I think that a generalisation such as that is grossly unfair! Boxing has had a history of participants who come from uneducated backgrounds and ghettos yes, but that has no reflection on their intelligence or ability to chronicle their own life....
Furthermore, I find that the stereotypical "dumb" boxer is actually a lot more scarce than the articulate, worldly-wise veteran. Jack Dempsey was a saavy businessman after his retirement. Oscar De la Hoya is extremely intelligent. Floyd Mayweather has a sense of business and not just a boxing brain. etc. etc. etc.
If you were to find yourself in the situation that you needed to get to know a person in a certain amount of time and you had the option of reading a writers opinion of them or their personal diary, which would you read

If you attend a histrory lesson, often the first thing taught is the difference between a primary and second source. A primary source is something frrom the time, recorded by someone at the time of an events happeneing. A secondary source is a record compiled later by a writer.
Finally I stress the point...there is a monumental difference between uneducated and unintelligent.
Bookmarks