Pryor - Taylor

[TBooze]

In the biggest fight of his life he was well ahead of an all time great and then many of us think he got screwed.

Many of us think Steele did his job correctly, the finish is an opinion call, there is no right or wrong answer, only what is in the record books.

As for Terry Norris, losing to a bigger, better fighter is a mental "blockage". Did Nino benvenutti mentally choke against Carlos Monzon?

Sort of, in that he grossly underated Monzon (as probably did most everybody else), and paid the price.

C'mon man, this is ridiculous. His prime wasn't long and he liked to slug more than box. But none of that is being mentally weak. And his second biggest fight was probably beating the crap out of Buddy McGirt.

But that was a weakness, and as it was not a physical weakness, it was thus a mental one. Taylor was brilliant against McGirt, I totally agree there.

And if the fight the OP presented is 12 rounds, you just predicted the mentally fragile taylor to beat Aaron Pryor. How did you come to that conclusion?

The fight would of been a lot closer, but I would of still fancied Pryor to come back from a slow start to win a close-ish decision.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

The Steele argument aside, everybody considers Taylor to have given a tremendous performance that night. Well, everyone but you. I've never heard him described as a mental midget before. But you hear odd things every day on message boards. Things like benvenutti underestimating Monzon. Especially in their second fight.

I consider a mental midget to be a fighter that folds when adversity or mental pressure overwhelms them. That never happened to Meldrick Taylor, not once.

[jaclem2]

..saad.....good definition....and andrew golata is the perfect example....

[TBooze]

The Steele argument aside, everybody considers Taylor to have given a tremendous performance that night. Well, everyone but you. I've never heard him described as a mental midget before. But you hear odd things every day on message boards. Things like benvenutti underestimating Monzon. Especially in their second fight.

When did I mention the second Monzon/Benvenuti fight?

I consider a mental midget to be a fighter that folds when adversity or mental pressure overwhelms them. That never happened to Meldrick Taylor, not once.

That is a dog, Golota is a good example. Taylor was always brave, indeed at times (both Chavez fights), far to brave for his own good. Taylor had a mental issues, that cost him so much from March 17th 1990 onwards.

[Yes We Can]

at 140 give me Kostya over either.

Tough fight, I see Pryor getting stopped at some point late through accumulation of shots.

[Goodnight, Irene]

Tszyu would be a Pryor victim for sure.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

The Steele argument aside, everybody considers Taylor to have given a tremendous performance that night. Well, everyone but you. I've never heard him described as a mental midget before. But you hear odd things every day on message boards. Things like benvenutti underestimating Monzon. Especially in their second fight.

When did I mention the second Monzon/Benvenuti fight?

I consider a mental midget to be a fighter that folds when adversity or mental pressure overwhelms them. That never happened to Meldrick Taylor, not once.

That is a dog, Golota is a good example. Taylor was always brave, indeed at times (both Chavez fights), far to brave for his own good. Taylor had a mental issues, that cost him so much from March 17th 1990 onwards.

Well, if you're saying that benvenutti underestimated Monzon as an excuse, it goes out the window for the second fight. Understand? Carlos was bigger and better. Nino wasn't mentally feeble.

Taylor certainly has pugilistic dementia, that is a mental issue. But nothing like you speak of in the ring. In fact, going by your definition guys like Sugar ray Robinson, Thomas Hearns, Erik Morales, etc.. were also mentally weak for pleasing fans when they could have stunk it out.

You really should let this go and move onto another thread.

[TBooze]

Well, if you're saying that benvenutti underestimated Monzon as an excuse, it goes out the window for the second fight. Understand? Carlos was bigger and better. Nino wasn't mentally feeble.

I am saying the general consensus was Benvenuti had underestimated Monzon in fight one. In fight two it became obvious a: Monzon was rather good and b: Benvenuti was at the end of his world class career.

Taylor certainly has pugilistic dementia, that is a mental issue. But nothing like you speak of in the ring. In fact, going by your definition guys like Sugar ray Robinson, Thomas Hearns, Erik Morales, etc.. were also mentally weak for pleasing fans when they could have stunk it out.

