by the way did you make that website yourself?Originally Posted by emma
![]()
by the way did you make that website yourself?Originally Posted by emma
![]()
I think that part of the problem is the number of different world champions in each weight class and the lack of any consistently good match ups. Back in the day it didnt seem like the most popular fighters took so many "tune ups". And it seemed like they did fought the other top boxers of the day more often.
I think that it is weird thou, that people will complain about the violence that boxing is, but then they will watch the violent shows that are on the TV and not complain about that violence.
You must be the change you want to see in the world. --Mahatma Gandhi
Part of its just that overall boxing fans place more of an emphasis on being undefeated these days, one bad performance and a guys exposed or done. Fighters use to fight so often that they were gonna rack up some losses, look at Ezzard Charles' record, Hank Armstrong's, guys like that had a bunch of losses and not all of them were at the end of their career. Still all time fighters.
Seems like a lot of people like a guy only if he's a great fighter, then as he starts to fade or maybe is shown to not be as good a fighter as they thought he might of been then sometimes people will jump ship. Being a fan of a boxer is different than being a fan of, for example, a football team. If a football team has a few bad years they can get better by bringing in different players. But once a boxer starts getting older and going downhill he's not likely to turn it around. But fans sometimes jump ship too early before a guy's really done, Lacy's not done unless he's mentally done, I mean Barrera lost twice to Junior Jones and came back from it. And that's just one example. But I try to stick with a guy, I've been a fan of Toney since the Nunn fight and its hard work being a loyal Toney fan.
yes.Originally Posted by The_One77
![]()
Points such as this and also the times? In the early 1900's you had the great depression, in the 60's you had revolts, nam, etc. It was a time of sticking to your guns and supporting what and who you believed in.Originally Posted by sanj16
Today this just isn't the case. Sure we have the terrorism, but boxing and politics are so separate except for the fact that politics of another kind are laced throughout boxing.
There just isn't much going on that makes people latch onto a fighter emotionally. It's all about boxing now. Where as with Ali, sure he is a magnificent boxer... but people loved him for other reasons as well, perhaps more so for other reasons. An example... I have an evolutionary psychology/biology professor, and one of her idols is none other than Muhammad Ali.
The problem now a days is people except everything immediately...
Every big fight must happen tomorrow, and if it does not, it is because so and so is a coward.
Modern (post 70) Boxing has never worked like that. Promotors deliberately let anticipation build, in the hope of making even bigger fights. Sometimes it does fail, because of an untimely defeat or injury, but 7 out of 10 times you end up with a huge superfight.
The last time this was done properly was for Lewis/Tyson, and the fight was massive, IMO, the only superfight of the 21st Century.
Look at the mismatch that happens tommorow morning, boxing is getting desperate, trying to hype a fight, as being absolutely huge, despite one of the participants comming of a defeat, to a, at best fringe contender...
The fight is so 'huge'; it is not even being shown in Britain...
Well they all try to copy Northside when he came here TYPING LIKE THIS and talking of Jermain Taylor. And they try to emulate but Northside is very successful at the fighters and also Pantera who hyped Miranda pretty much the same way. But the main reason we are seeing this is because they are upset that their man is getting less attention then the guy they think their man is better than. which is why people were hating on Jeff Lacy for getting more attention then the other super middleweights. Kessler wasn't on showtime like Lacy was and neither is Calzaghe. They think it's unfair so they lash out at the attention getting fighter in an attempt to get their fighter attention. And usually make statement and do not back it up as well. They just do not know yet. And they overrate their fighter if they beat someone much like they accuse us of doing to our "lacy's" if you will.Originally Posted by wacko3205
Wacko, stop trying to sneak in a Judah vs. mayweather reference to try and get me mad
Errrrrrrrr...back to the point.
What has indeed happened to the undying loyalty & respect for boxers?
People rip apart the ones that are technically gifted & undefeated, they applaud the ones that are human stains, & often they hinge their hopes on fighters that are champions but unproven against high caliber opponents.I will be watching you
![]()
Just bandwagon jumpers, and haters, and "those who like boxers because of the color of their trunks" is what I like to call it. It's what makes us different. I hate Tarver, but I would pick him to beat Calzaghe and I don't hate Calzaghe.What is going on? Talk to me people. I'm just curious.
Actually...I was talking more about Toney & Hatton...Toney being the stain & Hatton yet to be 100% proven...there again though...it's just my opinion...& I know that everyone loves Toney & Hatton.Originally Posted by Starr
Never beg a 40 dollar hooker...specially after she's just turned down your mom's credit card!!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks