# What are your least favorite boxing myths?



## poorface (Jun 14, 2013)

Which commonly repeated narratives in boxing do you find most annoying or inaccurate? Which seem most at odds with reality?

Two of the top historical ones for me:
*Taylor was completely dominating Chavez- *Chavez may have been down on the cards but had clearly done quality work and was catching Taylor more and more leading up to the knockdown. I feel like Taylor's lead in the fight gets overstated and overplayed by those who strongly disagree with the stoppage, yet even if you have a problem with Steele's decision, there's no need to completely gloss over what Chavez had been doing leading to the knockdown. This is also one of the reasons I found some of the comparisons between this fight and Martinez-Chavez a bit tortured. Yes they were both cases of (near) late-round KOs, but unlike Sr., Jr. did little to nothing in the rounds leading up the dramatic conclusion.
*
Leonard fought Duran's fight the first time around: *Much debate was had on this at the old board, but I still see Leonard's excuses for the loss accepted without justification more often than not. Stonehands' old piece (reprinted here: http://www.cyberboxingzone.com/cbzforum/showthread.php?9926-The-Fifth-God-Of-War-Roberto-Duran) was right on the money on this one.

For many recent fights, there's often no one dominant narrative, but a couple I've seen repeated too much for my liking in the last few years are:
*Marquez took his foot off the gas in the third Pacquiao fight- *My big problem with this one is that I'm not sure anyone even makes this argument if HBO doesn't pick up Beristain's advice in the corner and Steward throws a fit about it. Marquez's workrate may have dropped a bit in the last two rounds of the fight, but I think it's silly to suggest he simply gave away the last two rounds. In the first place, considering the weight and his performance up to that point, any decline in volume could just as easily be attributed to stamina, rather than a voluntary choice to adapt a poor strategy. Much more importantly in my opinion, one or both of those of rounds could still be scored for him. Pacquiao didn't exactly light the world on fire in either, and while he may have thrown a bit more, he was still getting hit with clean counters up to the final bell. This looked nothing like the end of Oscar-Tito.
*
Margarito was coming on when the Cotto rematch was stopped/Cotto was saved by the doctor- *He may have upped his workrate, but this one always reminds me of the Black Knight from Holy Grail having Arthur right where he wants him. There was no sign the fight was changing significantly in the last round.


----------



## 2377 (Jun 6, 2013)

From novice sports fans: 

"boxing is fixed" 
"is Tyson still fighting?" 
"today's fighters would get destroyed by the guys from the 30's"


----------



## oibighead (May 23, 2013)

Pro fighters (and athletes) care about their legacy over their bank account and family's security after they retire


----------



## poorface (Jun 14, 2013)

Montero said:


> From novice sports fans:
> 
> "boxing is fixed"
> "is Tyson still fighting?"
> "today's fighters would get destroyed by the guys from the 30's"


:lol: Well those are always fun. You could probably list at least 200 ridiculous things casuals have said or continue to say about just Tyson alone.

And in terms of larger debates, I think "Today's fighters are more skilled than those of previous generations" is just as maddening and warrantless as your last one.


----------



## mrtony80 (Jun 8, 2013)

A fighter looking good in training camp translates to how he'll perform on fight night.


----------



## scrappylinks (Jun 2, 2012)

you can't train power

you can't improve punch resistance


----------



## sim_reiss (Jun 6, 2012)

Floyd Mayweather is a pioneer for improved drug testing in boxing

A fighter's links to performance enhancing drugs should be overlooked because (a) I like him and/or (b) he's never failed a drug test

Away fighters get a fair shake in country X

Nonito Donaire is an exciting fighter

Tyson Fury and David Haye are good at trashtalk

The Transnational Boxing Rankings Board are different to any other subjective ranking body (In my opinion if the boxrec rankings were endogenised into matchmaking decisions, they'd be irrefutably better than any other rankings)

A fighter who fights twice a year deserves a soft touch (I'm looking at you Froch-Mack)


----------



## PivotPunch (Aug 1, 2012)

poorface said:


> Margarito was coming on when the Cotto rematch was stopped/Cotto was saved by the doctor- [/B]He may have upped his workrate, but this one always reminds me of the Black Knight from Holy Grail having Arthur right where he wants him. There was no sign the fight was changing significantly in the last round.


This oen is liek the Dawson-Pascal fight. Some where saying Dawson was on his way to stop Pascal and would have won if it wasn't for the cut anyone who says this hasn't seen Pascal's fight with Froch he can dig deep and has a pretty damn good chin


----------



## Vano-irons (Jun 6, 2012)

Completely agree regarding Duran/Leonard 1. Maybe, just maybe, Duran was good enough to draw Leonard into that kind of fight.

'Billy Conn had won every round before Louis stopped him'. No, he never. The fight was incredibly close, with Conn just ahead at the time of the stoppage


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

The whole "Tyson had no heart" and "Tyson would always lose to somebody not intimidated by him" propaganda annoys me to no end. It's complete and total bullshit that still gets spread around in plenty of circles, mostly YouTube boxing experts who are convinced Mike Tyson was average yet continue to place Jack Dempsey and Gene Tunney atop their heavyweight lists.


----------



## poorface (Jun 14, 2013)

PivotPunch said:


> This oen is liek the Dawson-Pascal fight. Some where saying Dawson was on his way to stop Pascal and would have won if it wasn't for the cut anyone who says this hasn't seen Pascal's fight with Froch he can dig deep and has a pretty damn good chin


I will say for that fight that while I don't think Dawson was assuredly going to win or anything like that, I thought the counter left alone in that last round was better than anything Margarito did against Cotto and that Pascal was in a good deal more trouble (though Chad being Chad, he obviously didn't take advantage of the situation).


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Bruce Lee was an outside fighter


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

Vano-irons said:


> Completely agree regarding Duran/Leonard 1. Maybe, just maybe, Duran was good enough to draw Leonard into that kind of fight.
> 
> 'Billy Conn had won every round before Louis stopped him'. No, he never. The fight was incredibly close, with Conn just ahead at the time of the stoppage


The latter point you made can also be applied to Walcott-Marciano I, where some are _still_ under the illusion that The Rock had been dominated from the opening bell until his glorious right hand. Maddening stuff. :lol:


----------



## Divi253 (Jun 4, 2013)

"You have to take the belt from the champion", meaning if it's a close fight the champion should get the benefit of the doubt. 

Boxing is scored by rounds, whoever wins the most rounds wins (unless there is crazy knockdowns or a KO).. There are even rounds in boxing as well, so no giving the champion the round because it was close... I hate when people act like your status should somehow shift the way rounds or fights are scored.


----------



## Vano-irons (Jun 6, 2012)

O59 said:


> The latter point you made can also be applied to Walcott-Marciano I, where some are _still_ under the illusion that The Rock had been dominated from the opening bell until his glorious right hand. Maddening stuff. :lol:


Walcott was beating the piss out of The Rock :yep

He was well ahead, but not as much as some male out.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

"Pernell Whitaker was boring." 

:err


----------



## poorface (Jun 14, 2013)

Divi253 said:


> "You have to take the belt from the champion", meaning if it's a close fight the champion should get the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> Boxing is scored by rounds, whoever wins the most rounds wins (unless there is crazy knockdowns or a KO).. There are even rounds in boxing as well, so no giving the champion the round because it was close... I hate when people act like your status should somehow shift the way rounds or fights are scored.


Ugh that might be the worst..


----------



## Hatesrats (Jun 6, 2013)

"Sergio Martinez was "Green" when Margarito TKO'd him"

Sergio was already 25+ & Margario was only like 22/23 @the time.
(Guess that makes JCC jr. "Green")
^No AM experience.


op


----------



## JeffJoiner (Jun 5, 2013)

Divi253 said:


> "You have to take the belt from the champion", meaning if it's a close fight the champion should get the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> Boxing is scored by rounds, whoever wins the most rounds wins (unless there is crazy knockdowns or a KO).. There are even rounds in boxing as well, so no giving the champion the round because it was close... I hate when people act like your status should somehow shift the way rounds or fights are scored.


