Ron Borges' massive gripe at Tyson in the Boxing Monthly..

[n1ebf]

Anyone read it. It was like a personal attack. And so repetetive in its slating of Tyson it even seemed personal.

I saw the pictures of Kostya Tyszu - Julio Cesar Chavez - and Mike Tyson getting inducted to the HOF along with Stallone (I won't talk about Joe "stop hitting him Ricky" fcking Cortez) - and I thought to myself - fck - that has to be one of the best HOF enrolments EVER ...and I'm not prone to following these things....

anyway , I read Ron Borges and he's basically to a massive, needless dump on poor Tyson which was quite out of order for me. He was also totally dismissive and disrespectful of Stallone or anything he's brought to the game too (quite in contrast to what I understand is Stallone's self-deprecating attitude to getting his roll-call)..

what's Ron Borges ever done to compare?

That's just my take anyway - it made me so sick reading it I thought I'd see what anyone else thought. I might throw a few lines in but I'm not able to just now...

[Scottrf]

I can see his reservations with Tyson, but put simply: Ask a man on the street to name two boxers, and Tyson will be one of them. The HOF hasn't taken a moral stance (Monzon is there for e.g.) so Tyson should be in. It's not just based on resumé, nor should it be.

[Emmseegee]

For me Tyson should be in there.
i also read the column and though it was a bit of a shocker.

[Jon Saxon]

Borges made his name for being the only hack who picked Holy over Tyson.

However though Tyson is a rapist he is also a boxing legend so Borges should STFU.

AND regarding Stallone, he was inducted into the non participant category and therefore a lock as his movies inspired so many kids to take up boxing so it's a no brainer.

[milpool]

I'm glad that others share this view as I was dismayed when I read it. What Borges needs to understand is that it is a Hall of 'Fame' and as has been mentioned Tyson along with Ali is probably the most famous boxer of all time.
When Tyson was cutting through the heavyweight division as a mere youth he was without doubt a joy to behold. So what if Trevor Berbick was a paper champion, so what if he made defences against limited and past their best fighters, in winning he showed an aura of invincibility not seen in years.
To say he lost every in every one of his 'biggest nights' is complete BS. Tyson would never have lost to Buster Douglas if he had had his head on straight and his defeats against Williams and McBride aren't even worth discussing, he was completely shot by that stage. He was past his best when Lewis beat him and clearly the demons were at work in the infamous rematch with Holyfield.
Tyson was his own worst enemy but to say he isn't a Hall of Famer is just ludicrous. Like him or loathe him the man is not only a boxing legend but a sporting legend.

[Wake up call]

Borges comes from the same school of bitter little Americans that spawned the likes of Dan Rafeal. Sad sad little man pretending to be a proper journalist. This is the guy that was sacked from a newspaper for stealing stories word for word from a student.

[LeedsLad]

I usually like reading his articles, but even by his standards this was a big swipe at Tyson.

He's always been a sceptic, from his pick of Holyfield (which was well reasoned and ultimately proved correct) to his comments in the legendary nights series.

I think it provides good balance to have a few detractors and so long as it's done in the right way there's no big issue. Too many of our journos/pundits are little more than fanboys if we're honest.

[Glyn Leach]

Haaaah! I love it when people disagree with an opinion stated in BM! I had a youngun (18) get in touch saying he will never buy BM again because of this one, that we were not providing suitable inspiration to young boxers by allowing Borges to state his views. Excuse me? If you view a wife-beating rapist sociopath as inspirational, I don't want you buying my mag anyway fella. Bye bye.

Personally I don't agree with Ron totally on this but I see where he's coming from and I'm quite happy to print opinions that are different to my own in BM. And despite the pro-Tyson bent that's being put on the subject here, the point of the piece, as Borges clearly states, is that the IBHOF is becoming a joke. It is an industry that relies on discovering new 'greats' every year. And the reality is that there are NOT enough greats to go round therefore the IBHOF has dumbed down to suit its own ends and enable its own survival. As Borges wrote, it's now become an International Boxing Hall of Very Good, through the necessity of those running it to earn a living. Maybe some of you who are commenting on the piece here haven't even read it?

