how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
since months BOTP is swamped with all kinds
of matchups ... and while i'm at it, why not make
a section for cassius clay threads as well ...
in the past this section here had more diversity
of topcis and posters, but it seems that it was
hitchhiked as of recent.
of matchups ... and while i'm at it, why not make
a section for cassius clay threads as well ...
in the past this section here had more diversity
of topcis and posters, but it seems that it was
hitchhiked as of recent.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
I think it's just fine. Duce is gonna post something derogatory about Ali every day. Vladimir is gonna post somewhere between 3 to 10 Hypothetical matchups everyday.
It's all good really.
If the other stuff were such interesting subjects, they would keep finding their way to the top.
It's all good really.
If the other stuff were such interesting subjects, they would keep finding their way to the top.
-
SaadOffTheDeck
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 19602
- Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
This is a section for hypothetical match ups, take them away and you're looking at a handful of threads a month. Take Ali away and it's a ghost land.
-
SaadOffTheDeck
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 19602
- Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
gilgamesh wrote:I think it's just fine. Duce is gonna post something derogatory about Ali every day. Vladimir is gonna post somewhere between 3 to 10 Hypothetical matchups everyday.
It's all good really.
If the other stuff were such interesting subjects, they would keep finding their way to the top.
Amazing how many people are complaining about this forum being active. I guess they just ignored it when it wasn't for the last couple years.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
i don't know. i feel like the more profound,
but as well more civilized posters, are drawing
back and leave the forum to the noisy trolls
and semi-trolls. i always enjoyed this part for
its more profound analysis and manners, but
on the first page i only see vlad matchups and
clay bashing. just bores me ...
but as well more civilized posters, are drawing
back and leave the forum to the noisy trolls
and semi-trolls. i always enjoyed this part for
its more profound analysis and manners, but
on the first page i only see vlad matchups and
clay bashing. just bores me ...
-
SaadOffTheDeck
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 19602
- Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
Without that stuff there would be virtually nothing. If you're bored, don't read them or post. Hit the archives and read from all the civilized and profound posters of the past. Maybe they should start a forum for posters of the past? There's an idea.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
Several of the more knowledgeable posters on Boxers of the Past are still regular posters here. I'll readily admit I don't know as much about some of the old timers as guys like Saad, and Dempseyfire, and Ezzard and a few others.
But I tend to only comment on fighters I've seen fight a lot of the time. If I know it's a guy like Greb or Langford that I know, nobody saw anymore of him than I did and they did nothing but read about him their damn self, I'll comment on him.
My point is, there's not really any trolls here. Calling Il Duce a semi-troll is somewhat accurate I guess, as he clearly has an axe to grind and he just can't get it sharp enough...but whatever like Saad says, at least somebody's talking around here.
But I tend to only comment on fighters I've seen fight a lot of the time. If I know it's a guy like Greb or Langford that I know, nobody saw anymore of him than I did and they did nothing but read about him their damn self, I'll comment on him.
My point is, there's not really any trolls here. Calling Il Duce a semi-troll is somewhat accurate I guess, as he clearly has an axe to grind and he just can't get it sharp enough...but whatever like Saad says, at least somebody's talking around here.
-
SaadOffTheDeck
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 19602
- Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
I'd much rather see a post about Johnston vs Nazarov than a post whining about someone posting about Johnston & Nazarov.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
I'm so old I remember the Marciano epidemic we had here. Every other thread.....
Now it's Ali, give it a few months....it will be 24/7 Tyson.
Now it's Ali, give it a few months....it will be 24/7 Tyson.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15173
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
Sounds like a good idea; therefore it won't happen.man wrote:since months BOTP is swamped with all kinds
of matchups ... and while i'm at it, why not make
a section for cassius clay threads as well ...
in the past this section here had more diversity
of topcis and posters, but it seems that it was
hitchhiked as of recent.
It is too bad that when someone comes up with a good idea for a thread that often it gets so little attention. Quickly it is on page 2 and onto oblivion after being squeezed out by the non interesting fantasy matchups and IL Duce BS threads.
Surely this Forum can be better than just randomly picking names of fighters and guessing who will win these matchups that hardly anyone really cares about.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
I see no reason why people can't have their inquisitive hypotheticals on the board with their name attached.
Just expressing themselves....and I don't feel anyone is being hurt in the process.
These sorts of things ebb and flow over the years.
Just expressing themselves....and I don't feel anyone is being hurt in the process.
These sorts of things ebb and flow over the years.
-
Vladimir5555
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 1221
- Joined: 12 Apr 2013, 11:38
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
I see on this forum most popular fantasy matches with Heavyweights;-).
-
loaded_gloves
- Cruiserweight
- Posts: 1907
- Joined: 09 Mar 2011, 12:18
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
At what price the activity?
And what is the quality of the activity?
Duce floods the forum with senile gibberish repeating the same made-up point over and over and the spam of mythical matchups all seem to be served up to provide confirmation bias for the poster who wants to double check his modern Aryan demi-gods are the best of all time therfore he doesn't need to invest hours of study on boxing history or watch dusty old negroid black & white boxing.