:deal Dead on. Once the opening bell rings, the belt is on the line. Score the freaking fight straight up and let the final tally dictate who is the champion afterwards.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

-Margarito cheated against Cotto
-Oscar always faded late and never won a big fight
-Roy Jones only relied on athleticism
-"That punch was lucky" whenever someone is knocked out
-He shook his head no, that meant that he was hurt 
- Tyson was mentally weak


----------



## Mal (Aug 25, 2013)

It seems that any time a fighter comes in under the weight class limit, people assume they are drained. As if 140, 147, 154, 160, etc, are the magical limits in which the body is fine, but a pound or two under, they are drained. You cannot make rules for something like this which varies from fighter to fighter, and even fight to fight for the same fighter.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

Lomachenko.


----------



## Theron (May 17, 2013)

Montero said:


> From novice sports fans:
> 
> "boxing is fixed"
> "is Tyson still fighting?"
> *"today's fighters would get destroyed by the guys from the 30's"*


Freddie Steele vs Golovkin/Martinez/Any middle you can think of who wins...

The list goes on, It's a boxing ''myth'' is total bullshit it's said by guys like you who know mot about fighters of today and obviously havn't bothered to look at the fighters of the past enough.


----------



## bjl12 (Jun 5, 2013)

Montero said:


> From novice sports fans:
> 
> *"boxing is fixed" *
> "is Tyson still fighting?"
> "today's fighters would get destroyed by the guys from the 30's"


Boxing IS fixed. See Bradley/Pac, Lara/Williams, Rios/Abril, etc.


----------



## bjl12 (Jun 5, 2013)

turbotime said:


> -"That punch was lucky" whenever someone is knocked out
> -He shook his head no, that meant that he was hurt


Yep



O59 said:


> Lomachenko.


+ fucking 1


----------



## Joaquín Guzmán (May 8, 2013)

That my boy Jack had loaded gloves.

Absolutely not true.


----------



## PabstBlueRibbon (Jun 6, 2013)

Come-forward fighters have no skill.


----------



## 2377 (Jun 6, 2013)

Theron said:


> Freddie Steele vs Golovkin/Martinez/Any middle you can think of who wins...
> 
> The list goes on, It's a boxing ''myth'' is total bullshit it's said by guys like you who know mot about fighters of today and obviously havn't bothered to look at the fighters of the past enough.


I know my boxing history, I challenge you to a duel of boxing knowledge any time my brother.

All I was saying is that some people feel that every dominant MW from yesteryear would mop the floor with guys form this generation and that's bullshit. To say the exact opposite is bullshit too. The FACT is that today's athlete is bigger, stronger, quicker, more athletic, better schooled, has better nutrition, better reference material (decades of video to watch and learn from) and much better healthcare. That doesn't necessarily equate to today's athlete beating yesterday's athlete in a mythical match up 100% of the time, but it sure as fuck gives them a hell of an advantage.

Would I favor Joe Louis over Wladimir Klitschko? No. Doesn't change the fact that I think Louis is the ATG #1 HW in the history of the sport, nor the opinion that he very well could beat Klitschko on any given night. But if I were a betting man, I'd put my money on Wlad in that fight if they went at it today.


----------



## 2377 (Jun 6, 2013)

bjl12 said:


> Boxing IS fixed. See Bradley/Pac, Lara/Williams, Rios/Abril, etc.


Then why do you watch it if you feel boxing is fixed?

SOME fights have HORRIBLE decisions where either bitter judges are seeking revenge (Pac-Bradley) or the house fighters gets the nod (Abril-Rios). But the overwhelming majority of fights all over the world - most of which are never televised and feature journeymen - are on the up and up.


----------



## Eoghan (Jun 6, 2013)

British fighters have no chin
Irish fighters are all brawlers
Felix Sturm vs Matthew Macklin was a disgrace
Ali was the greatest fighter to walk the planet BAR NONE
Audley Harrison will win a world title- it's his destiny!
GGG (who is one of my favourite fighters) is the man at 160
Calzaghe was a ducker


----------



## DaCrooked (Jun 6, 2013)

turbotime said:


> -Margarito cheated against Cotto
> -Oscar always faded late and never won a big fight
> -Roy Jones only relied on athleticism
> -"That punch was lucky" whenever someone is knocked out
> ...


That one irks the shit out of me too.

Another big myth, is Mayweather ducked Margarito and an 8million dollar payday


----------



## poorface (Jun 14, 2013)

Montero said:


> The FACT is that today's athlete is bigger, stronger, quicker, more athletic, *better schooled*, has better nutrition, *better reference material (decades of video to watch and learn from)* and much better healthcare. That doesn't necessarily equate to today's athlete beating yesterday's athlete in a mythical match up 100% of the time, but it sure as fuck gives them a hell of an advantage.


Completely disagree with the bolded. Indeed, I would say the biggest single advantage most fighters have of yesteryear over those of today is better fundamentals thanks to having trainers more knowledgeable in that aspect of boxing. All the video tape in the world does not compensate for lacking trainers who know the angles or cannot distinguish between fast and skilled feet. There's been a gradual loss of institutional and tacit knowledge thanks in large part to the dying out of multi-generation trainer legacies, and this in large part accounts for the number of athletically gifted but fundamentally flawed fighters we see near the top of the sport today.


----------



## Theron (May 17, 2013)

Montero said:


> I know my boxing history, I challenge you to a duel of boxing knowledge any time my brother.
> 
> All I was saying is that some people feel that every dominant MW from yesteryear would mop the floor with guys form this generation and that's bullshit. To say the exact opposite is bullshit too. *The FACT is that today's athlete is bigger, stronger, quicker, more athletic, better schooled, has better nutrition, better reference material (decades of video to watch and learn from) and much better healthcare. * That doesn't necessarily equate to today's athlete beating yesterday's athlete in a mythical match up 100% of the time, but it sure as fuck gives them a hell of an advantage.
> 
> Would I favor Joe Louis over Wladimir Klitschko? No. Doesn't change the fact that I think Louis is the ATG #1 HW in the history of the sport, nor the opinion that he very well could beat Klitschko on any given night. But if I were a betting man, I'd put my money on Wlad in that fight if they went at it today.


Not exactly only in the heavyweight division are they bigger.

Stronger, quicker, more athletic, better schooled is all up to debate as it is not fact. 
Fact is fighters of the past are rated higher for a reason, because they were better than now


----------



## techks (Jun 4, 2013)

Vargas was "fed to the wolves" by facing Trinidad despite giving Wright a tough fight and clearly beating Quartey and having about several defenses with his 154 belt. Plus it seemed like he was snapping his head back every time with the jab until the low blows came.

Floyd is a "runner" when mobile and "his legs are done" once he stands and fights.

Pacquiao has no skill

Hearns had no chin

Staredowns determining a winner

Odd obsession over men saying a fighter looks "chubbier than usual and has a stomach" despite looking very ripped

People not taking in consideration that sometimes the punch that doesn't land is as or more important than the homerun punch that does.(i.e. Boxer not very durable but slick beating a heavy handed fighter)


----------



## bjl12 (Jun 5, 2013)

Montero said:


> Then why do you watch it if you feel boxing is fixed?
> 
> SOME fights have HORRIBLE decisions where either bitter judges are seeking revenge (Pac-Bradley) or the house fighters gets the nod (Abril-Rios). But the overwhelming majority of fights all over the world - most of which are never televised and feature journeymen - are on the up and up.


As you said, the large majority of fights are legit. The only time fights get sketchy are when Bop Arum is involved. The Lara/Williams fight was atrocious also. Somehow, someway, I think Bop Arum was involved


----------



## NoNeck (Jun 7, 2013)

Odlanier Solis is 45 pounds overweight.


----------



## Bogotazo (May 17, 2013)

The guy coming forward is always the less skilled fighter.


----------



## The Wanderer (Jul 17, 2013)

From the Rumble in the Jungle:*

Ali did nothing but wait for Foreman to get tired*. *Ali and Dundee intentionally loosened the ropes.