FYI, Borges made his name long before the Tyson-Holyfield pick, so he's more than earned his right to have an opinion — as do you.

[Glyn Leach]

Borges comes from the same school of bitter little Americans that spawned the likes of Dan Rafeal. Sad sad little man pretending to be a proper journalist. This is the guy that was sacked from a newspaper for stealing stories word for word from a student.

That school of bitter little Americans, men like Mike Katz, Wally Matthews, Mike Marley and Borges, completely shits on the so called boxing journalists of today, who merely reprint press releases and write puff pieces. They are to be admired and are sadly missed because they are not fanboys, they are journalists. And maybe you should call Borges a 'sad sad little man' to his face — probably not a good idea to do that to a man who fought in Vietnam.

Regarding the 'plagiarism' issue, I don't view it as an issue at all and I'm proud to have kept Borges on board when others turned their backs on him. We all fornicate up in life, myself included. In Ron's case, I can understand perfectly well, because I've been there, how easy it might be to print largely statistical information in the form it is presented to you. The same charge could be leveled at so many journalists — and only etiquette prevents me from naming names — but more so because they lift writing from other sources, which is disgusting. Ron's just the unlucky one that got pulled for it. Shit happens.

[Counter-puncher]

Regarding the 'plagiarism' issue, I don't view it as an issue at all and I'm proud to have kept Borges on board when others turned their backs on him. We all eff up in life, myself included. In Ron's case, I can understand perfectly well, because I've been there, how easy it might be to print largely statistical information in the form it is presented to you. The same charge could be leveled at so many journalists — and only etiquette prevents me from naming names — but more so because they lift writing from other sources, which is disgusting. Ron's just the unlucky one that got pulled for it. Shit happens.

journalist as apologist for plagiarism. I've heard it all, now. wow. just, wow. just because the charge could be levelled at others, thats okay? what the eff is left in your world, if basically ican trust ABSOLUTELY NOBODY who you ever publish again? as you're willing to not only employ plagiarisers but defend them?

correct me if i am wrong Glyn but if Borges knowingly tried passing off someone else's work as his own- which is what I am inferring- thats almost as low as a non-News International journo can go.

'he's just the unlucky one who got caught'. apologies in advance for what will sound pompous as fvck, but you sound breathtakingly glib. how about 'he's someone who cheated and tried to pass off a lie'. your defending him, just, wow.

i don't even have any dewy-eyed ideals about journalists, nor are my expectations of them particularly high, but you're just lowered the bar, mate.

[Scottrf]

Regarding the 'plagiarism' issue, I don't view it as an issue at all and I'm proud to have kept Borges on board when others turned their backs on him. We all eff up in life, myself included. In Ron's case, I can understand perfectly well, because I've been there, how easy it might be to print largely statistical information in the form it is presented to you. The same charge could be leveled at so many journalists — and only etiquette prevents me from naming names — but more so because they lift writing from other sources, which is disgusting. Ron's just the unlucky one that got pulled for it. Shit happens.

journalist as apologist for plagiarism. I've heard it all, now. wow. just, wow. just because the charge could be levelled at others, thats okay? what the eff is left in your world, if basically ican trust ABSOLUTELY NOBODY who you ever publish again? as you're willing to not only employ plagiarisers but defend them?

correct me if i am wrong Glyn but if Borges knowingly tried passing off someone else's work as his own- which is what I am inferring- thats almost as low as a non-News International journo can go.

'he's just the unlucky one who got caught'. apologies in advance for what will sound pompous as fvck, but you sound breathtakingly glib. how about 'he's someone who cheated and tried to pass off a lie'. your defending him, just, wow.

i don't even have any dewy-eyed ideals about journalists, nor are my expectations of them particularly high, but you're just lowered the bar, mate.

I'm a fan of Glyn's posts on here, but I'm with you on this one.