I do not know Taylor's current health. I doubt it is very good. But he was primed when he fought Chavez the first time, and he lost when winning.

His subsequent performances against Garcia, Brown, Norris and Taylor really were affected by Taylor's inability to come to terms with the Chavez defeat. Norris aside, they were all fights he should of one at a canter, and yet struggled in all of them.


Taylor had a mental issue, you only have to look at them fights to see it, he was struggling no end.

But do not worry; I am not saying Taylor was a dog or was not an exceptional fighter. But the evidence is, he was just was not mentally tough/good enough, when he stepped in the ring with a great fighter. There is no evidence to prove otherwise. So logic says, Pryor as a borderline great, would probably of found a way to win.

[keithmoonhangover]

12 or 15 round fight Ezzard?

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Well, if you're saying that benvenutti underestimated Monzon as an excuse, it goes out the window for the second fight. Understand? Carlos was bigger and better. Nino wasn't mentally feeble.

I am saying the general consensus was Benvenuti had underestimated Monzon in fight one. In fight two it became obvious a: Monzon was rather good and b: Benvenuti was at the end of his world class career.

Taylor certainly has pugilistic dementia, that is a mental issue. But nothing like you speak of in the ring. In fact, going by your definition guys like Sugar ray Robinson, Thomas Hearns, Erik Morales, etc.. were also mentally weak for pleasing fans when they could have stunk it out.

I do not know Taylor's current health. I doubt it is very good. But he was primed when he fought Chavez the first time, and he lost when winning.

His subsequent performances against Garcia, Brown, Norris and Taylor really were affected by Taylor's inability to come to terms with the Chavez defeat. Norris aside, they were all fights he should of one at a canter, and yet struggled in all of them.


Taylor had a mental issue, you only have to look at them fights to see it, he was struggling no end.

But do not worry; I am not saying Taylor was a dog or was not an exceptional fighter. But the evidence is, he was just was not mentally tough/good enough, when he stepped in the ring with a great fighter. There is no evidence to prove otherwise. So logic says, Pryor as a borderline great, would probably of found a way to win.

So now you're talking about evidence of you delving into a fighters psyche from your TV screen?

Once again your broad generalizations bring all time greats into the foray. I guess Chavez wasn't mentally tough enough to beat great fighters either. The best fighters he ever beat were Rosario & Taylor. He fell short against Whitaker and Oscar. Looks like we have another mental midget on our hands.

You don't have to beat great fighters to be mentally strong. Arturo Gatti couldn't win a round against an elite opponent and his mental toughness was off the charts. This has nothing to do with the proposed match up. We both picked Pryor.

Evidence, logic and common sense are three things your posts are sorely lacking in this thread. And I'm not worried about anything. Just going in a merry go around with a stubborn noob who is clinging to some stupid wording in one of his first posts. But don't worry, I can do this for years. And if we are going to go back and forth for 5 or 6 thousand posts. As a courtesy, stop with the breaking off each sentence. I assure you that I have the mental capacity to follow your genius without the aid.

[Jaywheel]

Taylor was as mentally fragile in the ring as Fernando Vargas.

[TBooze]

Well, if you're saying that benvenutti underestimated Monzon as an excuse, it goes out the window for the second fight. Understand? Carlos was bigger and better. Nino wasn't mentally feeble.

I am saying the general consensus was Benvenuti had underestimated Monzon in fight one. In fight two it became obvious a: Monzon was rather good and b: Benvenuti was at the end of his world class career.

Taylor certainly has pugilistic dementia, that is a mental issue. But nothing like you speak of in the ring. In fact, going by your definition guys like Sugar ray Robinson, Thomas Hearns, Erik Morales, etc.. were also mentally weak for pleasing fans when they could have stunk it out.

I do not know Taylor's current health. I doubt it is very good. But he was primed when he fought Chavez the first time, and he lost when winning.

His subsequent performances against Garcia, Brown, Norris and Taylor really were affected by Taylor's inability to come to terms with the Chavez defeat. Norris aside, they were all fights he should of one at a canter, and yet struggled in all of them.