*In actuality, Ali hit Foreman with hard shots in most of the rounds, and in every round in 1-5 you can _visibly _see Ali hurting Foreman. You can see Foreman getting his head snapped back multiple times, staggering after Ali combinations, getting hit hard enough to move his entire body, take steps backward or to the side, etc. Yes, part of the reason Foreman was knocked out was because he was tired and mentally defeated, and part of ti was because he'd been systematically softened up by rounds of crisp, sharp punishment.

And if you believe it was part of Ali and Dundee's plan to loosen the ropes and use that in the rope-a-dope, then you must believe that Dundee screaming himself hoarse yelling at Ali to move and get off the ropes, (which is plainly audible in the film of the fight) is either a figment of someone's imagination or an elaborate ruse to convince George otherwise, I guess. Because fighters in the ring pay so much attention to what their opponent's corner is shouting that they do things like completely change their gameplan or refuse to try and hit the other fighter on the ropes.

*Chavez was an unskilled, take 3 to land 1 brawler relying on heart, chin and power*. The only way to believe this one is if you've never actually watched fight footage of the man and just rely on what equally ignorant people say about him.






Seriously, watch Chavez move, box, jab and counter against Lockridge in round 9 and tell me he's a mindless, unskilled brawler.






*Duran was an unskilled, take 3 to land 1 brawler relying on chin and power*. Ditto, even if some of Duran's form can be rough and not exactly textbook at times.

*Foreman did nothing but absorb an asskicking from Moorer until he landed one punch*. Much like Ali in in the Jungle, Foreman was active throughout this fight, and he spent the last round knocking Moorer from one side of the ring to the other.






*Ali only won his first fight against Cooper because he got extra rest between rounds due to the torn glove*. He got a total of maybe 7 extra seconds. According to legend, the ref decided to have new gloves brought up from the back, and everyone waited for however many minutes this particular version claimed passed. In actuality, Dundee showed the ref the torn glove, the ref sent someone to look for new gloves, and started the next round almost on time. Ali promptly finished Cooper in that rounds before any gloves could be changed.






Ali goes down at 7:30, announcer guy immediately says that the bell has sounded, there is no break from the broadcast, next rounds starts at 8:37.


----------



## The Wanderer (Jul 17, 2013)

Oh, forgot one: that Marvin Hagler was a slugger and a brawler. You can always tell which posters have only seen the fights with Hearns, Mugabi and Leonard. He's a small sample of what Hagler was doing when he was at his best:


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

The Wanderer said:


> *Foreman did nothing but absorb an asskicking from Moorer until he landed one punch*. Much like Ali in in the Jungle, Foreman was active throughout this fight, and he spent the last round knocking Moorer from one side of the ring to the other.
> 
> *Ali only won his first fight against Cooper because he got extra rest between rounds due to the torn glove*. He got a total of maybe 7 extra seconds. According to legend, the ref decided to have new gloves brought up from the back, and everyone waited for however many minutes this particular version claimed passed. In actuality, Dundee showed the ref the torn glove, the ref sent someone to look for new gloves, and started the next round almost on time. Ali promptly finished Cooper in that rounds before any gloves could be changed.
> 
> Ali goes down at 7:30, announcer guy immediately says that the bell has sounded, there is no break from the broadcast, next rounds starts at 8:37.


Foreman fight was close to getting stopped though because of the swelling.
Not saying he constantly had his ass kicked but he was in a very tight situation.

7 seconds is still a lot in boxing, maybe not very much if it's on top of the 60 seconds rest.
But if a fighter manages to spoil a fight by 7 second after being dropped heavily it can safe him from being stopped. (See Holyfield collapsing in Ruiz his laps and holding on for more than 10 seconds in round 11 of their second fight.)
Though in the Ali-Cooper fight those seconds were probably less important as he already had a 60 second rest and I've never seen Ali needing more than 60 seconds to recover from a punch


----------



## steviebruno (Jun 5, 2013)

The Wanderer said:


> Oh, forgot one: that Marvin Hagler was a slugger and a brawler. You can always tell which posters have only seen the fights with Hearns, Mugabi and Leonard. He's a small sample of what Hagler was doing when he was at his best:


My mouth just dropped. It's funny how poorly depicted fighters like him and Duran are in video games.


----------



## Amsterdam (Aug 26, 2013)

I don't like any 'myth', because that basically signifies that it's false. Casual fans or fans that don't pay attention to the details of the game often miss a lot of tactical details that contributes to some of these erroneously repeated things. 

Ali-Foreman was a brutal battle where both guys dished out punishment and the tougher guy won. Yet it's represented like Foreman beat on Ali for 7 rounds and fell over from exhaustion and that's absolutely ludicrous. I also agree with Foreman-Moorer, Foreman made wise tactical decisions to set up Moorer and was in that fight mid rounds forward, it was far from a lucky punch and again a case of the stronger guy winning the fight. 

My most recent myth that I dislike is that Vitali Klitschko was owning Lennox Lewis and Lennox was saved by a cut. Fans of the K Bro's have insinuated for years that Vitali was schooling him(although only being up 2 points in a very competitive battle)and act like some accidental cut saved Lennox from a certain stoppage loss. This is very erroneous. 

The reality - 

Vitali landed the volume, Lewis landed the much harder blows, one of which opened a ghastly gash on Vitali's face and Lewis had Vitali very staggered and holding on in the 6th round and has it continued with that cut(which was opened by a legal blow), may have cost him his eye sight in that eye. 4 rounds to 2, very competitive back and forth battle where again, the right person won the fight. 

Klitschko fans also act like that was a prime Lennox of peak abilities and not a guy in lesser condition at the tail end of his career.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

The Wanderer said:


> Oh, forgot one: that Marvin Hagler was a slugger and a brawler. You can always tell which posters have only seen the fights with Hearns, Mugabi and Leonard. He's a small sample of what Hagler was doing when he was at his best:


This a really informing article about Hagler.
http://www.eastsideboxing.com/weblog/news.php?p=2501&more=1
What Hagler could and couldn't do.


----------



## Amsterdam (Aug 26, 2013)

Any opinion that any elite fighter is just a 'brawler' in the case of styles of pressure or punching origin is also an uneducated myth. A good example is Foreman again, as he's made out to be some unskilled, dumb brute who got by only power. A guy who gets by on power are gate keeper type fighters who sometimes get KO wins over hyped prospects or other fringe contenders in fights where they're being handled accordingly. 

A fighter who is destroying elite level, or ATG level competition handily cannot possibly be a useless brute with power. 

Foreman had an elite jab, elite footwork, excellent timing and elite ring cutting skills - all of which helped him deliver blows of immense power to bring him the victory. Even though he's awkward, crude to the eye and not flashy like a proper boxer, there are still good fundamental boxing skills in there that contribute to him being a very difficult opponent for anyone, so to misrepresent him as only an unskilled brute that had a punch is stupid. It's also a myth that he had bad stamina, that fight in Zaire was insane and who knows what would have happened had it been under normal conditions, in other instances he lasted long fights fine. 

Foreman's crude compared to the polished skills of Hagler, so to call Hagler an unskilled brawler, or Chavez for that matter, shows a serious lack of boxing knowledge. These guys are great. 

There was a story back on ESB where a guy who sparred a lot of famous fighters gave his opinions on each - he was sparring Marvis Frazier in preparation for a fight in the 80s and Joe stepped in to demonstrate some techniques he was trying to teach to Marvis and the poster stated that Joe's left hook still hit the mark at will even at that age. He had some similar stories praising the amazing skills of Duran at 'shot' boxing age and other stuff, it was a great read. 

No top level fighter is anything less than extraordinary, but for certain casual enthusiasts, everyone is the toughest person in the house except the guys fighting in the ring.


