Boxing Off-Topic

[JayBee74]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

Long-form article on ESPN (caveat emptor), if you're bored at work....

http://espn.go.com/espn/feature/stor...-boxing-demise

I like Richard Steele's very simplistic thinking:

"Muhammad Ali was always my greatest fighter, OK?" "But Muhammad Ali lost five times. If Floyd wins this fight, he's the all-time greatest because he's never lost."

Marciano? Calzage?

What about the late Edwin Valero who had a 27-0 record with 27 knockouts, 19 of which came in the 1st round? He was a two division champ and at the time of his tragic death the reigning WBC lightweight champion.

[pietasterp]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

I like Richard Steele's very simplistic thinking:

"Muhammad Ali was always my greatest fighter, OK?" "But Muhammad Ali lost five times. If Floyd wins this fight, he's the all-time greatest because he's never lost."

Marciano? Calzage?

What about the late Edwin Valero who had a 27-0 record with 27 knockouts, 19 of which came in the 1st round? He was a two division champ and at the time of his tragic death the reigning WBC lightweight champion.

Yeah, the glaring idiocy of that statement is not lost on too many boxing fans, I would imagine. But it fits right in with the ESPN way of thinking (i.e. whatever is happening now is the most important thing that ever happened).

I think the article as a whole is sort of lazy and rife with opinion passed off as fact, but again, it's ESPN, so it's not like it's going to be Pulitzer-quality writing. Also, the author seems like the kind of person that either never has or never will (out of willful neglect) read Mark Kram's eye-opening account of his years spent covering Ali "Ghosts of Manila" (if you're interested, it's at http://www.amazon.com/Ghosts-Manila-.../dp/0060954809).

But I agree with the underlying point, which I've made on numerous occasions, that boxing is essentially a product of desperation. That's why it seems like all the great ones come from nothing, and not coincidental that the largest volume of quality fighters come from the most impoverished places.

[redsrule]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

Floyd's resume is a lot stronger than Calzaghe's and Marciano's imo. I think SRR is better all time, same with Ali, but if Floyd fought bums every 2 weeks in his prime he'd have 100 wins + as well.

[pietasterp]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

Floyd's resume is a lot stronger than Calzaghe's and Marciano's imo. I think SRR is better all time, same with Ali, but if Floyd fought bums every 2 weeks in his prime he'd have 100 wins + as well.

I'm not sure what anyone would consider Floyd's best win is, though, and how that compares to the overall resumes of any number of dozens of other fighters. Floyd has basically never beaten another Hall of Fame-worthy fighter when that fighter was in his prime. He got a decision against a clearly-over-the-hill Oscar de la Hoya (and by the way, I'm not so sure he won that fight, having watched it once again last week...), probably lost to Jose Luis Castillo at least once, beat a "pre-career-rejuvination @ 160" Miguel Cotto, and the rest of his "name" wins - Zab Judah, Canelo, Gatti, - in retrospect are solid, but not spectacular wins.

Reasonable people can disagree of course, and certainly Floyd is in that debate, but when you compare his resume to guys that fought the likes of George Foreman, Smokin' Joe Frazier, Ken Norton, Duran, Hagler, Hearns, etc., to me Floyd's wins aren't in the same class. Even if he beats Pacquiao on Saturday (which I think he will), that changes nothing since Pac's at least 5-years past his prime and has since been "beaten" twice, once in spectacular KO fashion.

For me, anyway, the undefeated record in a sport like boxing is meaningless because fighters can pick and choose who they fight. I'm pretty sure I could be undefeated if I only ever fought 6-month old infants...

[JayBee74]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

Floyd's resume is a lot stronger than Calzaghe's and Marciano's imo. I think SRR is better all time, same with Ali, but if Floyd fought bums every 2 weeks in his prime he'd have 100 wins + as well.

My real point is that Richard Steele is submitting a criteria (undefeated) that actually applys to a few fighters, but in his mind applys only to Floyd.

[SPRINGS03]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

Canelo vs kirkland coming up, that could be an entertaining fight, but i think no matter what version of kirkland we get, canelo will dominate him. He's not the slow brawler some people think he is, the kid is kinda crafty. Definitely a boxer puncher. Kirkland looks like he's in shape for the fight from what i've seen, so that's good.