Taylor had a mental issue, you only have to look at them fights to see it, he was struggling no end.

But do not worry; I am not saying Taylor was a dog or was not an exceptional fighter. But the evidence is, he was just was not mentally tough/good enough, when he stepped in the ring with a great fighter. There is no evidence to prove otherwise. So logic says, Pryor as a borderline great, would probably of found a way to win.

So now you're talking about evidence of you delving into a fighters psyche from your TV screen?

Once again your broad generalizations bring all time greats into the foray. I guess Chavez wasn't mentally tough enough to beat great fighters either. The best fighters he ever beat were Rosario & Taylor. He fell short against Whitaker and Oscar. Looks like we have another mental midget on our hands.

You don't have to beat great fighters to be mentally strong. Arturo Gatti couldn't win a round against an elite opponent and his mental toughness was off the charts. This has nothing to do with the proposed match up. We both picked Pryor.

I think Chavez was kind of past it when he fought Whitaker and de la Hoya, don't you?

Taylor was primed to meet Chavez...

Evidence, logic and common sense are three things your posts are sorely lacking in this thread. And I'm not worried about anything. Just going in a merry go around with a stubborn noob who is clinging to some stupid wording in one of his first posts.

But don't worry, I can do this for years. And if we are going to go back and forth for 5 or 6 thousand posts. As a courtesy, stop with the breaking off each sentence. I assure you that I have the mental capacity to follow your genius without the aid.

That is good to read!

[SaadOffTheDeck]

I am saying the general consensus was Benvenuti had underestimated Monzon in fight one. In fight two it became obvious a: Monzon was rather good and b: Benvenuti was at the end of his world class career.
I do not know Taylor's current health. I doubt it is very good. But he was primed when he fought Chavez the first time, and he lost when winning.

His subsequent performances against Garcia, Brown, Norris and Taylor really were affected by Taylor's inability to come to terms with the Chavez defeat. Norris aside, they were all fights he should of one at a canter, and yet struggled in all of them.


Taylor had a mental issue, you only have to look at them fights to see it, he was struggling no end.

But do not worry; I am not saying Taylor was a dog or was not an exceptional fighter. But the evidence is, he was just was not mentally tough/good enough, when he stepped in the ring with a great fighter. There is no evidence to prove otherwise. So logic says, Pryor as a borderline great, would probably of found a way to win.

So now you're talking about evidence of you delving into a fighters psyche from your TV screen?

Once again your broad generalizations bring all time greats into the foray. I guess Chavez wasn't mentally tough enough to beat great fighters either. The best fighters he ever beat were Rosario & Taylor. He fell short against Whitaker and Oscar. Looks like we have another mental midget on our hands.

You don't have to beat great fighters to be mentally strong. Arturo Gatti couldn't win a round against an elite opponent and his mental toughness was off the charts. This has nothing to do with the proposed match up. We both picked Pryor.

I think Chavez was kind of past it when he fought Whitaker and de la Hoya, don't you?

Taylor was primed to meet Chavez...

Evidence, logic and common sense are three things your posts are sorely lacking in this thread. And I'm not worried about anything. Just going in a merry go around with a stubborn noob who is clinging to some stupid wording in one of his first posts.

But don't worry, I can do this for years. And if we are going to go back and forth for 5 or 6 thousand posts. As a courtesy, stop with the breaking off each sentence. I assure you that I have the mental capacity to follow your genius without the aid.

That is good too read!

Yup, primed to meet Chavez in a fight that he displayed nothing but heart, courage,dynamic skill and an incredible will to win. That's what makes your argument so retarded to begin with. Bringing up later fights just shows your mental weakness as a poster.

I wouldn't call Chavez past it against Whitaker. No more past it than Whitaker was. But it really doesn't matter what I think. It's all about you Booze. What was Chavez thinking when he was walking to the ring? Was he worrying that he had never beaten a great fighter? Was he sucking his thumb in mental terror? You're the message board psychiatrist, enlighten us all oh wise one.

[TBooze]

Yup, primed to meet Chavez in a fight that he displayed nothing but heart, courage,dynamic skill and an incredible will to win. That's what makes your argument so retarded to begin with. Bringing up later fights just shows your mental weakness as a poster.