----------



## Amsterdam (Aug 26, 2013)

"X fighter was shot" at the time of a loss when he looked good otherwise in the fight is a myth that needs to die.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Amsterdam said:


> Vitali landed the volume, Lewis landed the much harder blows, one of which opened a ghastly gash on Vitali's face and Lewis had Vitali very staggered and holding on in the 6th round and has it continued with that cut(which was opened by a legal blow), may have cost him his eye sight in that eye. 4 rounds to 2, very competitive back and forth battle where again, the right person won the fight.
> 
> Klitschko fans also act like that was a prime Lennox of peak abilities and not a guy in lesser condition at the tail end of his career.


How much did Foreman even land clean on Ali?
I doubt it was much.

A "myth" I've seen a few times from Vitards is that the cuts caused by Lewis were lucky cuts.
They're obviously ignoring the facts that Lewis always punched to cut and almost every fighter ended up with a ravaged face after a few Lewis rounds.(Only Vitali became a pizza though)
They're also forgetting that only the left side of Vitali's face was ravaged, the right side was practically intact.








Because his left hand is always so low, his defence against right hand attacks is extremely leaky once he faces a boxer that can actually reach him (Like Lewis)

Razor right hand + holding your left very low is like adding tko to 3+3.

No wonder he's only faced plodders in his comeback.

(Vitali lost because his defence on the left side is bad and Lewis exploited that, Vitali also crosses his legs too much which was also exploited)


----------



## Amsterdam (Aug 26, 2013)

^ Additionally, another growing myth is that the Klitschko's are ATG's and that the longevity proves it. I suppose fans these days ignore the tremendously awful opposition that both have presided over and have not managed to impressively defeat in many cases. 

Lewis landed the telling blows throughout the fight, the evidence is on Vitali's face. Lewis also had him badly hurt in round 6, the HBO commentators were stating 'Lewis can barely stand up' when Vitali was holding on to not be KD'd, very stupid. Lewis was indeed tired and in lesser than good condition, but Vitali was equally tired and very hurt in that sixth round. I wish he'd have hit the canvas instead of grabbing hold of Lewis just once, because it'd have saved us a lot of debate nonsense over the years with Klitschko fanboys.


----------



## The Wanderer (Jul 17, 2013)

dyna said:


> 7 seconds is still a lot in boxing, maybe not very much if it's on top of the 60 seconds rest.
> But if a fighter manages to spoil a fight by 7 second after being dropped heavily it can safe him from being stopped. (See Holyfield collapsing in Ruiz his laps and holding on for more than 10 seconds in round 11 of their second fight.)
> Though in the Ali-Cooper fight those seconds were probably less important as he already had a 60 second rest and I've never seen Ali needing more than 60 seconds to recover from a punch


True enough about how 7 seconds can be a lot of time in the right situation. If it's a situation like, say, Chavez trying to hunt down Taylor in the 12th or Bute looking to be out on his feet at the end of his first bout with Andrade, it's a lifetime. (Corrales-Castillo I and spitting out the mouthpiece is another great example of that.)

The point though is there are people who will swear up, down, and sideways that Ali got _literally_ minutes worth of extra time between rounds. A good story is just more important than facts to these people, and I wonder how many of them would notice that the time between rounds in that fight went long unless they were told.

Thanks for the link to the Hagler article, still reading now but it looks like a good one.


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

The biggest myth in boxing... There was a fighter named Harry Greb! Where is a film of any of his pro fights?


----------



## Theron (May 17, 2013)

Peter said:


> That my boy Jack had loaded gloves.
> 
> Absolutely not true.


This article took away any doubt in my mind about it

http://coxscorner.tripod.com/dempsey_gloves.html


----------



## Oneshot (Jun 6, 2013)

Zab is a loser, he won 6 belts. 

Berto is a bum, 4 fight of the year contenders at 30.

Golovkin is a white boxer, he is Korean and ethnic Russian born in an Asian country Kazakhstan. 

Floyd picks on little guys, I often heard this from casuals on ESPN when Floyd fought 147 pounders.

Manny has an ATG career above 140, it's good but hardly ATG, to many drained and shot fighters.

Devon Alexander is average, if a so called fan thinks Broner is better than Alexander I'm done talking to them.

Rigo is boring, he displays beautiful boxing than gets his guy out of there.

Oscar is overrated, he fought the best and earned what he got.

Boxers are scared of guys, look this is a job for boxers, you notice how Lucas is getting fights now, he brings large purses now.

Broner is protected, he has fought Ponce, Demarco, Paulie and Gavin and he turned 24 last month, Terrence Crawford turns 26 next month and all he has is Prescott and the Mexican prospect.


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

Oneshot said:


> Golovkin is a white boxer, he is Korean and *ethnic Russian *born in an Asian country Kazakhstan.


Arent ethnic russians White? And how can he be Korean and ethnic russian at the same time? And what has this to do with boxing?


----------



## Oneshot (Jun 6, 2013)

Berliner said:


> Arent ethnic russians White? And how can he be Korean and ethnic russian at the same time? And what has this to do with boxing?


His mom is Korean, I don't really want to get into what Russians are considered but no I don't view them as white, every time I say anything against Golovkin they ban me for being racist to whites but I view him as Asian and Slavic.


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

wow so Povetkin isnt White! I always learn something new from racial-doc oneshot. Thanks.


----------



## Oneshot (Jun 6, 2013)

Berliner said:


> wow so Povetkin isnt White! I always learn something new from racial-doc oneshot. Thanks.


God you are a moron, read a history book.


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

Oneshot said:


> God you are a moron, read a history book.


sorry I am not a racial doctor and I really dont care.:lol:


----------



## Oneshot (Jun 6, 2013)

Berliner said:


> sorry I am not a racial doctor and I really dont care.:lol:


The only reason you like Golovkin is cause you think he is white.


----------



## MAG1965 (Jun 4, 2013)

Duran was out of shape in the second Leonard fight and that was the reason for the loss, not seeing at all that Ray fought totally different from the first bell.


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

Oneshot said:


> The only reason you like Golovkin is cause you think he is white.


Please dont start again with this racial shit. You already was banned because of it. Why dont you learn. You didnt get banned because you "said something against Golovkin" (like you Claim) you got banned because you post racial crap every day. And no race dont matters for me in boxing. You are the Person who always says somet´hing about race. Look at your comment. If Golovkin is White or not has nothing to do with boxing and it isnt a "boxing myth". Just stop talking about it.


----------



## Oneshot (Jun 6, 2013)

Berliner said:


> Please dont start again with this racial shit. You already was banned because of it. Why dont you learn. You didnt get banned because you "said something against Golovkin" (like you Claim) you got banned because you post racial crap every day. And no race dont matters for me in boxing. You are the Person who always says somet´hing about race. Look at your comment. If Golovkin is White or not has nothing to do with boxing and it isnt a "boxing myth". Just stop talking about it.


Please the mods are gay for Gaylovein., look how hard you are claiming he is white. You know in your heart if a black fight had his resume everyone wouldn't act like this.


----------



## Thomas!! (Nov 9, 2012)

'Lifting weights makes you bulky and slows you down'


----------



## Hatesrats (Jun 6, 2013)

Myth: "Tommy Hearns had a glass jaw"...
I strongly disagree w/This on many levels.

Someone with such a "shit chin" would not be able to move up in weightclass the way the Hitman did.
He was stopped by Leonard in an grueling battle, KO'd by Arguably the GOAT Middleweight of all-time...
The Barkley fight (First one) is prob the one that people tend to lean on the most as him having a glass jaw.

Its whatever tho... Tommy is the shit.


----------



## Luf (Jun 6, 2012)

Only really happens on websites but stupid cannot arguments.

For example I could say "I'm not arsed that Floyd v canelo is at a catchweight" and some muppet would reply "but it's a different story when Pac beat Cotto whilst your boy was hiding in retirement"

You get the point. Don't see the point in sill fanboy arguments like that.


----------



## McKay (Jun 6, 2012)

That the staredown has any relevance to the fight itself.


----------



## SJS20 (Jun 8, 2012)

sim_reiss said:


> Floyd Mayweather is a pioneer for improved drug testing in boxing
> 
> A fighter's links to performance enhancing drugs should be overlooked because (a) I like him and/or (b) he's never failed a drug test
> 
> ...


