Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
I'm not one big on conspiracies but if you listened to jim lampley commentate with out any video you'd have to wonder how the hell-is Winky still standing .As strong as J.T is ....if he would have been landing those punches winky would have been stopped (NO QUESTIONS ) So was jim lampley drunk or had an agenda of his own? Its not like he did it once or 6 times ! it was all night!
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
I'm guessing seeing the fight live as close as he is to the ring the excitement probably would get to anyone... THough I now think Wright won after seeing the fight without alchohol in my body I still believe he won by at most 3 rounds and I could see it still being a draw or even going Taylor way in some of the those rounds just because he was hitting so much harder and still alot.
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Lampley is an HBO Yes man, plain and simple. And his commentary is always Bias as hell.
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
i have a feeling HBO felt that a yong undefeated champ = $$$, and they told him to 'sell taylor to the audience' or something like that, subtle, but still a requested bias
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalTheButcher
i have a feeling HBO felt that a yong undefeated champ = $$$, and they told him to 'sell taylor to the audience' or something like that, subtle, but still a requested bias
I really don't get all this $$$ talk. If Taylor lost, an enforced rematch that was in the contract would have been huge so they wouldn't lose any money, probably get more through his loss via a rematch if anything.
Because Taylor held onto his titles it seems like Winky doesn't want to go again, so if anything HBO are losing money......
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalTheButcher
i have a feeling HBO felt that a yong undefeated champ = $$$, and they told him to 'sell taylor to the audience' or something like that, subtle, but still a requested bias
I really don't get all this $$$ talk. If Taylor lost, an enforced rematch that was in the contract would have been huge so they wouldn't lose any money, probably get more through his loss via a rematch if anything.
Because Taylor held onto his titles it seems like Winky doesn't want to go again, so if anything HBO are losing money......
Yes sir you are right a Rematch was a sure thing cause of the rematch clause...I love this point you just made, hopefully all the conspiracy theory people will chilll and realize it would of made a shite load of money if Taylor lost....GUARANTEED 2ND FIGHT WITH MORE SUSPENSE AND DRAMA=$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtrock
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalTheButcher
i have a feeling HBO felt that a yong undefeated champ = $$$, and they told him to 'sell taylor to the audience' or something like that, subtle, but still a requested bias
I really don't get all this $$$ talk. If Taylor lost, an enforced rematch that was in the contract would have been huge so they wouldn't lose any money, probably get more through his loss via a rematch if anything.
Because Taylor held onto his titles it seems like Winky doesn't want to go again, so if anything HBO are losing money......
Yes sir you are right a Rematch was a sure thing cause of the rematch clause...I love this point you just made, hopefully all the conspiracy theory people will chilll and realize it would of made a shite load of money if Taylor lost....GUARANTEED 2ND FIGHT WITH MORE SUSPENSE AND DRAMA=$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Thanks jtrock, feel free to :coolclick: me at will :P, I will return it as soon as Karma lets me...
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtrock
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalTheButcher
i have a feeling HBO felt that a yong undefeated champ = $$$, and they told him to 'sell taylor to the audience' or something like that, subtle, but still a requested bias
I really don't get all this $$$ talk. If Taylor lost, an enforced rematch that was in the contract would have been huge so they wouldn't lose any money, probably get more through his loss via a rematch if anything.
Because Taylor held onto his titles it seems like Winky doesn't want to go again, so if anything HBO are losing money......
Yes sir you are right a Rematch was a sure thing cause of the rematch clause...I love this point you just made, hopefully all the conspiracy theory people will chilll and realize it would of made a shite load of money if Taylor lost....GUARANTEED 2ND FIGHT WITH MORE SUSPENSE AND DRAMA=$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Thaknk you Jtrock, feel free to :coolclick: me at will :P, I will return it as soon as Karma lets me...
I Wrote it down dude.... Karma is a mofo 24
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Jim Lampley is the reason so many people thought Oscar defeated Tito, he was yelling out combinations that Oscar was not even landing, ditto for George Foreman, Larry Merchant was the only honest one. Harold Letterman also scored the fight a draw. For those of you who have the fight on DVD or tape please watch the fight with the volume down and score the fight yourself, you will be very surprised.
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
BLAH BLAH BLAH.......... undisputable fact Jim Lampley was putting major yeast on J.Ts offense!
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatsandy
I'm not one big on conspiracies but if you listened to jim lampley commentate with out any video you'd have to wonder how the hell-is Winky still standing .As strong as J.T is ....if he would have been landing those punches winky would have been stopped (NO QUESTIONS ) So was jim lampley drunk or had an agenda of his own? Its not like he did it once or 6 times ! it was all night!
yeah...it made me want to mute the fight....but instead I would just yell at him like and Idiot...:) I'd say thinks like "are you that big a douchebag" and "how f***ing blind can one guy be" for the rest of the fight.....
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalTheButcher
i have a feeling HBO felt that a yong undefeated champ = $, and they told him to 'sell taylor to the audience' or something like that, subtle, but still a requested bias
I really don't get all this $ talk. If Taylor lost, an enforced rematch that was in the contract would have been huge so they wouldn't lose any money, probably get more through his loss via a rematch if anything.
