Fake tan illegal? How come? I mean, it fornicating should be illegal because then we could lock up that 'Cheap as chips!' pudendum, but it's just UV rays or that spray stuff applied to the skin, really. Unless you're talking about the fact that continued use seems to turn the skin to the consistency of an old leather couch, absorbing some of the impact of punches...stujones wrote:That was one debate going around in my house on Friday. My sister was convinced that was a fake tan, surely that is illegal though.
Minter vs Symmonds bill.
-
mickeybeard
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 488
- Joined: 31 Jan 2004, 09:05
- Symonds-Minter was wildly excited, as anticipated, and fair play to Minter. He proved me wrong. He boxed well, kept cool,calm & confident and made Chas pay for his wreckless mistakes. If Chas can re-group, learn some lessons I'd love to see a return.
Chas' days of thrilling the crowd are far from over, and Minter showed me he can go further.
- I'm almost converted to being a fully fledged supporter of Kevin Mitchell. He attitude has changed completely, his sportmanship improved no end, and he's just a complete joy to watch. Despite taking a couple of right handers flush his defence and ability to slip shots was superb and had me enthralled. With talk of another 8 rounder followed by a Southern Area title fight coming up soon after it's a complete change of direction to where I thought Mitchell was heading.
- Gary Woolcombe finally got some mainstream exposure and I think that's what made him force the pace so much. He's more often a nice stylist picking his punches with precision.
He may not be a huge puncher, but for those who've followed his career will note that only his debut opponent came to fight and despite getting decked, got up and duly paid him back double by banging him out in the second round. I would say Scriven has been one of the few who have tried to make a fight of it since, and lo and behold Gary registers another stoppage.
How far he go I wouldn't like to say but he's one to watch.
As for someone's comment about him buggering-off as soon as he gets tumbled, I don't agree. He's been boxing since he was 11 or 12 and lost 13 of his first 15 amateur bouts!!! Woolcombe is not a quitter. Even when he got whacked by Lenny Daws in the London ABA's he came straight back the next year eager for more.
-Paul Buckley was an exciting amateur boxing out of the Eltham ABC and featured in one of the best amateur bouts I ever witnessed on one of his clubs shows. Hopefully he can transfer some of that form to the pro's.
Chas' days of thrilling the crowd are far from over, and Minter showed me he can go further.
- I'm almost converted to being a fully fledged supporter of Kevin Mitchell. He attitude has changed completely, his sportmanship improved no end, and he's just a complete joy to watch. Despite taking a couple of right handers flush his defence and ability to slip shots was superb and had me enthralled. With talk of another 8 rounder followed by a Southern Area title fight coming up soon after it's a complete change of direction to where I thought Mitchell was heading.
- Gary Woolcombe finally got some mainstream exposure and I think that's what made him force the pace so much. He's more often a nice stylist picking his punches with precision.
He may not be a huge puncher, but for those who've followed his career will note that only his debut opponent came to fight and despite getting decked, got up and duly paid him back double by banging him out in the second round. I would say Scriven has been one of the few who have tried to make a fight of it since, and lo and behold Gary registers another stoppage.
How far he go I wouldn't like to say but he's one to watch.
As for someone's comment about him buggering-off as soon as he gets tumbled, I don't agree. He's been boxing since he was 11 or 12 and lost 13 of his first 15 amateur bouts!!! Woolcombe is not a quitter. Even when he got whacked by Lenny Daws in the London ABA's he came straight back the next year eager for more.
-Paul Buckley was an exciting amateur boxing out of the Eltham ABC and featured in one of the best amateur bouts I ever witnessed on one of his clubs shows. Hopefully he can transfer some of that form to the pro's.
Last edited by THEBUTCH on 04 May 2005, 09:33, edited 3 times in total.
nice post butch and agree with all of that, ive been one of the few mitchell sympathisers on here and looking at the state of his hands after the fight you can see why he coasted a little towards the end they must have been murdering him.
He always says "allo" ringside and actually comes accross quite the opposite of how he is perceived or he protrays himself.
ill keep rooting for him.
He always says "allo" ringside and actually comes accross quite the opposite of how he is perceived or he protrays himself.
ill keep rooting for him.
-
kevin
- Heavyweight
Totally agree with you J, he is completely different out of the ring, always happy to talk to you.
Yes his hand looked well swollen again, no wonder he couldn't end it although it did look like he would after two or three rounds.
Look at his record in the amateurs six junior titles and a Senior ABA champ at 18, of course he's got talent. And they reckon his kid brother is even better!!!
Kev
Yes his hand looked well swollen again, no wonder he couldn't end it although it did look like he would after two or three rounds.
Look at his record in the amateurs six junior titles and a Senior ABA champ at 18, of course he's got talent. And they reckon his kid brother is even better!!!
Kev
I don't know anything about fake tan, never used it but I have two questions concerning its legality.mickeybeard wrote:Fake tan illegal? How come? I mean, it fornicating should be illegal because then we could lock up that 'Cheap as chips!' pudendum, but it's just UV rays or that spray stuff applied to the skin, really. Unless you're talking about the fact that continued use seems to turn the skin to the consistency of an old leather couch, absorbing some of the impact of punches...stujones wrote:That was one debate going around in my house on Friday. My sister was convinced that was a fake tan, surely that is illegal though.