Yeah god forbid Froch take an easy fight atsch


----------



## TBooze (Dec 9, 2012)

McKay said:


> That the staredown has any relevance to the fight itself.


That is not always a myth ask the Bomber and Iron Mike...


----------



## sim_reiss (Jun 6, 2012)

SJS20 said:


> Yeah god forbid Froch take an easy fight atsch


That's my point, his level of competition is irrelevant. He's a P4P top-10 who fights twice a year. As a result he should fight a top opponent twice a year rather than wasting his time on a gatekeeper.


----------



## NoNeck (Jun 7, 2013)

Amsterdam said:


> I don't like any 'myth', because that basically signifies that it's false. Casual fans or fans that don't pay attention to the details of the game often miss a lot of tactical details that contributes to some of these erroneously repeated things.
> 
> Ali-Foreman was a brutal battle where both guys dished out punishment and the tougher guy won. Yet it's represented like Foreman beat on Ali for 7 rounds and fell over from exhaustion and that's absolutely ludicrous. I also agree with Foreman-Moorer, Foreman made wise tactical decisions to set up Moorer and was in that fight mid rounds forward, it was far from a lucky punch and again a case of the stronger guy winning the fight.
> 
> ...


The bolded is 100% false. You're talking out of your ass there.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

JUAN-emmanuel 3 was a "close and competitive fight"


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

Montero said:


> Then why do you watch it if you feel boxing is fixed?
> 
> SOME fights have HORRIBLE decisions where either bitter judges are seeking revenge (Pac-Bradley) or the house fighters gets the nod (Abril-Rios). But the overwhelming majority of fights all over the world - most of which are never televised and feature journeymen - are on the up and up.


Good Lord, are you ever naive!


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

My least-favorite myths:

1: "Women weaken legs."

Nonsense. Maybe for about 15 minutes, but no, not really even that.

If anything, having sex causes your overall (average) androgen level to increase, which will help you to train harder.

It also calms you down & improves your reflexes.


Plus, women cause you to spend all of your money, so there's not much left for beer & Doritos. Thus, you become much healthier! :lol:

-------------



2: Buster Douglas only beat Tyson because Mike was ill-prepared that night. 

Pu-leeze ......


----------



## Hatesrats (Jun 6, 2013)

Cableaddict said:


> My least-favorite myths:
> 
> 1: "Women weaken legs."
> 
> ...


OG trainers came up with that myth so the fighters can stay focused on fighting & not all the potential Pussy they could be getting instead.


----------



## Oneshot (Jun 6, 2013)

Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) said:


> JUAN-emmanuel 3 was a "close and competitive fight"


Damn Pactards say that shit, I got Bradley -Manny 9-3 Manny but if I say JMM won the third fight 8-4 I'm a liar against Manny.


----------



## Michael (Jun 8, 2012)

That Duran invented the giraffe by uppercutting a horse.


----------



## O59 (Jul 8, 2012)

sim_reiss said:


> That's my point, his level of competition is irrelevant. He's a P4P top-10 who fights twice a year. As a result he should fight a top opponent twice a year rather than wasting his time on a gatekeeper.


Mate, he had just fought a Murderer's Row of super-middleweights and re-matched the only fighter to ever beat him, excluding Andre Ward, in his very next bout. If anybody in the entire sport was entitled to a soft touch, it was Carl Froch.

Criticizing a guy who has a reputation for taking nothing but interesting and relevant fights against the best opponents possible for fighting a _single_ easy-ish opponent is silly.


----------



## Tage_West (May 16, 2013)

Sportofkings said:


> That Duran invented the giraffe by uppercutting a horse.


blasphemy!!!!:fire:ibutt:fire


----------



## Tage_West (May 16, 2013)

Oneshot said:


> His mom is Korean, I don't really want to get into what Russians are considered but no I don't view them as white, every time I say anything against Golovkin they ban me for being racist to whites but I view him as Asian and Slavic.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Koryo-saram


----------



## sim_reiss (Jun 6, 2012)

O59 said:


> Mate, he had just fought a Murderer's Row of super-middleweights and re-matched the only fighter to ever beat him, excluding Andre Ward, in his very next bout. If anybody in the entire sport was entitled to a soft touch, it was Carl Froch.
> 
> Criticizing a guy who has a reputation for taking nothing but interesting and relevant fights against the best opponents possible for fighting a _single_ easy-ish opponent is silly.


If you fight twice a year, you are not entitled to a soft touch. That's my view and it applies as much to Froch as it does to any other fighter. The sport needs it's most bankable stars in good fights as often as possible. The Mack fight meant Carl wasted 6 months of his career when he could have been adding another scalp to his murderer's row. I'm not silly for expecting a top-10 super-middleweight rather than a top-50 light-heavyweight, you're silly for lapping it up...


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Leonard ducked Pryor-no he fucking well didn't.
Hagler beat Leonard-as clear a 116-112 as you'll ever see.
Lopez ducked Carbajal and Gonzalez-absolute poppycock,Lopez would have easily fought and beat at least one of them.Classic case of boxing politics
A fully focused Naz would have beat Barrera-balderdash and that one is pretty self explanatory


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

sim_reiss said:


> If you fight twice a year, you are not entitled to a soft touch. That's my view and it applies as much to Froch as it does to any other fighter. The sport needs it's most bankable stars in good fights as often as possible. The Mack fight meant Carl wasted 6 months of his career when he could have been adding another scalp to his murderer's row. I'm not silly for expecting a top-10 super-middleweight rather than a top-50 light-heavyweight, you're silly for lapping it up...


How many of these "two a year" guys have had a row of opponents pre-Mack like Froch did?


----------



## sim_reiss (Jun 6, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> How many of these "two a year" guys have had a row of opponents pre-Mack like Froch did?


Mayweather

Andre Ward (Who wants a soft-touch coming off an injury but is still likely to get matched with Edwin Rodriguez)

Sergio Martinez

Pacquiao

Abner Mares

Take away 2012 and Donaire has often fought twice a year against top opposition

Marquez (Likar Ramos was a joke fight, no excuse)

Bradley (Got paid obscene money to fight Casamayor so I kind of give him a pass for that)

Hopkins (Ornelas and Roy Jones came at a time he was struggling for relevance)

I'll make the point for a third time however. Why is who you've fought relevant when there's plenty of time available for rest and recovery between them? Please don't misconstrue my opinion as a dislike of Froch. I love Froch. However, a little part of me dies every time I scroll down his boxrec and see Yusuf fucking Mack...


----------



## cachibatches (Jun 4, 2013)

You can't improve your chin.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

sim_reiss said:


> Mayweather
> 
> Andre Ward (Who wants a soft-touch coming off an injury but is still likely to get matched with Edwin Rodriguez)
> 
> ...


You can argue against some of those guys but the point @O59 was trying to make was that that fight was a money reward for a brutal row of fights,and everyone was accusing Barker and Macklin of being bums when Martinez fought them.
Froch is renowned even by people who don't like him for taking hard fights,and no one was pretending Mack was anything other than a nice payday that had been well earned.


----------



## Tage_West (May 16, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> Leonard ducked Pryor-no he fucking well didn't.
> Hagler beat Leonard-as clear a 116-112 as you'll ever see.
> Lopez ducked Carbajal and Gonzalez-absolute poppycock,Lopez would have easily fought and beat at least one of them.Classic case of boxing politics*
> A fully focused Naz would have beat Barrera-balderdash and that one is pretty self explanatory*


i dont think he would win but it would be more competative, there is that emanuel steward interview about working with naz. it was the worst camp he had ever seen. naseem was ready to have a fight but he just wasn't trained enough. he got tapes of 2 recent berrera tapes with a lot of hard pushing and pulling to get them from hbo. sent them to the hamed camp....didnt watch them, just rewinding the junior jones fight.atsch
little sparring and few days of real excercise. mainly just fasting himself for the weight and just waiting for the day of the fight to arrive. 
it's fucking mental looking back at it.

but berrera had a great defence and a solid jab. and was fundamentally sound and was stupidly considered just an inside fighter. way more versatile. and hamed got suckered in.

also it looked like hamed would be a ko victim he kept gettign dropped and was always open. it just seemed like he must walk into a shot and get followed up on and that would be it. and i think thats what the hamed camp thought berrera would do as well.

