Admit Your Worst Picks Ever

[Ezzard]

Sharkeysboy


You think the concept of Good v Evil in boxing is ridiculous ? So you wouldn't really care if a fighter was say a rapist, or punched his pregnant wife, or shot his girlfriend, or was a coke dealer or just in general a menace to society. And at the same time do you suppose you could root for such a fighter against a guy who behaved like a gentleman and was approachable and polite to the public ? Now I'm not accusing Duran of being all those things in the first part of the paragraph, but it's a pretty well established fact that we're talking about one of the most classless guys of our lifetime. Talking about killing opponents when a fighter is in serious condition, refusing to shake hands, commenting about opponents wives, crotch grabbing in the ring etc. AND none of that matters, because Sugar Ray Leonard was a pretty boy ! Like I said before, I just don't get it.

And a couple of other things. You said Leonard had never faced a fighter like Duran. He hadn't faced a fighter with the relentless aggression of Duran, but he had already dominated and stopped the previously unbeaten Wilfred Benitez, acknowledged at the time to be the best defensive fighter in the world at any weight. AND PLEASE !!! How many people are going to just keep repeating the claim that Duran stepped up to WW to fight Leonard ? He hadn't fought at LW since the DeJesus fight, almost 2 and a half years before he faced Leonard. He couldn't fight at LW anymore because it would have been too much trouble to make the weight.

Leonard smiled for the camera but he was just a salesman. Ray knew what it took to be liked but don't amke the mistake of thinking that Ray wasn't as nasty. What about the reported public show of challenging Nunn? What about all of the snide comments about opponents? Ray knew how to act on camera and he knew how to put on a show but all that corkscrew wind ups before punching etc was really disrespectful to opponents and no better than name calling IMO. Leonard had a competitive streak a mile long.

Duran was going to fight America's darling. He didn't come up with the TV stations backing him and being a media superstar before he even won a title. Duran wasn't a rapist or any of the other things (as you rightfully point out). His brand of bravado might not sit well with North American sensibilities but then that's why he did it. if you can't see that then you're just as much a victim of it as Leonard was in the first fight.

Duran was a master fighter who achieved more than any human had the right to. He was never the same after the first Leonard fight. He didn't train and he was abdly hurt by the "No Mas" debacle but he still went on to beat Moore and Barkley and go 15 with a prime Hagler (Ray would have got KO'd if his fight with hagler had been 15 rounds). can you imagine Ray making it competitive with Mike Spinks for 15? Anyway, i don't weant to denigrate Leonard because his acievements were very very special too.

Duran might have been unable to make lightweight but he was not a natural welterweight. It doesn't really matter how much weight you put on, so much of your strength and power resides in your frame and not your muscularity. I could beef up on steroids to 250 lbs of solid muscle (currently only 235 ) but I still wouldn't be able to punch as hard as George Foreman.

[sharkeysboy]

Sharkeysboy


You think the concept of Good v Evil in boxing is ridiculous ? So you wouldn't really care if a fighter was say a rapist, or punched his pregnant wife, or shot his girlfriend, or was a coke dealer or just in general a menace to society. And at the same time do you suppose you could root for such a fighter against a guy who behaved like a gentleman and was approachable and polite to the public ? Now I'm not accusing Duran of being all those things in the first part of the paragraph, but it's a pretty well established fact that we're talking about one of the most classless guys of our lifetime. Talking about killing opponents when a fighter is in serious condition, refusing to shake hands, commenting about opponents wives, crotch grabbing in the ring etc. AND none of that matters, because Sugar Ray Leonard was a pretty boy ! Like I said before, I just don't get it.

And a couple of other things. You said Leonard had never faced a fighter like Duran. He hadn't faced a fighter with the relentless aggression of Duran, but he had already dominated and stopped the previously unbeaten Wilfred Benitez, acknowledged at the time to be the best defensive fighter in the world at any weight. AND PLEASE !!! How many people are going to just keep repeating the claim that Duran stepped up to WW to fight Leonard ? He hadn't fought at LW since the DeJesus fight, almost 2 and a half years before he faced Leonard. He couldn't fight at LW anymore because it would have been too much trouble to make the weight.