I wouldn't call Chavez past it against Whitaker. No more past it than Whitaker was. But it really doesn't matter what I think. It's all about you Booze. What was Chavez thinking when he was walking to the ring? Was he worrying that he had never beaten a great fighter? Was he sucking his thumb in mental terror? You're the message board psychiatrist, enlighten us all oh wise one.

I am glad you finally got on my wave length!

Chavez seemed to have issues with defeat. A brilliant winner, who's mystic was damaged with the Whitaker fight and destroyed by Randall, a fight (the first one ;;-)) he never quite recovered from. He lost a lot more than his '0' that night (mind you it could (rightly) be argued he lost it years back against Miguel Ruiz).

The first de la Hoya fight was a disgrace, the man should never of been in the ring, knowing the moment Oscar landed a punch near his eye, it would re open a fresh cut. But Chavez was a bitter man by then, not fighting with the fire that peaked the night he beat Rosario.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Yup, primed to meet Chavez in a fight that he displayed nothing but heart, courage,dynamic skill and an incredible will to win. That's what makes your argument so retarded to begin with. Bringing up later fights just shows your mental weakness as a poster.

I wouldn't call Chavez past it against Whitaker. No more past it than Whitaker was. But it really doesn't matter what I think. It's all about you Booze. What was Chavez thinking when he was walking to the ring? Was he worrying that he had never beaten a great fighter? Was he sucking his thumb in mental terror? You're the message board psychiatrist, enlighten us all oh wise one.

I am glad you finally got on my wave length!

Chavez seemed to have issues with defeat. A brilliant winner, who's mystic was damaged with the Whitaker fight and destroyed by Randall, a fight (the first one ;;-)) he never quite recovered from. He lost a lot more than his '0' that night (mind you it could (rightly) be argued he lost it years back against Miguel Ruiz).

The first de la Hoya fight was a disgrace, the man should never of been in the ring, knowing the moment Oscar landed a punch near his eye, it would re open a fresh cut. But Chavez was a bitter man by then, not fighting with the fire that peaked the night he beat Rosario.

Your wave length is a place I don't ever care to be. I shudder to think of myself in such a diminished mental state. But at least you're consistent. Chavez was mentally fragile as well. Even if your theories are outlandish, consistency I can respect.

[BoxBuzz]

Just checked with the Akashic records on this. (Thus ending any further speculation.)

Upon opening the sacred pages of this never erring oracle and compendium of all hypotheticals made manifest, I was not surprised to learn that Taylor wins this one about the way Ezz describes.

Those who got it wrong will be asked to stay after class and reflect on their errors. (In as stunning reversal of credibility, it turns out Jaclem has this 100% correct!) Goes to show that a simple majority opinion can fall short on occasion.

As far as that one poster who said Tzyu would be a CERTAIN victim of Pryor's I would say on the night of the Hatton fight, yes.
However in their mutual primes it's harder to say. Punchers have been known to defeat swarmers here and there.....or is it hear and their?

[Goodnight, Irene]

As usual, your offering is neither here nor there

[jaclem2]

...i'm surprised at buzzy referring to my sudden reversal of credibility, as i picked taylor over the overrated fraud from cincinnati. not only that, i was the one who showed buzzy way back that this aaron fellow was not much of a fighter. we didn't know it then but we were both there during his earliest fights and he should have come to the conclusion by himself.

..and how did chavez get into this thread?

[BoxBuzz]

As usual, your offering is neither here nor there

Quite..........

Complex and authentic truths do not lend themselves to being "found" by utilizing limiting concepts such as longitude and latitude. Thus the need for ethereal script.

[Ezzard]

I know Buzz and Jaclem have their Pryor theories. And I wasn't at the fights...

For me I just believe Taylor was better.

[BoxBuzz]

Ezz....truly and without bias, your analysis seems correct to me as well. But Pryor has a remarkable (nearly fanatic) following based on his best efforts (Arguello I and II) Which I would say even his critics would say were top shelf performances....(even if he was on jet fuel on one occasion.)