DUMB stuff, but i think it could of been a bit different.


----------



## Eoghan (Jun 6, 2013)

Oneshot said:


> His mom is Korean, I don't really want to get into what Russians are considered but no I don't view them as white, every time I say anything against Golovkin they ban me for being racist to whites but I view him as Asian and Slavic.










Looks fairly white to me


----------



## 2377 (Jun 6, 2013)

Oneshot said:


> Golovkin is a white boxer, he is Korean and ethnic Russian born in an Asian country Kazakhstan.


"White" is a relative term brother. If you mean Caucasian, then Russians are indeed part of that pool (Slavic branch) and GGG would thus be part Caucasian, part Asian. If you're referring to "white" as a skin color/tone, then GGG is about as white as it gets. if white to you simply means "blonde hair and pink skin" (IE: the Povetkin look) than pretty much all of southern/eastern Europe, the middle east and Latin America is non-white.

But I see your point, the former Soviet states are way more diverse than people realize; many folks have some Mongol blood in them somewhere down the line. Genghis Kahn sure loved to rape him some blonde women.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Buster Mathis was an unskilled slob

Women "weaken legs". Tell that to SRR and Ali

Floyd Patterson had a glass jaw

Quarry is the best fighter to never win a title. Couldn't be more incorrect.

James Toney landed a lucky, hail-mary punch against Michael Nunn after being dominated for 10 rounds

Teddy Atlas willed Michael Moorer to victory with his speeches


----------



## NoMas (Jun 7, 2012)

'Losing' a stare down means your scared or intimidated...

Fury only fights cruiserweights... Oh wait :lol:


----------



## bald_head_slick (May 23, 2013)

"He needs to punch in combination."

Unless you have been countered? STFU. A "long" punch sequence against a game opponent is usually 2-3 shots. If a guy is consistently getting off 4+ punch combos? The other guy is not on his level. Period.


----------



## Setanta (May 24, 2013)

Hatesrats said:


> "Sergio Martinez was "Green" when Margarito TKO'd him"


Relatively green.

He came late to the sport and had been boxing for just over two years. (Marg had been been boxing professionally for just over six years).

It was Sergio's first fight outside of Argentina.

In addition, all of Margarito's wins prior to his Mosley bout must be viewed with at least some skepticism. He never had another stoppage (or name win) after he was properly instructed in handwrapping.


----------



## Wallet (May 31, 2012)

Divi253 said:


> "You have to take the belt from the champion", meaning if it's a close fight the champion should get the benefit of the doubt.
> 
> Boxing is scored by rounds, whoever wins the most rounds wins (unless there is crazy knockdowns or a KO).. There are even rounds in boxing as well, so no giving the champion the round because it was close... I hate when people act like your status should somehow shift the way rounds or fights are scored.


:deal

The only advantage to being the champion should be keeping your belt in the event of a draw.


----------



## Setanta (May 24, 2013)

Eoghan said:


> Looks fairly white to me


Soon that will change to *black* and *blue.*

:lol:


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

Eoghan said:


> Looks fairly white to me


 NO! Ask racial doctor oneshot! Povetkin isnt White, I heard that he is orange!


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Berliner said:


> NO! Ask racial doctor oneshot! Povetkin isnt White, I heard that he is orange!


Obviously he's black, every man who has ever beaten Wlad was black.
And he'll beat Wlad, so he's black.

Look at Corrie Sanders, never seen the guy but boxrec says african


----------



## Berliner (Jun 6, 2013)

dyna said:


> Obviously he's black, every man who has ever beaten Wlad was black.
> And he'll beat Wlad, so he's black.
> 
> Look at Corrie Sanders, never seen the guy but boxrec says african


:lol:


----------



## Kid Cubano (Jun 5, 2013)

Sparring myths.
Whoever beat the shit out of somebody in sparring.
Only believe on what I see on fight day.


----------



## elterrible (May 20, 2013)

poorface said:


> Margarito was coming on when the Cotto rematch was stopped/Cotto was saved by the doctor- [/B]He may have upped his workrate, but this one always reminds me of the Black Knight from Holy Grail having Arthur right where he wants him. There was no sign the fight was changing significantly in the last round.


This one, while I agree that the the stoppage was legit and that margo wasnt "coming on", I think the fight showed that cotto was lucky he had a margo with a busted ass eye for him to target, that was the plan all along and margo's face couldnt hold up. If margo didnt have a pre existing injury to target, I think he would have won the rematch based on styles and based on the problems he gave cotto and the amount and ease he was able to land on cotto.


----------



## Stiffjab (May 21, 2013)

Khan was dominating Garcia before that "lucky" left hook landed. 

Danny was throwing that counter left hook all night before it finally landed flush. 

Taking a Tyson's body shot was the equivalent of being hit by a small hatchback traveling at 100km per hour. I heard that one on the 90s :lol:


----------



## Theron (May 17, 2013)

PityTheFool said:


> *Leonard ducked Pryor-no he fucking well didn't.*
> Hagler beat Leonard-as clear a 116-112 as you'll ever see.
> Lopez ducked Carbajal and Gonzalez-absolute poppycock,Lopez would have easily fought and beat at least one of them.Classic case of boxing politics
> A fully focused Naz would have beat Barrera-balderdash and that one is pretty self explanatory


Explain?


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Vitali has the highest KO ratio of any hw champ.
Currently it's a little bit lower than Marcianos KO ratio


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Theron said:


> Explain?


Well for a start,Leonard offered Pryor a career high payday,which Pryor refused even though he bitched all through his title reign about being lucky to make a quarter mil in defences.
And Pryor did not have the credentials to be demanding more because he didn't register his first high profile win (Arguello) until three days after Ray announced his first retirement,and when you consider that Pryor was the underdog in that fight,why on earth would he be in a position to be demanding more than the $700k he was offered.
I always thought it was half a mil,but @Hands of Iron blew this out of the water with an old archive article which basically puts an end to this argument.I hope he sees this and links it.
Pryor called out Leonard at a PC for SRL-Hearns,but why on earth would Ray fight a guy who was not even a welter and had no names that would have interested the public on his résumé(35 year old Cervantes was a career light welter) at that point and give him any more than any of the other run of the mill names that he fought between the superfights?
This is all a myth created by "Legendary Nights" and the fact that Pryor did nothing at 147 along with the timelines mean that this is one of the most ridiculous myths in boxing.


----------



## Boxed Ears (Jun 13, 2012)

That John Catucci isn't a great, great picker. I have seen it. That Jazzmin is better than Mazz. That there should be an uh-oh every time Moe can't be found, like it's a bad think. That it's water falling on Moe...it's vodka.


----------



## Brownies (Jun 7, 2013)

O59 said:


> The latter point you made can also be applied to Walcott-Marciano I, where some are _still_ under the illusion that The Rock had been dominated from the opening bell until his glorious right hand. Maddening stuff. :lol:


I think I had it a draw if Walcott was able to finish that round... but I do score fights a bit weirdly.