Because Taylor held onto his titles it seems like Winky doesn't want to go again, so if anything HBO are losing money......
thats a one time thing, and im not saying HBO was the reason for the bad decision, im saying HBO feels that if people believe taylor beat wright it leads to a lucrative relationship between taylor and HBO, also the reason they would go with taylor over wright is because he is younger and will make money for years to come, and he is unbeaten (on paper) which appeals to someone who has never seen him fight
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalTheButcher
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalTheButcher
i have a feeling HBO felt that a yong undefeated champ = $, and they told him to 'sell taylor to the audience' or something like that, subtle, but still a requested bias
I really don't get all this $ talk. If Taylor lost, an enforced rematch that was in the contract would have been huge so they wouldn't lose any money, probably get more through his loss via a rematch if anything.
Because Taylor held onto his titles it seems like Winky doesn't want to go again, so if anything HBO are losing money......
thats a one time thing, and im not saying HBO was the reason for the bad decision, im saying HBO feels that if people believe taylor beat wright it leads to a lucrative relationship between taylor and HBO, also the reason they would go with taylor over wright is because he is younger and will make money for years to come, and he is unbeaten (on paper) which appeals to someone who has never seen him fight
he's catching everybody at the perfect time...not his fault.....he was just born a few years later then the rest of em.....
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
I thought it was just me. I remeber Lampley going crazy every time JT would flurry and I would ask my self is it me or did not one of those punches just land. For the record I do think Wink won the fight although I think he behaved more like a champion defending something that was allready his rather than a challenger that was traying to go out and take something. There for I think a draw was a very just decsision.
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalTheButcher
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalTheButcher
i have a feeling HBO felt that a yong undefeated champ = $, and they told him to 'sell taylor to the audience' or something like that, subtle, but still a requested bias
I really don't get all this $ talk. If Taylor lost, an enforced rematch that was in the contract would have been huge so they wouldn't lose any money, probably get more through his loss via a rematch if anything.
Because Taylor held onto his titles it seems like Winky doesn't want to go again, so if anything HBO are losing money......
thats a one time thing, and im not saying HBO was the reason for the bad decision, im saying HBO feels that if people believe taylor beat wright it leads to a lucrative relationship between taylor and HBO, also the reason they would go with taylor over wright is because he is younger and will make money for years to come, and he is unbeaten (on paper) which appeals to someone who has never seen him fight
Yeah but the point is HBO will PPV all the best fighters so why do they need a favourite who they connive with the judges to give them gift decisions?
If Taylor lost to Winky, and then lost a rematch they would just move onto somebody else and promote them as the new Hagler, Ray Leonard whatever.
The boxing industry is just like the film industry, they rely on hype, glitzy promotions and advertisements to get people to pay to watch, the films being any good has nothing whatsover to do with it.
They don't need an exciting young talent to promote in order to make money, all they need is half an hour and a few reels of boxing footage to put together a 30 minute commercial that they call Countdown To....
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
im not saying they conspire with the judges, im saying its in thier best interest to create the impression that taylor won that fight
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by SalTheButcher
im not saying they conspire with the judges, im saying its in thier best interest to create the impression that taylor won that fight
Ah I get you there. I think your probably right, although even Lampley and Merchant couldnt think of anything good to say about their goldenboy Lacy when he fought Calzaghe.
Lampleys words, 'He's making Lacy look like an amatuer'.
Just be thankful that Bob Arum and Don King arn't part of the HBO commentary team!
Now that would be some biased shit!
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Ah I get you there. I think your probably right, although even Lampley and Merchant couldnt think of anything good to say about their goldenboy Lacy when he fought Calzaghe.
Lampleys words, 'He's making Lacy look like an amatuer'.
That was those ShowTime douche bags doing the speak on that one.
Not much else that they could have said though was there? Heh heh heh.
Oh man damn! Joe kicked his ass!!!
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Ah I get you there. I think your probably right, although even Lampley and Merchant couldnt think of anything good to say about their goldenboy Lacy when he fought Calzaghe.
Lampleys words, 'He's making Lacy look like an amatuer'.
That was those ShowTime douche bags doing the speak on that one.
Not much else that they could have said though was there? Heh heh heh.
Oh man damn! Joe kicked his a**!!!
Damn, my bad. :-[ I'm sure it was Lampley or Merchant who said that though ???
Who said it then?
Your'e definitely right though because I remember the classy Jimmy Lennon Jr was the announcer.
Re: Was Jim Lampley drunk or intentionally misleading viewers
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by wacko3205
Quote:
Originally Posted by bilbo
Ah I get you there. I think your probably right, although even Lampley and Merchant couldnt think of anything good to say about their goldenboy Lacy when he fought Calzaghe.
Lampleys words, 'He's making Lacy look like an amatuer'.
That was those ShowTime douche bags doing the speak on that one.
Not much else that they could have said though was there? Heh heh heh.
Oh man damn! Joe kicked his a**!!!
Damn, my bad. :-[ I'm sure it was Lampley or Merchant who said that though ???
Who said it then?
Your'e definitely right though because I remember the classy Jimmy Lennon Jr was the announcer.
It was Steve Albert that made the amatuer comment...Bernstein chimed in...but not so ignrantly.
I actually like Berstein from time to time...but fwock Steve Albert...he's a total dickhead. Don't even get me started on Jim Gray! I hate that fwock!!!
Karyn Byrant's a bit of a hottie though...I wonder is she like's pickles? You know...the kind that you purchase from a big jar @ the corner sto'?
;D Heh heh heh.