[lefthook82]

Regarding the 'plagiarism' issue, I don't view it as an issue at all and I'm proud to have kept Borges on board when others turned their backs on him. We all eff up in life, myself included. In Ron's case, I can understand perfectly well, because I've been there, how easy it might be to print largely statistical information in the form it is presented to you. The same charge could be leveled at so many journalists — and only etiquette prevents me from naming names — but more so because they lift writing from other sources, which is disgusting. Ron's just the unlucky one that got pulled for it. Shit happens.

journalist as apologist for plagiarism. I've heard it all, now. wow. just, wow. just because the charge could be levelled at others, thats okay? what the eff is left in your world, if basically ican trust ABSOLUTELY NOBODY who you ever publish again? as you're willing to not only employ plagiarisers but defend them?

correct me if i am wrong Glyn but if Borges knowingly tried passing off someone else's work as his own- which is what I am inferring- thats almost as low as a non-News International journo can go.

'he's just the unlucky one who got caught'. apologies in advance for what will sound pompous as fvck, but you sound breathtakingly glib. how about 'he's someone who cheated and tried to pass off a lie'. your defending him, just, wow.

i don't even have any dewy-eyed ideals about journalists, nor are my expectations of them particularly high, but you're just lowered the bar, mate.

x2

That was quite a pathetic 'justification' @ Glynn Leach

[Counter-puncher]

Regarding the 'plagiarism' issue, I don't view it as an issue at all and I'm proud to have kept Borges on board when others turned their backs on him. We all eff up in life, myself included. In Ron's case, I can understand perfectly well, because I've been there, how easy it might be to print largely statistical information in the form it is presented to you. The same charge could be leveled at so many journalists — and only etiquette prevents me from naming names — but more so because they lift writing from other sources, which is disgusting. Ron's just the unlucky one that got pulled for it. Shit happens.

journalist as apologist for plagiarism. I've heard it all, now. wow. just, wow. just because the charge could be levelled at others, thats okay? what the eff is left in your world, if basically ican trust ABSOLUTELY NOBODY who you ever publish again? as you're willing to not only employ plagiarisers but defend them?

correct me if i am wrong Glyn but if Borges knowingly tried passing off someone else's work as his own- which is what I am inferring- thats almost as low as a non-News International journo can go.

'he's just the unlucky one who got caught'. apologies in advance for what will sound pompous as fvck, but you sound breathtakingly glib. how about 'he's someone who cheated and tried to pass off a lie'. your defending him, just, wow.

i don't even have any dewy-eyed ideals about journalists, nor are my expectations of them particularly high, but you're just lowered the bar, mate.

I'm a fan of Glyn's posts on here, but I'm with you on this one.

me too, and i am happy to be a subscriber to BM :(

[fasteddie]

if you would of asked any kid growing up in 1980's or 1990's to name a boxer or what boxer they would most wanna be like they would say either ali,sugar ray leonard,tyson or rocky balboa(80's only) so for a two bit writer to pass judgement on my 2 idol's as a kid (rocky films before i knew they wasn't real and tyson) is a disgrace,ask the average joe now what boxer's they know and they will still say tyson. hof for tyson is a no brainer he has done alot for the sport but also done it wrong at times. he will still go down as an all time great heavyweight.

[Scottrf]

cant blame Glyn for defending his corner but tend to agree with the others in this case. Now back to the topic of TYson HOF worthy

I agree in general with his premise, I just think Tyson is someone that has to be there regardless of whether his career stacks up (and it's by no means bad: youngest WC, 2x WC, 9 straight defenses, mainly against former or future WCs). Heavyweights are always more likely to get in, especially one with the impact of Tyson.

[gasman]

Borges comes from the same school of bitter little Americans that spawned the likes of Dan Rafeal. Sad sad little man pretending to be a proper journalist. This is the guy that was sacked from a newspaper for stealing stories word for word from a student.

That school of bitter little Americans, men like Mike Katz, Wally Matthews, Mike Marley and Borges, completely shits on the so called boxing journalists of today, who merely reprint press releases and write puff pieces. They are to be admired and are sadly missed because they are not fanboys, they are journalists. And maybe you should call Borges a 'sad sad little man' to his face — probably not a good idea to do that to a man who fought in Vietnam.