What nonsense. First of all, you list all of these crimes and then say the "evil" Duran didn't do any of them. Why'd you'd bring them up. I guarantee in Panama they don't consider Duran evil, they consider Leonard evil. You're falling for hype and delusion. Muster some self awareness, man, and grow up. I think it's absurd that we're debating about behavior outside the ring but since you brought it up, let me point out how silly it is. Both Duran and Leonard have had problems with drugs, ugly domestic squabbles and I seem to remember some paternity issues with Leonard. None of which I care a damn about but I don't accept the silly assumption that Duran is universally accepted as "classless". He'll never live "no mas" down but even with that he's got legendary appeal. Boxing isn't populated by choir boys. Jack Johnson won the crown and opened a whore house in Chicago. Dempsey pimped for awhile or do you really believe he married that hooker to make an honest woman out of her? Harry Greb was a notriously dirty fighter. Have you seen the HBO documentary on Sugar Ray Robinson? Not such a nice guy. Jake LaMotta and Rocky Graziano used to roam the Bronx streets together mugging people. Sonny Liston and Dwight Quawi were excons. And do you want to get into the racists? John L. Sullivan, James Jeffries, et al. Carlos Monzon murdered his girl friend by thowing her out a hotel window. This list could go on forever. Actually, the only fighter I've ever seen display any meaningful moral intergrity was Ali when he was willing to give up his title rather than violate his religious principles. I admired that very much. Didn't mean a thing to me when he stepped back in the ring, however. There his job was to beat other men senseless and you better not be a nice guy when the fight is on. A better arguement to get me to like Leonard is one a friend of mine used is to point out that I'm being distracted by the hype too when I can't see through Leonard's phony front to the violent, ruthless man he had to be to win those fights. You're on the wrong message board. I think there's a badminton board available. Much more pleasent people in that sport. By the way, to compare Wilfredo No Punch Benitez to Hands of Stone Duran shows you just don't get it. One of the most beautiful moments in sports history was in the Brawl in Montreal when Duran landed a big punch and you could see the shock and fear in Leonard's eyes as he realized he was in with the real thing now. It's to Leonard's credit that he used that moment to become a man but to think he experienced anything like that against Benitez is really delusional.

[Ezzard]

A better arguement to get me to like Leonard is one a friend of mine used is to point out that I'm being distracted by the hype too when I can't see through Leonard's phony front to the violent, ruthless man he had to be to win those fights.

Absolutely spot on. Leonard was as nasty as they come. When h was obviously superior to an opponet he taunted them and made them look stupid. A so called "classy" fighter would have KO'd them and got on with preparing for the next fight. Ray was mean and that's a part of what made him great

By the way, to compare Wilfredo No Punch Benitez to Hands of Stone Duran shows you just don't get it. One of the most beautiful moments in sports history was in the Brawl in Montreal when Duran landed a big punch and you could see the shock and fear in Leonard's eyes as he realized he was in with the real thing now. It's to Leonard's credit that he used that moment to become a man but to think he experienced anything like that against Benitez is really delusional.

The moment in the 2nd when Duran lands the left hook is really something. Duran owns him for the rest of the fight after that but Ray proved his mettle. A great fight with two great fighters.

[wlvrne]

Should huge upsets be considered in the "worst picks ever" list?

I mean, can picking Tyson to beat Douglas or Morales to beat Raheem be considered a horrible pick when virtually everyone is picking them? Before the Tyson v. Douglas fight, if someone said that they were picking Douglas to win, they were either joking or insane. No one could have made a good case for Douglas to defeat Tyson. So, from my point of view, that really wouldn't be a bad pick.

To further illustrate my point, let's say that fighter A is a huge favorite over fighter B:

If A defeats B, and you picked B to win, that's a "worst pick ever"
If B defeats A, and you picked A to win, that's not necessarily a bad pick, just an unfavorable outcome
If A defeats B, and you picked A to win, then you're with everyone else
If B defeats A, and you picked B to win, then you're obviously insane

All you're trying to do is cover your ass in this post. The thread is what it means - and it includes upsets over favorites.

[wlvrne]

Hey Wolf Ferina........those picks are over a period of time that probably more than doubles your current life span. Now I'm not saying I'm proud of those pics but most of them I was with the majority on.

Pray tell me which of those you would have taken the other side on? And could you also tell me why you would have done so? Or were you just doing that old keyboard belch that you are incurring fame for?

Now I'm on bit of a bad luck roll with Tszyu Hopkins, Morales, Ouma and so on. But luck comes in streaks and when my luck changes it's easy street for me from then on. I can just see it now I'll be rollin in coin and you'll be wantin a loan. And I'm going to remember when you kicked me when I was down. And I'm gonna let you have it with an interest rate that will feel like a crakkin uppercut.

I had Tszyu over Hatton too, as Hatton was unkown to me in terms of real accomplishments.
I had Mosley over DLH, as Mosley is the better counter-puncher. In the 2nd fight though, I thought Oscar got robbed.
Leonard over Duran in their 2nd fight, because I knew Leonard would fight smarter than he did in the first. I had picked Leonard in the 1st one as well because I thought he would box, not brawl with Duran.
Tyson/Holyfield was truly a "pick-em" fight for me. I knew Holyfield could be really tough ( Bowe ) or lackadaisical ( Moore ), while Tyson hadn't really fought hard in a long time.
I had picked RJJ over Tarver in their second one also.
I had picked Chavez over Taylor because tho Taylor was quicker, I leaned on Chavez' relentless work to the body. I felt Taylor got robbed, tho.
Morales/Raheem, I leaned towards Raheem as the match-up reminded me too much of when Trinidad and DLH both moved up in weight to take a crack at the great Bernard Hopkins.
The others you listed, I was either too young to watch, or wasn't into boxing then.
Yes, I was giving you a bad time. I thought it more of a friendly ribbing than a "kick while you're down". Maybe my other posts have been a tad too acerbic. But, please note that I did write that I was a poorer picker at football than my off-spring.

[iceman21287]

Should huge upsets be considered in the "worst picks ever" list?

