Boxing Forums



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  2
Likes Likes:  82
Dislikes Dislikes:  2
Results 1 to 15 of 265

Thread: Conspiracy theories

Share/Bookmark

Threaded View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2020
    Location
    Uttar Pradesh, India
    Posts
    5,763
    Mentioned
    60 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    341
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: Conspiracy theories

    Quote Originally Posted by TitoFan View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Spicoli View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by TIC View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Spicoli View Post
    Random but never really put that together. I mean even the greatest of career middles had a pound or two over they fought at once or twice. Can't really think of calling them anything other than great career middleweights tbf .
    nothing to do with the question. is it a fact ggg fought his entire career at 160?
    Bud honestly, it's a big example of splitting hairs to me. Just my unasked for two cents, I get it. And I'm not peeling back thru all the discussion you gents had there . I just didn't realize that was reason behind the sig until mentioned.

    As a boxing fan for as long as I've been just like all of us, all I can tell you is if a question is poised talking overall career/division pertaining to any division or fighter...160 i.e middleweight division it's with the knowledge of a guy's full work. When you talk "entire career 160" you seem to be counting down to grams, 1,2,3 lbs in a random tune up to find the very narrow exception. Literally the #. When I talk "entire career 160" it's considering a fighter's literal overall record and middle division/weight worn and fought at. I don't think a one-off technicality equals to a fighter's literal full career. Cleraly one outweighs the other. Was he 163 for hapless Rolls, yeh. But do I consider Golovkin a "career middleweight" (until Canelo III) yes. And honestly would it have mattered at that point, doubt it.


    I still think he would've been happy had I added the word "practically" in there.

    Still... my point stands (regardless of the hairs being split).

    Ginger dragged a 40-year old career middleweight up to super middle, in yet another pathetic show of cherry-picking at its best.

    No amount of "gram or ounce counting" is going to dispel that fact.

    The fact that this even merits a discussion just shows how desperate "Ginger-defending" can get.

    Cheers.
    It's a good point. The word ~practically~ would have probably hit the spot. The same thing is happening over on the Tyson Fury thread with Primo. He seems fixated on deliberately misusing words or, even more oddly, invents new definitions for words. A mere knockdown becomes a "pole axe"; or winning a close victory becomes being "beaten". Perhaps worst of all, getting 50 stitches is a sign of "not being an all time great boxer".

    It's even beyond splitting hairs.

    It's, frankly, cognitive dissonance.
    Last edited by NoSavingByTheBell; 04-10-2024 at 04:01 AM.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Predictive theories of boxing matches
    By SugarBoxing in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-08-2015, 05:12 AM
  2. Replies: 51
    Last Post: 01-30-2008, 04:40 PM
  3. Random Observations, comments and Theories.
    By donnydarkoIRL in forum Off Topic
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-14-2007, 04:55 PM

Bookmarks

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Boxing | Boxing Photos | Boxing News | Boxing Forum | Boxing Rankings

Copyright © 2000 - 2025 Saddo Boxing - Boxing