still, I wish the man all the luck for the rest of his career. He's had it rough and showed great courage in the last few years.

I don't have any problem with you thinking you won the debate, you're entitled to that. :bbb


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> "I've followed this thread intently and really enjoyed both sides of it and just because i side with @Brownies that doesn't mean that @Dealt_with didn't put forth a tremendous argument."
> 
> I think that counts as your vote mate :lol:


no coz those in the tourney didn't get counted. Like I said I also pick Napoles but I felt you put your argument forward really well.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Brownies said:


> Well, Napoles is not even my favorite cuban boxer ! :lol: I don't know, when we talk about greatness and things like that, I try to look at the whole picture and not make that much difference between the different eras. I thought he showed the greater and longer dominance over his peers, but I agree that others could claim that title.
> 
> I can't help but think of Jimi Hendrix, Kurt Cobain and John Lennon when I see your choice of Rigondeaux. He's great, but he's greater because he didn't have the time yet to become an old boxer getting knocked out at 38, trying to claim one last belt... Call me crazy with my analogies, but Lennon wasn't a much better composer than McCartney but he didn't have the time to become an old aristocrat. We've only seen the best of Rigondeaux and I'd like to look at the whole picture before getting over-excited. His gold medals were great achievements, but I don't know... What does it really means ? Still, I wish the man all the luck for the rest of his career. He's had it rough and showed great courage in the last few years.
> 
> I don't have any problem with you thinking you won the debate, you're entitled to that. :bbb


:cheers I'll be cheering you on in the future. However your opponent has my word that I'll be impartial when it comes time to placing my vote :lol:

Your viewpoint is fair enough but I disagree. Federer is greater than Sampras to me, despite the fact he's still playing (not very well but you get my point)


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

By the way Dealt, I've always assumed that you were from Eastern Europe. If it's so, I really couldn't tell from your grammar. I speak french and had a hell of a time writing all of that haha. :lol:


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Luf said:


> no coz those in the tourney didn't get counted. Like I said I also pick Napoles but I felt you put your argument forward really well.


I see, you were a contestant so your vote wasn't included... that means my vote for Teeto wouldn't have been included either.


----------



## Dealt_with (Jun 4, 2013)

Brownies said:


> By the way Dealt, I've always assumed that you were from Eastern Europe. If it's so, I really couldn't tell from your grammar. I speak french and had a hell of a time writing all of that haha. :lol:


No English is my first language.. I guess I can still take that as a compliment that I'm not a complete tard :lol:
That's very impressive, I would've had no idea English wasn't your first language. Nice one mate.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Dealt_with said:


> I see, you were a contestant so your vote wasn't included... that means my vote for Teeto wouldn't have been included either.


yeah that's what I gathered anyways.

I sided with brownies in terms of his choice because who I would have chosen. But in terms of voting for the better argument, had I been allowed I would have voted you.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

I didn't see anyone vote in my comp.
This poster's vote thing is quite confusing.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

I thought @Brownies v @Dealt_with was a brilliant debate with great stuff from both guys.
I thought it was a brave choice by Dealt but also brilliant posting from Brownies.
You both educated me in that bout,and other than a good laugh, there's nothing more rewarding on this forum than genuinely learning new stuff.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> I didn't see anyone vote in my comp.
> This poster's vote thing is quite confusing.


Yeah, wouldn't it be simpler if they used polls and only counted the votes after the debate finishes?


----------



## GPater (Sep 18, 2012)

TBooze said:


> @GPater had the disadvantage of going second, which in our subject was huge...
> 
> That said, roll on round two!


Was a good debate, wasnt as though I had an indefensible pick myself, although I would have bagged Burley too.

Good luck my man, Ill train you Apollo Creed style for the next round :lol:


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

O59 said:


> Yeah, wouldn't it be simpler if they used polls and only counted the votes after the debate finishes?


:deal


----------



## poorface (Jun 14, 2013)

O59 said:


> Yeah, wouldn't it be simpler if they used polls and only counted the votes after the debate finishes?


