BoxBuzz wrote:I believe there is a place in the forum for those who have unique styles of expression, those who are inconsistent, and those who's tempers fluctuate wildly....and in granberry's case those who miss their meds on occasion.
We should recognized that thiis a boxing forum, and thus a wide berth of conflict and engagement styles should be assumed and allowable if not embraced. One might assume a different set of communication skillsets on a chess forum. If that's your cup of tea, please find that chess forum and enjoy!
I recall on one occasion attempting to draw the contrast between the participants on this forum..and say a bunch of old ladies on a knitting forum.....for some of you it may seem as if the similarites are perhaps even more striking. It all depends on how you're wired I suppose.
Granberry was a great, colorful contributor to BoxRec.
He definitely knew quite a bit about the fight game from the era I'm most interested in, that being the mid '60s through mid '70s.
BoxBuzz wrote:I believe there is a place in the forum for those who have unique styles of expression, those who are inconsistent, and those who's tempers fluctuate wildly....and in granberry's case those who miss their meds on occasion.
We should recognized that thiis a boxing forum, and thus a wide berth of conflict and engagement styles should be assumed and allowable if not embraced. One might assume a different set of communication skillsets on a chess forum. If that's your cup of tea, please find that chess forum and enjoy!
I recall on one occasion attempting to draw the contrast between the participants on this forum..and say a bunch of old ladies on a knitting forum.....for some of you it may seem as if the similarites are perhaps even more striking. It all depends on how you're wired I suppose.
Granberry was a great, colorful contributor to BoxRec.
He definitely knew quite a bit about the fight game from the era I'm most interested in, that being the mid '60s through mid '70s.
Fair enough Yancey.....but I need both you and granberry to remember and accept that Ali puts a whoopin' on Joe every 2 out of 3.
That alone will bring a new era of peace and prosperity to our B.O.T.P. forum.
BoxBuzz wrote:I believe there is a place in the forum for those who have unique styles of expression, those who are inconsistent, and those who's tempers fluctuate wildly....and in granberry's case those who miss their meds on occasion.
We should recognized that thiis a boxing forum, and thus a wide berth of conflict and engagement styles should be assumed and allowable if not embraced. One might assume a different set of communication skillsets on a chess forum. If that's your cup of tea, please find that chess forum and enjoy!
I recall on one occasion attempting to draw the contrast between the participants on this forum..and say a bunch of old ladies on a knitting forum.....for some of you it may seem as if the similarites are perhaps even more striking. It all depends on how you're wired I suppose.
Granberry was a great, colorful contributor to BoxRec.
He definitely knew quite a bit about the fight game from the era I'm most interested in, that being the mid '60s through mid '70s.
Fair enough Yancey.....but I need both you and granberry to remember and accept that Ali puts a whoopin' on Joe every 2 out of 3.
That alone will bring a new era of peace and prosperity to our B.O.T.P. forum.
An astute (which eliminates Collins) contributor here once hypothesized that in order to determine the true winner of a hard fought trilogy one needs to observe and compare the condition of the combatants twenty years after their last encounter.
Sounds to me like a pretty good way to judge things.
yancey wrote:
Granberry was a great, colorful contributor to BoxRec.
He definitely knew quite a bit about the fight game from the era I'm most interested in, that being the mid '60s through mid '70s.
Fair enough Yancey.....but I need both you and granberry to remember and accept that Ali puts a whoopin' on Joe every 2 out of 3.
That alone will bring a new era of peace and prosperity to our B.O.T.P. forum.
An astute (which eliminates Collins) contributor here once hypothesized that in order to determine the true winner of a hard fought trilogy one needs to observe and compare the condition of the combatants twenty years after their last encounter.
Sounds to me like a pretty good way to judge things.
I've heard the theory........though many other factors COULD have occured that might have had impact on a twenty (Plus) year outcome. (Environment, genetics,living style, diet, micro organisms, financial pressures... and .....wait for it.........Ex Wives.
Now for some of us who look for the more quantifiable and direct emprical evidence, we may want to factor in the condition of a fighter twenty HOURS after a fight. As this may also be an indicator. In this case putting even the 1 out of 3 official record keeping scorecard into questionable territory.
BoxBuzz wrote:
Fair enough Yancey.....but I need both you and granberry to remember and accept that Ali puts a whoopin' on Joe every 2 out of 3.
That alone will bring a new era of peace and prosperity to our B.O.T.P. forum.
An astute (which eliminates Collins) contributor here once hypothesized that in order to determine the true winner of a hard fought trilogy one needs to observe and compare the condition of the combatants twenty years after their last encounter.
Sounds to me like a pretty good way to judge things.
I've heard the theory........though many other factors COULD have occured that might have had impact on a twenty (Plus) year outcome. (Environment, genetics,living style, diet, micro organisms, financial pressures... and .....wait for it.........Ex Wives.
Now for some of us who look for the more quantifiable and direct emprical evidence, we may want to factor in the condition of a fighter twenty HOURS after a fight. As this may also be an indicator. In this case putting even the 1 out of 3 official record keeping scorecard into questionable territory.
Have you also heard the theory that because of the styles of the fighters, Frazier HAD to absorb the more immediate punishment in order to hunt down and conquer his more physically talented opponent?
Frazier prevailed in the most important fight of the trilogy. The fight which best represented both fighters at their peak, with the whole world watching.
yancey wrote:
An astute (which eliminates Collins) contributor here once hypothesized that in order to determine the true winner of a hard fought trilogy one needs to observe and compare the condition of the combatants twenty years after their last encounter.