----------



## Nucking Futs (Jul 12, 2013)

No one in America rated Jeff Lacy, A fighter loses and he is shot


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Nucking Futs said:


> No one in America rated Jeff Lacy, *A fighter loses and he is shot*


I fucking hate this one. Countless examples. You wait to see if Mayweather loses (he won't), he'll be classed as 'shot', when really we know that although he is not raelly prime anymore, I don't believe this to be a valid excuse whatsoever if he does lose.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

'Boxing is dead'

STFU. 
1. Boxing still has Mayweather, Pacquiao, Wlad, Vitali, Marquez, Hopkins who are from the younger part of this era.
2. Amateur boxers. Lomachenko, Rigondeaux, Golovkin, Verdejo are stars, there are many more coming through who are visibly very talented. 
3. Amateur boxing going back to 10-9 rounds. No more pitter-patter highly amateur style bs. We're going to be getting a lot of pro-style kids. The greater
the pool, add to this the competitive pressure, this leads to great fighters entering into pros.Wait till post-Rio 2016 Olympics. Amazing fighters will come through. 
..wait for 20 years, boxing is going to be fucking *crazy*.
4. No headgear in amateurs. The David Price's of the amateurs will be weaned out. 
5. Golden Boy are putting on shit loads of fights all the time, the matches we all want to see. 
6. We're seeing a lot of media coverage from camps all the time, it's always exciting as we follow the build up to each fight and feel connected to the community.
7. Boxing is huge in South America, getting bigger in countries like Kazakhstan, Ukraine, Tajikstan....and also CHINA. China has a high poverty level and boxing is
a way out of poverty. There will be many stars. 
8. So we don't have as many 'greats' right now, but we surely will soon. The greats that we do have right now are incredible.
9. With the exception of the two or three greats for the 80's welterweight division for example or the middleweight division of the Hagler era, who was actually that good? Pete Ranzany?


----------



## Cableaddict (Jun 6, 2013)

The Undefeated Gaul said:


> 'Boxing is dead'
> 
> STFU.
> 1. Boxing still has Mayweather, Pacquiao, Wlad, Vitali, Marquez, Hopkins who are from the younger part of this era......


Boxing also has Deontay Wilder. While not a guaranteed superstar, there is no denying that he's making casuals very interested in the sport again. Having a tall HW that's KTFO everyone he faces (yeah, I know) gets the punters very excited, and that's good for all of us. (until he gets KTFO, if that happens.)

Also, Mayweather is actually fighting a live body.

Also, we now have NBC broadcasting on network TV, and we seemingly have HBO & Showtime competing against each other more so than in the past.

There is also a (very) mild trend for commentators and pundits to publicly talk about corruption, more so than in the past. guys like Teddy Atlas, Lampley, and even Paulie, are getting pretty outspoken about it. While this won't get rid of corruption (not a chance) it probably causes the powers-that-be to keep their manipulations less obvious & public (Chisora-Scott notwithstanding.) So, this is also good for the sport.

Yep, boxing is far from dead.


----------



## The Undefeated Gaul (Jun 4, 2013)

Cableaddict said:


> Boxing also has Deontay Wilder. While not a guaranteed superstar, there is no denying that he's making casuals very interested in the sport again. Having a tall HW that's KTFO everyone he faces (yeah, I know) gets the punters very excited, and that's good for all of us. (until he gets KTFO, if that happens.)
> 
> Also, Mayweather is actually fighting a live body.
> 
> ...


Great points.

Trust me, I'd believe you if you said they believe Deontay is greater than Ali, especially after their top 10 list of Calzaghe being one of the GOAT's.


----------



## Theron (May 17, 2013)

Saying things like if it were today Conn would have beaten Louis etc because of the 12 round limit, i mean if fighters that were being talked about had only 12 rounds they would try to do what they needed to in that time and speed it up instead of waiting because they knew they had extra time. I mean yes it's up for debate if they could have done it in a shorter time but it's not a fact saying they would have lost for sure it being shortened would change their game plan and would change the fight they wouldn't continue to fight a 15 round fight game plan if they only had 12 rounds.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Theron said:


> Explain?


Happy with my explanation Theron?


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Theron said:


> Explain?





PityTheFool said:


> Well for a start,Leonard offered Pryor a career high payday,which Pryor refused even though he bitched all through his title reign about being lucky to make a quarter mil in defences.
> And Pryor did not have the credentials to be demanding more because he didn't register his first high profile win (Arguello) until three days after Ray announced his first retirement,and when you consider that Pryor was the underdog in that fight,why on earth would he be in a position to be demanding more than the $700k he was offered.
> I always thought it was half a mil,but @*Hands of Iron* blew this out of the water with an old archive article which basically puts an end to this argument.I hope he sees this and links it.
> Pryor called out Leonard at a PC for SRL-Hearns,but why on earth would Ray fight a guy who was not even a welter and had no names that would have interested the public on his résumé(35 year old Cervantes was a career light welter) at that point and give him any more than any of the other run of the mill names that he fought between the superfights?
> This is all a myth created by "Legendary Nights" and the fact that Pryor did nothing at 147 along with the timelines mean that this is one of the most ridiculous myths in boxing.


 




It was only EVER about money. Pryor turned down the opportunity to get embarrassed.

Little known: Pryor accepted a second offer for $700,000 (The first WAS 500k P) and signed a contract. He was going to fight Leonard after Roger Stafford, which was scheduled for May 1982. They discovered the detached retina prior to the SRL-Stafford fight, and he ended up fighting Alexis Arguello at 140. A past his prime Arguello, in his fourth weight division who he went through hell to stop and even resorted to cheating. This is the cat you people think was going to do anything other than be KTFO against a peaking, 147 thoroughbred like Ray Leonard? :lol:

Some other favorites:

"Leonard ducked Cuevas" :lol:

Via Four Kings:

_*After Leonard won his first world title by stopping Benitez for the WBC welterweight title in November 1979, there loomed an obvious candidate for a big money fight, and his name was not Roberto Duran. In early 1980, the mexican welterweight Jose "Pepino" Cuevas was boxing's longest reigning champion having won his WBA title in 1976 and defended it on ten occasions.

A showdown between the two 147-pound claimants seemed not only natural but inevitable, and the ground work for the fight was laid by Leonard's first WBC title defense, a fourth round one-punch knockout over England's Davey Boy Green in March of 1980.

A deal for the Leonard-Cuevas fight had actually been reached, with the approval of both sanctioning bodies, but the proposed match-up rapidly began to unravel amid charges of backroom politicking involving some unlikely bedfellows.

Although Leonard was the standard bearer of the World Boxing Council, the organization was headquartered in Mexico, and WBC President Jose Sulaiman implored his countryman to step aside and pave the way for a Duran challenge to Leonard (a cynic might have noted Sulaiman's cozy relationship with Don King at work in these machinations: Leonard-Cuevas would have been a big fight on which King would not have made a single peso).

The World Boxing Association, whose title Cuevas held, was based in Duran's home country, and the military government there turned the thumbscrews on a pair of Panamanian officials, WBA president Rodrigo Sanchez and Elias Cordova, the chairman of the organization's championship committee.

Col. Ruben Paredes, who headed up the National Guard of Panamanian dictator Gen. Omar Torrijos, paid a visit to the WBA offices and strongly intimated that it would be in Sanchez's best interests to pull the plug on Leonard-Cuevas. Paredes represented the muscle of Torrijos. Torrijos principal padrone was Carlos Eleta, Duran's influential backer.*_

"Hearns was drained against Leonard" :lol:

_* Exclusive RING interview with Hearns from Jan 1982.

R: You weighed 145 pounds for the fight, surprisingly light isn't it?

H: People think just because I'm tall and have a big upperbody that I should be heavier and that I have problems making 147 pounds. Let me set the record straight right now. I don't have any problems making 147 pounds. I think I proved that by coming in at 145.

R: Might you have overtrained or de-hydrated from making the weight?

H: I couldn't have been de-hydrated. I told you, I made the weight naturally. I didn't have to starve myself. I ate like I always eat before a fight. As for overtraining, that couldn't have been possible. When a fighter overtrains, he gets tired and is not strong during a bout. I never got tired and felt very strong.*_


----------



## Leftsmash (Oct 22, 2012)

That John Ruiz was not great on the inside.


----------



## dyna (Jun 4, 2013)

Leftsmash said:


> That John Ruiz was not great on the inside.


I like you


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Leftsmash said:


> That John Ruiz was not great on the inside.


don't really see a problem with this


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> Happy with my explanation Theron?


Yeah @Theron , you happy?


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> It was only EVER about money. Pryor turned down the opportunity to get embarrassed.
> 
> Little known: Pryor accepted a second offer for $700,000 (The first WAS 500k P) and signed a contract. He was going to fight Leonard after Roger Stafford, which was scheduled for May 1982. They discovered the detached retina prior to the SRL-Stafford fight, and he ended up fighting Alexis Arguello at 140. A past his prime Arguello, in his fourth weight division who he went through hell to stop and even resorted to cheating. This is the cat you people think was going to do anything other than be KTFO against a peaking, 147 thoroughbred like Ray Leonard? :lol:
> 
> ...