Regarding the 'plagiarism' issue, I don't view it as an issue at all and I'm proud to have kept Borges on board when others turned their backs on him. We all eff up in life, myself included. In Ron's case, I can understand perfectly well, because I've been there, how easy it might be to print largely statistical information in the form it is presented to you. The same charge could be leveled at so many journalists — and only etiquette prevents me from naming names — but more so because they lift writing from other sources, which is disgusting. Ron's just the unlucky one that got pulled for it. Shit happens.

Well said. And I couldnt agree more with you on the proliferation of fanboys who write up boring quotes and back slap their 'idols' whilst thinking that this has given them the right to slag off others. One thing Borges succeeded in here, whether you agree with his views or not, is write an interesting article - which is why he is a paid writer for BM.

[Counter-puncher]

genuine question, Glyn: have you ever been plagiarised yourself? I haven't, and can't claim to know how it would feel, but can only imagine it would make the victim (of what is essentially a theft of intellectual property) completely incensed.

[n1ebf]

genuine question, Glyn: have you ever been plagiarised yourself? I haven't, and can't claim to know how it would feel, but can only imagine it would make the victim (of what is essentially a theft of intellectual property) completely incensed.

[Counter-puncher]

thanks for that NEBF

[n1ebf]

thanks for that NEBF

sh*t.....ya got me. Sorry, accidently copied and pasted by mistake lol ;;-)

[Counter-puncher]

you were fvcking plagiarising me, weren't ya, ya pudendum.

any jobs going for this man Glyn?

[n1ebf]

Well said. And I couldnt agree more with you on the proliferation of fanboys who write up boring quotes and back slap their 'idols' whilst thinking that this has given them the right to slag off others. One thing Borges succeeded in here, whether you agree with his views or not, is write an interesting article - which is why he is a paid writer for BM.

i agree 100% and as long as an opinion is backed up with a decent argument i have no problem with some who thinks differently to me. I prefer a piece where the Journo will express his point of view than when, as you say a fanboy is just back slapping

I completely disagree. The piece in question by Borges was too long, boring and totally lacking in ANY form of regard for any single achievement Mike Tyson ever had in the ring. On that basis it should be shown for the crap it is.
The point about the HOF (and to be honest - I love boxing but I really couldn't give a fck who has their poster on a wall in a building ten thousand miles from my home that I'll never see) was merely secondary to the Tyson tripe and the passion and length gone to by the author on each subject, I would have thought, make this abundantly clear.

If I read any more it will certainly be with a huge pinch of salt.

[Counter-puncher]

thanks for that NEBF

sh*t.....ya got me. Sorry, accidently copied and pasted by mistake lol ;;-)

are you Ron Borges?*

*it's a joke Glyn, NEBF cant be Ron, he knows to much

well now you mentioned it, NEBF is the man who legendarily once wrote 'I've never seen Fighter A, but I'm pretty sure he will be too much for fighter B'

sounds perfect, on that basis I'm almost amazed he hasn't got a gig with BM or someone like that already.


;;-)

[n1ebf]

thanks for that NEBF

sh*t.....ya got me. Sorry, accidently copied and pasted by mistake lol ;;-)

are you Ron Borges?*

*it's a joke Glyn, NEBF cant be Ron, he knows to much

[n1ebf]

sh*t.....ya got me. Sorry, accidently copied and pasted by mistake lol ;;-)

are you Ron Borges?*

*it's a joke Glyn, NEBF cant be Ron, he knows to much

well now you mentioned it, NEBF is the man who legendarily once wrote 'I've never seen Fighter A, but I'm pretty sure he will be too much for fighter B'

;;-)

wasn't fighter A up against Pete Buckley that night if I remember??

(and let's be fair - because your (my) comment probably does make me sound pretty dumb...but the TV ain't the only medium mate. There's write-ups, books, other people's opinions etc that have seen the Fighter A's of this world....so it wasn't as outlandish as it may have sounded.

Example.......I'd never seen Toshiaka Nishioko, but I got the impression Rendall Munroe was up against it...etc (that's just an example you understand)