I believe the problem is that only those not in the competition can have their votes counted and they have to be justified, rather than just "X shares my opinion so he has my vote."


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

O59 said:


> Yeah, wouldn't it be simpler if they used polls and only counted the votes after the debate finishes?


Can you clear your inbox mate?
Been trting to PM you


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> Can you clear your inbox mate?
> Been trting to PM you


No problem mate. :good


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

Should be clear now @PityTheFool.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

O59 said:


> Should be clear now @PityTheFool.


Should be there now mate


----------



## Ivan Drago (Jun 3, 2013)

What's going on with this, match abandoned?


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

:conf


----------



## FelixTrinidad (Jun 3, 2013)

How come I wasn't invited to this?


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

FelixTrinidad said:


> How come I wasn't invited to this?


You were probably serving a sentence :-(


----------



## bballchump11 (May 17, 2013)

Chatty sent me a PM and told me that I won the entire tourney


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

bballchump11 said:


> Chatty sent me a PM and told me that I won the entire tourney


Affirmative action :-(


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

turbotime said:


> Affirmative action :-(


Where was my AF when snow white Teeto got the nod?

Oh that's right, I'm the only mod of color. What a coincidence Lunny and the gang chatted each other up to decide my fate.


----------



## Rexrapper 1 (Jun 4, 2013)

:lol: I forgot all about this.


----------



## Vic (Jun 7, 2012)

I was the favorite to win this, after my impressive first round KO over Michiganwarrior....


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Any news on when the 2nd round of this is starting? This was great. Should be an annual thing if it can be tightly organised, although I appreciate the effort needed of those involved. Looking forward to this kicking off again.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Bogotazo said:


> Where was my AF when snow white Teeto got the nod?
> 
> Oh that's right, I'm the only mod of color. What a coincidence Lunny and the gang chatted each other up to decide my fate.


Teeto ended up taking that?


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Teeto ended up taking that?


There were no real losers in that one.

Ironically,you were treated about as fairly as RJJ in Korea in your bout.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Teeto ended up taking that?


Yep.


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

My working hours stepped up dramatically as soon as I started this and I aint had the time I thought I would have to do it. @Bogotazo if you want to jump in and help out I reckon we could finish it before the end of the year.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Damn, I didn't do the question I was assigned 'What boxer other than Vasyl Lomachenko would become the most successful as a pro, from 2012 Olympics?' - something like that. 

It's a hard one that I'm not sure I can answer although Robeisy Ramirez strikes me.


----------



## Kurushi (Jun 11, 2013)

Chatty said:


> My working hours stepped up dramatically as soon as I started this and I aint had the time I thought I would have to do it. @*Bogotazo* if you want to jump in and help out I reckon we could finish it before the end of the year.


If other mods have the time to pick this up then that's the perfect solution. Everyone was loving this shit.


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

I couldn't be arsed in the end. Sorry.


----------



## artful (May 10, 2013)

Dyna KO 1 Flea Man :ibutt


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

Fuck it. I'll bow out and help run it if anyone wants to step up with me :ibutt !!!


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

Jeez, I just realized I was originally in the thing.

Never knew. :lol:



Well, boxing history REALLY isn't my thing, anyway. (I'll go head-to-head with anybody on questions of style & technique, though.)


A man must know his limitations ......:yep


----------



## Flea Man (Jun 2, 2012)

artful said:


> Dyna KO 1 Flea Man :ibutt


:-(


----------



## Chatty (Jun 6, 2012)

Flea Man said:


> I couldn't be arsed in the end. Sorry.


 I couldn't finish it anyway as I got loads of work on and didn't have time and to which I've never heard the end of since.

I plan to revive it this year with some helpers so the time it consumes is realistic for me to do.


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

Now that it's over, I can honestly say that everyone else's debates sucked compared to Teeto vs. Bogo. 

Sorry guys. No hard feelings, eh?


----------