Sounds to me like a pretty good way to judge things.
I've heard the theory........though many other factors COULD have occured that might have had impact on a twenty (Plus) year outcome. (Environment, genetics,living style, diet, micro organisms, financial pressures... and .....wait for it.........Ex Wives.
Now for some of us who look for the more quantifiable and direct emprical evidence, we may want to factor in the condition of a fighter twenty HOURS after a fight. As this may also be an indicator. In this case putting even the 1 out of 3 official record keeping scorecard into questionable territory.
Have you also heard the theory that because of the styles of the fighters, Frazier HAD to absorb the more immediate punishment in order to hunt down and conquer his more physically talented opponent?
Frazier prevailed in the most important fight of the trilogy. The fight which best represented both fighters at their peak, with the whole world watching.
BoxBuzz wrote:There was once a very successful newspaper that could lay claim to having the ability to change facts even as indelible as the FOTC's outcome.
It was/is called Pravda....
If it was still in it's prime, the rightful champ...(Valuev) might well still be undefeated!
Darn it, Ali and Co. should have enlisted Pravda's help a few weeks after the FOTC!
They could have been useful in the campaign to "educate" the public on the proper result.
Oh well, at least we have ESPN to contantly show Manila but never the FOTC.
BoxBuzz wrote:
I've heard the theory........though many other factors COULD have occured that might have had impact on a twenty (Plus) year outcome. (Environment, genetics,living style, diet, micro organisms, financial pressures... and .....wait for it.........Ex Wives.
Now for some of us who look for the more quantifiable and direct emprical evidence, we may want to factor in the condition of a fighter twenty HOURS after a fight. As this may also be an indicator. In this case putting even the 1 out of 3 official record keeping scorecard into questionable territory.
Have you also heard the theory that because of the styles of the fighters, Frazier HAD to absorb the more immediate punishment in order to hunt down and conquer his more physically talented opponent?
Frazier prevailed in the most important fight of the trilogy. The fight which best represented both fighters at their peak, with the whole world watching.
ThatOne wrote:Yes. All athletes are at their peak after not participating in their sport for three and one half years, from the ages of twenty five to twenty nine.
I'm surprised more athletes don't take such hiatuses/sabbaticals.
Ali was 95% of himself that night and, to his credit, fought 110%.
BoxBuzz wrote:There was once a very successful newspaper that could lay claim to having the ability to change facts even as indelible as the FOTC's outcome.
It was/is called Pravda....
If it was still in it's prime, the rightful champ...(Valuev) might well still be undefeated!
Darn it, Ali and Co. should have enlisted Pravda's help a few weeks after the FOTC!
They could have been useful in the campaign to "educate" the public on the proper result.
Oh well, at least we have ESPN to contantly show Manila but never the FOTC.
In Pravdas absence, Bert Sugar has done his best.
"The winner in that fight (FOTC) became the loser. The loser in that fight became the winner."
BoxBuzz wrote:There was once a very successful newspaper that could lay claim to having the ability to change facts even as indelible as the FOTC's outcome.
It was/is called Pravda....
If it was still in it's prime, the rightful champ...(Valuev) might well still be undefeated!
Darn it, Ali and Co. should have enlisted Pravda's help a few weeks after the FOTC!
They could have been useful in the campaign to "educate" the public on the proper result.
Oh well, at least we have ESPN to contantly show Manila but never the FOTC.
In Pravdas absence, Bert Sugar has done his best.
"The winner in that fight (FOTC) became the loser. The loser in that fight became the winner."
I nearly threw up.
Well, you threw up, but ThatOne jacked off.
That no doubt made him happy.
BoxBuzz, we're back to that beautiful, happy moment!
yancey wrote:
Have you also heard the theory that because of the styles of the fighters, Frazier HAD to absorb the more immediate punishment in order to hunt down and conquer his more physically talented opponent?
Frazier prevailed in the most important fight of the trilogy. The fight which best represented both fighters at their peak, with the whole world watching.
Nothing can change that fact.
Yep, Joe won the fight that counted the most!
Sarcasm dutifully noted.
Not that it is worth noting.
Hey, moron, I was agreeing with you. I'm a BIG Joe Frazier fan. He's my favorite heavyweight. I don't think he's the ATGest heavyweight, but he's my favorite. The difference between you and me (other than about 100 points in my favor in the IQ scale) is that (a) I also think Marciano was a special fighter, and (b) I don't think the way to build up Frazier is to tear down Marciano. Geez . . .
raylawpc wrote:
Yep, Joe won the fight that counted the most!
Sarcasm dutifully noted.
Not that it is worth noting.
Hey, moron, I was agreeing with you. I'm a BIG Joe Frazier fan. He's my favorite heavyweight. I don't think he's the ATGest heavyweight, but he's my favorite. The difference between you and me (other than about 100 points in my favor in the IQ scale) is that (a) I also think Marciano was a special fighter, and (b) I don't think the way to build up Frazier is to tear down Marciano. Geez . . .
I read too much into your original post.
I was giving you a little too much credit on the slickness scale.
p.s. Frazier #5 ATG, Ali #1 (surprised, ThatOne?), Marciano, somewhere in the second 10. The films don't lie and the dirtiness bothers me.
Yep, Joe won the fight that counted the most!