1) If put on thick enough can it not work as an extra layer and therefore harder for a fighter to get a cut. I'm not talking about repeated use I am mean put it as thick as Gavin Henson or Hulk Hogan does.
2) Isn't it possible that it can smear into either your eyes or the eyes of the opponent - wouldn't that hurt like mad? I don't know anything about the stuff but no the boxing boards are strict on other aspects similar (like stuff to use to stop a cut).
-
Manos de Oro
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 1630
- Joined: 21 Sep 2004, 12:10
Hmm, I've noticed how it's mostly, in fact nearly always, people from London who are supporting Mitchell. That's understandable given how some of you have met him and say he's alright. I'm open to that; I never make up my mind over a fighter going only from their demeanor on TV - it can get people over-excited and bring out the worst in them. I think this is what is happening with Mitchell, assuming you are all correct and he is alright outside the ropes, but it still leaves a big problem for his handlers because the majority of people outside his hometown seem to view him as a complete arsehole.
There's nothing potentially wrong with that, of course. The most successful (financially) boxers from these shores in recent years have all played off that image - the type of person you buy a ticket or tune in to watch so you can see them get their come uppance. The problem I see with Mitchell is that he may actually get that come uppance. Does he have the power of Naz or the heart of Eubank to pull out a win when it's going against him?
Heart (and chin for that matter) is obviously untested with him, power... not too sure. He's definitely not the second coming of The Dark Destroyer - if you compare their early fights and then say so it just makes you look stupid. Allegedly must have been targeting Generation Naz with that remark because people who have seen Benn's early reign can see right through it.
What about boxing ability then? Well, he showed a frightening level of boxing immaturity in his very early fights. If you look at my posts on those fights and since then, you can see I've actually been getting more and more impressed with how he handles himself. Still, the first time he fought someone with a modicum of fire he could only salvage a draw on most people's cards (forget the horrific refereeing), and his tendence to make snide fouls - hitting after the break or when his opponent is down - is a sign of arrogance, knowing he can get away with it because he's the house fighter and the guy has just been brought in to lose.
Mitchell does have good qualities in that he has shown a good sense of distance and good counter-punching, but that aside he is essentially an overhyped SN Local Hero who's a dead cert for a WBU title and completely meaningless (in sporting terms) career. He should make a good few pennies out it, though.
There's nothing potentially wrong with that, of course. The most successful (financially) boxers from these shores in recent years have all played off that image - the type of person you buy a ticket or tune in to watch so you can see them get their come uppance. The problem I see with Mitchell is that he may actually get that come uppance. Does he have the power of Naz or the heart of Eubank to pull out a win when it's going against him?
Heart (and chin for that matter) is obviously untested with him, power... not too sure. He's definitely not the second coming of The Dark Destroyer - if you compare their early fights and then say so it just makes you look stupid. Allegedly must have been targeting Generation Naz with that remark because people who have seen Benn's early reign can see right through it.
What about boxing ability then? Well, he showed a frightening level of boxing immaturity in his very early fights. If you look at my posts on those fights and since then, you can see I've actually been getting more and more impressed with how he handles himself. Still, the first time he fought someone with a modicum of fire he could only salvage a draw on most people's cards (forget the horrific refereeing), and his tendence to make snide fouls - hitting after the break or when his opponent is down - is a sign of arrogance, knowing he can get away with it because he's the house fighter and the guy has just been brought in to lose.
Mitchell does have good qualities in that he has shown a good sense of distance and good counter-punching, but that aside he is essentially an overhyped SN Local Hero who's a dead cert for a WBU title and completely meaningless (in sporting terms) career. He should make a good few pennies out it, though.
tonyevs wrote:
"Kevin Mitchell looks like he will go far, he looks very clever indeed, shame he doesn`t sound it when he talks, I think next time Sky should provide subtitles"
Subtitles .. he doesn't sound stupid when he talks. He earns his living as a boxer not an investment banker. Leave the kid alone. Maybe you should talk to him before he has done the rounds Tony.[/list][/code]
2 points re: Gary Woolcombe.
i) The tan. I'm pretty sure it's come from sitting under sunbeds for hours. He's not normally orange!
ii) To suggest he's chinny is ludicrous in my opinion. This is boxing. You get hit on the button and anyone could "go". Yes, he'll come up against much harder punches than Scriven, but I prefer to observe how when wobbled he held tight for a second or two, then immediately got his act together. I think the "word" chinny needs clarifying because we all have our own interpretation of it. To me "chinny" is someone who pretty much gets decked or wobbled all the time and losses as result.
i) The tan. I'm pretty sure it's come from sitting under sunbeds for hours. He's not normally orange!
ii) To suggest he's chinny is ludicrous in my opinion. This is boxing. You get hit on the button and anyone could "go". Yes, he'll come up against much harder punches than Scriven, but I prefer to observe how when wobbled he held tight for a second or two, then immediately got his act together. I think the "word" chinny needs clarifying because we all have our own interpretation of it. To me "chinny" is someone who pretty much gets decked or wobbled all the time and losses as result.