Attaboy!


----------



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

Pretty much anything to do with Earnie Shavers's power.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> Attaboy!


I think it's an absolutely perfect day to start talking boxing again.


----------



## turbotime (May 12, 2013)

I fucking hate that "if the fight was a 15 rounder" excuse too.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> I think it's an absolutely perfect day to start talking boxing again.


As you know,I always miss you when you go off on your anti-boxing phases.
Welcome back.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

It's Ovah said:


> Pretty much anything to do with Earnie Shavers's power.


In what sense mate?


----------



## SouthPaw (May 24, 2013)

Castillo getting "robbed" against Mayweather. Objective scoring has Mayweather winning clear. He won 4 or 3 of the first four and was clearly winning before both point deductions. That's 3(or 4) rounds + a 10-8 round and a 9-9 round. You'd have to give Castillo every other round to have him winning, and even then it'd be close.

Also another myth is that Mayweather dominated the 2nd Castillo fight. That fight was way closer than the first with Floyd flat out running at times(and I'm a huge fan). I gave Mayweather that last round to nick the fight, and had Castillo gotten credit for that BS KD in the 12th, he'd deserve the decision.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

PityTheFool said:


> As you know,I always miss you when you go off on your anti-boxing phases.
> Welcome back.


Yeah man, I truly don't ever mean to act like a cunt and ignore things. Sometimes it just ain't there.


----------



## PityTheFool (Jun 4, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Yeah man, I truly don't ever mean to act like a cunt and ignore things. Sometimes it just ain't there.


I get that.
Sometimes debating on here can use an awful lot of energy that can be used elsewhere.


----------



## Hands of Iron (Jun 27, 2012)

Damn, EXACTLY. That's precisely what it is.


----------



## Golovkingreatestever (Aug 30, 2013)

I'm starting to see people claim weight class doesn't mean anything, not sure if they are ignorant or biased but when I see boxers who always fight smaller guys and their fans act like it's not an advantage it's troubling.


----------



## Kid Cubano (Jun 5, 2013)

SouthPaw said:


> Castillo getting "robbed" against Mayweather. Objective scoring has Mayweather winning clear. He won 4 or 3 of the first four and was clearly winning before both point deductions. That's 3(or 4) rounds + a 10-8 round and a 9-9 round. You'd have to give Castillo every other round to have him winning, and even then it'd be close.
> 
> Also another myth is that Mayweather dominated the 2nd Castillo fight. That fight was way closer than the first with Floyd flat out running at times(and I'm a huge fan). I gave Mayweather that last round to nick the fight, and had Castillo gotten credit for that BS KD in the 12th, he'd deserve the decision.


Totally disagree, the first fight could've gone either way. But the second fight Castillo didn't do shit.


----------



## Sexy Sergio ( L E O N ) (May 19, 2013)

Kid Cubano said:


> Totally disagree, the first fight could've gone either way. But the second fight Castillo didn't do shit.


yep in the rematch Josue won 3-4 rounds

In the first fight he won 5


----------



## Abraham (May 9, 2013)

That ONE fight proves a fighter doesn't suffer from a weakness he is known for, e.g., Khan survived Maidana, so must have a chin after all...Judah made it through Garcia, so must not be as mentally weak as previously thought.


----------



## Golovkingreatestever (Aug 30, 2013)

Abraham said:


> That ONE fight proves a fighter doesn't suffer from a weakness he is known for, e.g., Khan survived Maidana, so must have a chin after all...Judah made it through Garcia, so must not be as mentally weak as previously thought.


Judah isn't mentally weak that's a casual myth, he took brutal beatings in Cotto and Danny and he walked into Spink's house and took his belts back.


----------



## Leftsmash (Oct 22, 2012)

tommygun711 said:


> don't really see a problem with this


Anyone that steps into the inside is in Ruiz's world.



dyna said:


> I like you


Dyna knows what's up.:yep


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Leftsmash said:


> Anyone that steps into the inside is in Ruiz's world.


if you mean the clinching BS, then ok, but that's not an inside game


----------



## Leftsmash (Oct 22, 2012)

tommygun711 said:


> if you mean the clinching BS, then ok, but that's not an inside game


You obviously didn't see the display of infighting against Valuev, he managed to get under Valuev's thundering shots at range and still rough him up on the inside, not many people can attest to that, and don't even think about mentioning Holyfield slapping shots against SNV.


----------



## Blanco (Aug 29, 2012)

That Cotto vs Malignaggi was a close fight, Paulie only won three rounds at best.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Leftsmash said:


> You obviously didn't see the display of infighting against Valuev, he managed to get under Valuev's thundering shots at range and still rough him up on the inside, not many people can attest to that, and don't even think about mentioning Holyfield slapping shots against SNV.


You're right, I didn't watch Valuev-Ruiz based on the fact that it was a *SHIT* fight. Any fight where a man outhugs Ruiz himself is an absolute shit fight. Also, 'thundering shots'? really? Valuev isn't a hard puncher at all for his size and would get handled by any quality contender at HW.

Holyfield beat Valuev clearly.


----------



## Leftsmash (Oct 22, 2012)

tommygun711 said:


> You're right, *I didn't watch Valuev-Ruiz *based on the fact that it was a *SHIT* fight. Any fight where a man outhugs Ruiz himself is an absolute shit fight. Also, 'thundering shots'? really? Valuev isn't a hard puncher at all for his size and would get handled by any quality contender at HW.
> 
> Holyfield beat Valuev clearly.


Stopped reading right there.


----------



## tommygun711 (Jun 4, 2013)

Leftsmash said:


> Stopped reading right there.


i don't really care tbh. I've heard from plenty of people the fight is shit. i learned after 2 rounds the fight was probably going to be shit. you can't tell me it's a great fight or anything like that.


----------



## hazza (Sep 2, 2013)

my list of hated boxing myths/ sayings:

1. mike tyson never beat anyone who wasn't scared of him
2. look how ripped fighter a is, he'll beat fighter b
3. he was doing well until he got knocked out
4. ali was losing against foreman and was going to cave in
5. taylor would have won if it hadn't been stopped
6. today's fighters have better training/ nutrition, therefore they'd win
7. zab should have been allowed to continue against tszyu
8. punchers aren't born
9. you need to take the title from the champion
10. can't score rounds even


----------



## Theron (May 17, 2013)

Hands of Iron said:


> Yeah @Theron , you happy?


I wasn't arguing it just asking why he didn't duck Pryor and am happy yes.


----------



## Theron (May 17, 2013)

That punchers can be made too. You either have the power or you don't you can improve the amount your hurt a guy by catching him coming in etc but you can't become a George Foreman or Julian Jackson by changing your technique.


----------



## pipe wrenched (Jun 4, 2013)

Blanco said:


> That Cotto vs Malignaggi was a close fight, Paulie only won three rounds at best.


:think....I don't believe I'd ever heard that one said. Cotto FUGGED Paulie up in there, had his jaw annihilated up in that joint something fierce. Almost as bad as Abraham vs Miranda :yep


----------



## r1p00pk (Jun 13, 2013)

Hatesrats said:


> "Sergio Martinez was "Green" when Margarito TKO'd him"
> 
> Sergio was already 25+ & Margario was only like 22/23 @the time.
> (Guess that makes JCC jr. "Green")
> ...


isnt there some study that shows you need to have at least 10 years of experience of a sport to really be good at it. By then Martinez had only boxed for 5 years. Physical prime sure but he was green in terms of experience.


----------



## Libertarian (Jun 2, 2012)

Taylor won 11.5 rounds against Froch.

Hate that one. Listening to some you'd think that Froch got hammered until he landed a lucky shot in the last ten seconds and scored the stoppage.

Yes, he was dropped, and yes he was losing, but still.....


----------