I mean, can picking Tyson to beat Douglas or Morales to beat Raheem be considered a horrible pick when virtually everyone is picking them? Before the Tyson v. Douglas fight, if someone said that they were picking Douglas to win, they were either joking or insane. No one could have made a good case for Douglas to defeat Tyson. So, from my point of view, that really wouldn't be a bad pick.

To further illustrate my point, let's say that fighter A is a huge favorite over fighter B:

If A defeats B, and you picked B to win, that's a "worst pick ever"
If B defeats A, and you picked A to win, that's not necessarily a bad pick, just an unfavorable outcome
If A defeats B, and you picked A to win, then you're with everyone else
If B defeats A, and you picked B to win, then you're obviously insane

All you're trying to do is cover your ass in this post. The thread is what it means - and it includes upsets over favorites.

Dude I wasn't trying to cover my ass at all. I was just trying to say that I don't consider huge upsets to be considered as worst picks, because the phrase "worst picks" connotes that one is making a bad choice at the time of the pick. That said, I believe all who have seen any of my predictions know that I have made some pretty bad choices before, most recently my prediction that Tito Trinidad would KO Winky Wright. So please, before you act like an ass at least read what I was trying to say.

And if this thread is really "includes upsets over favorites" then everyone who is old enough has the same worst pick ever - which would be of course picking Tyson over Douglas.

[thehero55]

I picked Bowe over Holyfield in their rematch
Tyson over Holyfield


I just watched Clay vs. Jones and Liston vs Patteson 1 and 2. Based on these fights, I woulda picked Clay

[wlvrne]

Should huge upsets be considered in the "worst picks ever" list?

I mean, can picking Tyson to beat Douglas or Morales to beat Raheem be considered a horrible pick when virtually everyone is picking them? Before the Tyson v. Douglas fight, if someone said that they were picking Douglas to win, they were either joking or insane. No one could have made a good case for Douglas to defeat Tyson. So, from my point of view, that really wouldn't be a bad pick.

To further illustrate my point, let's say that fighter A is a huge favorite over fighter B:

If A defeats B, and you picked B to win, that's a "worst pick ever"
If B defeats A, and you picked A to win, that's not necessarily a bad pick, just an unfavorable outcome
If A defeats B, and you picked A to win, then you're with everyone else
If B defeats A, and you picked B to win, then you're obviously insane

All you're trying to do is cover your ass in this post. The thread is what it means - and it includes upsets over favorites.

Dude I wasn't trying to cover my ass at all. I was just trying to say that I don't consider huge upsets to be considered as worst picks, because the phrase "worst picks" connotes that one is making a bad choice at the time of the pick. That said, I believe all who have seen any of my predictions know that I have made some pretty bad choices before, most recently my prediction that Tito Trinidad would KO Winky Wright. So please, before you act like an ass at least read what I was trying to say.

And if this thread is really "includes upsets over favorites" then everyone who is old enough has the same worst pick ever - which would be of course picking Tyson over Douglas.

They don't post Tyson/Douglas because that's such an old, beaten horse on this site. An example of an "upset" would be Golota getting himself DQ'ed when he was winning the fight easily over Riddick Bowe during their first fight. I had picked Golota to win that one. Was he?....yes. Did he lose due to a DQ?....yes. Was it a bad pick?....yes.
Tyson/Douglas; did almost everybody in the civilized world pick Tyson?....yes. Did they know he wasn't going to train hard for this fight? That he would spend 3 days partying before the fight (so the rumor mill says)? That he really wouldn't take Douglas seriously?....No; No & No.
Did almost everyone pick badly that time?....yes.
Another case of an "upset" - Robbie Peden fighting John Brown back in 2000. Peden was favored to win over Brown who had had some tough fights and was considered by many to be a journey-man fighter. Brown took it to Peden and won a UD. Was Peden a bad pick for those who chose him over Brown?....yes.
And don't start hurling insults at me ("ass"), or I'll bury yours. It was my option to disagree with you, so I did. But I surely did not insult you.

[The Boxing Enthusiast]

Mike Grant over Lennox Lewis.

I'm proud of you ShoeShine. It takes a brave man to admit that.

IMO,
TBE

Mine was Gatti over Floyd. :(

[Seamus]

I actually picked Angel Manfredy (who I thought very highly of at the time) to KO Floyd Mayweather, who had had only 18 fights at the time. Also picked Qawi by KO 11 over Michael Spinks. Really thought the little Camden Buzzsaw would wear down Spinks with his body attack.

[BrocktonBlockbuster49]

TBE why would u pick gatti over the # 1 p4p boxer in the world and undefeated future HOF triple world champion???

[jezzamundo]

The only picks I have ever been wrong about:

Green to KO Beyer (2nd fight, did anyone pick Beyer here?)
Tszyu to KO Hatton (I was really only 60/40 to Tszyu here)
Golota to UD Brewster
Wlad to KO Brewster
Wlad to KO Sanders
Hopkins to UD Taylor
Mundine to UD Siaca
Golota to SD Ruiz
McCline to SD Byrd
Meehan to UD Rahman

I'm sure there's more, but these are the only fights I ever remember being wrong about, considering that I have only been following boxing since 2001.