[JayBee74]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

Canelo vs kirkland coming up, that could be an entertaining fight, but i think no matter what version of kirkland we get, canelo will dominate him. He's not the slow brawler some people think he is, the kid is kinda crafty. Definitely a boxer puncher. Kirkland looks like he's in shape for the fight from what i've seen, so that's good.

Yeah, Kirkland can bang, but he's at least a medium level head case, and I question how sharp he'll be given his level of activity. We'll see what his new trainer can do.

[N51_rob]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

I think this will be a "dangerous" fight for Canelo for about 3-5 rounds. Kirkland will legit test his chin. If he can box and move in think he will be okay and possibly put James away late. Either way there will be action in this fight.

This fight has a Prescott/Khan type feel to it. If Kirkland wins in spectacular fashion the rematch will be a PPV.

[pietasterp]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

Should be an interesting fight for sure. If Kirkland could stay out of legal trouble, he coulda been a contender. But either way, he's dangerous and clearly one of the better fighters Canelo has ever faced. I'd be interested to see if Canelo has the decided size advantage he normally enjoys against almost everyone he fights (always seemed similar to Chavez Jr to me in that regard, albeit w/ more skill and commitment). Anyway, I'm glad it's Kirkland he's fighting and not someone like Lara. Fireworks would be welcome for sure after this past weekend...

[steelcityjames]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

should be an entertaining bout. i think Kirkland's lack of defense will be his downfall. i think it will be an action packed fight before Canelo stops him around the 7th round. Kirkland does have a puncher's chance though...i'm looking forward to it!

[JayBee74]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

Kirkland's big power has him at a not too outrageous 7-2 underdog.

<p><img src="https://heavyeditorial.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/canelokirklandhoupc_hoganphotos-5-e1430747374761.jpg?quality=65&strip=all&w=780&h=51 2" alt="" width="300" height="197" /></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>

[pietasterp]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

Kirkland's big power has him at a not too outrageous 7-2 underdog.

<p><img src="https://heavyeditorial.files.wordpress.com/2015/05/canelokirklandhoupc_hoganphotos-5-e1430747374761.jpg?quality=65&strip=all&w=780&h=51 2" alt="" width="300" height="197" /></p>
<p></p>
<p></p>

I actually think I'd be in for a hundo at 7-2, were I in Nevada...that's right in the value sweet spot.

[JayBee74]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

I actually think I'd be in for a hundo at 7-2, were I in Nevada...that's right in the value sweet spot.

Yeah, why not?^^^^^

CBS has a Premier Boxing Champions card starting at 3CT/4ET Saturday, featuring Omar Figueroa vs Ricky Burns, and Austin Trout vs a yet to be named opponent. Anthony Mundine had to pull out because of a perforated ear drum.

[Review]

Boxing Off-Topic

I like Richard Steele's very simplistic thinking:



"Muhammad Ali was always my greatest fighter, OK?" "But Muhammad Ali lost five times. If Floyd wins this fight, he's the all-time greatest because he's never lost."



Marciano? Calzage?



What about the late Edwin Valero who had a 27-0 record with 27 knockouts, 19 of which came in the 1st round? He was a two division champ and at the time of his tragic death the reigning WBC lightweight champion.

Greatest of all time depends on the criteria you use. Stats are very important, otherwise why keep track of who wins? Also, who you fight and when you fight them is important, but also tricky business due to politics. At boxing fight parties I've said many times that you can't put SRR number 1 at WW unless you've seen him. My dad saw him in his prime but he's in his early 80's. There's like zero footage of him at WW, only clips here and there that show his best. That is no way to rate or judge a fighters ability. People should judge with their own eyes and make up their own opinion. Richard Steele has been a ref for a long time. He's seen A LOT of great ones up close. If he thinks Mayweather is greatest so be it. Watching someone fight live in person and on T.V. is completely different. I remember going to see Jones Jr. live when he was in prime and he looked better than he did on T.V.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[fistofrage]

Re: Boxing Off-Topic

I actually think I'd be in for a hundo at 7-2, were I in Nevada...that's right in the value sweet spot.

Yep, that's perfect amount of risk/reward. You could lay $100 down and even if you lose you got better value out of that $100 than the May/Pac fight.