It's boxers of the past, it should be a quiet, slow moving, more cerebral atmos like the library. It should take weeks for an interesting new conversation on Jimmy Wilde, Battling Siki, or Max Schmeling to evolve. If you want to hear braindead morons jabbering rapidly about nothing on the street corner you have current scene. I don't like these mindless fools hanging around my neighbourhood, up to no good.
I sound like an old man.
And what is the quality of the activity?
Duce floods the forum with senile gibberish repeating the same made-up point over and over and the spam of mythical matchups all seem to be served up to provide confirmation bias for the poster who wants to double check his modern Aryan demi-gods are the best of all time therfore he doesn't need to invest hours of study on boxing history or watch dusty old negroid black & white boxing.
It's boxers of the past, it should be a quiet, slow moving, more cerebral atmos like the library. It should take weeks for an interesting new conversation on Jimmy Wilde, Battling Siki, or Max Schmeling to evolve. If you want to hear braindead morons jabbering rapidly about nothing on the street corner you have current scene. I don't like these mindless fools hanging around my neighbourhood, up to no good.
I sound like an old man.
-
Ambling Alp II
- Super Middleweight
- Posts: 15173
- Joined: 04 Nov 2012, 18:31
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
I dunno if you sound like an old man, but you are making sense.
Often time an interesting topic gets crowded out by the babble.
When there is 20 meaningless fantasy matchup threads on the first page of the Forum, other more interesting threads usually aren't going to get a lot of attention.
In fact, it seems the more interesting the post, the less chance it has of people responding. However, if you start a post saying "Tyson sucks" or something like that it will get a lot of traction.
Often time an interesting topic gets crowded out by the babble.
When there is 20 meaningless fantasy matchup threads on the first page of the Forum, other more interesting threads usually aren't going to get a lot of attention.
In fact, it seems the more interesting the post, the less chance it has of people responding. However, if you start a post saying "Tyson sucks" or something like that it will get a lot of traction.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
That's where we utilize the magic of the ol' bump....or comment....to RISE.....to the top.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
Don't be so bitter, Dunce.Il Duce wrote:Hypothetical Match Ups,,,,
Should be 'reserved' for that 'skank site' down the road........ESB.
You posted there for years until they finally heeded the call to boot your racist ass.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
Ambling Alp II wrote:Sounds like a good idea; therefore it won't happen.man wrote:since months BOTP is swamped with all kinds
of matchups ... and while i'm at it, why not make
a section for cassius clay threads as well ...
in the past this section here had more diversity
of topcis and posters, but it seems that it was
hitchhiked as of recent.
It is too bad that when someone comes up with a good idea for a thread that often it gets so little attention. Quickly it is on page 2 and onto oblivion after being squeezed out by the non interesting fantasy matchups and IL Duce BS threads.
Surely this Forum can be better than just randomly picking names of fighters and guessing who will win these matchups that hardly anyone really cares about.
Boxing is the one sport where its fans are most interested how the practitioners of today would have fared against the practitioners of yesterday and how the practitioners from one era would have fared from the practitioners of another era.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
Giancarlo wrote:Don't be so bitter, Dunce.Il Duce wrote:Hypothetical Match Ups,,,,
Should be 'reserved' for that 'skank site' down the road........ESB.
You posted there for years until they finally heeded the call to boot your racist ass.
I "love" Duce as a poster. What would really make this board a gas if if granberry returned.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
Every individual Hypothetical match that's been posted is better than all of your Ali hate threads combined.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
Il Duce wrote:No they aren't.gilgamesh wrote:Every individual Hypothetical match that's been posted is better than all of your Ali hate threads combined.
Isn't that why you follow everyone of my posts.
"Touchdown"
Can you somehow petition granberrry to return to posting here?
That would really liven things up.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
I see your posts as a competition you're having with yourself to see if you can be stupider with your next post than you were with your last. You usually deliver.Il Duce wrote:No they aren't.gilgamesh wrote:Every individual Hypothetical match that's been posted is better than all of your Ali hate threads combined.
Isn't that why you follow everyone of my posts.
"Touchdown"
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
Il Duce...did you live in Louisville? I called it my home for about a decade.
I lived in the Hurstbourne area. I often played at Porters, and the Sealbach Hotel with a singer named
Gary Edwards.
I lived in the Hurstbourne area. I often played at Porters, and the Sealbach Hotel with a singer named
Gary Edwards.
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
not day-in day-out. fantasy matchup afterThatOne wrote:Boxing is the one sport where its fans are most interested how the practitioners of today would have fared against the practitioners of yesterday and how the practitioners from one era would have fared from the practitioners of another era.
fantasy matchup. these and the "clay sucks"-
routine will turn this section into a backwards
version of CS. actually no, it already has.
including the racism.
sad.
-
SaadOffTheDeck
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 19602
- Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
Anything > nothing, even if it merely inspires complaints. BTW, Jimmy Wilde is overrated as hell.loaded_gloves wrote:At what price the activity?
And what is the quality of the activity?
Duce floods the forum with senile gibberish repeating the same made-up point over and over and the spam of mythical matchups all seem to be served up to provide confirmation bias for the poster who wants to double check his modern Aryan demi-gods are the best of all time therfore he doesn't need to invest hours of study on boxing history or watch dusty old negroid black & white boxing.
It's boxers of the past, it should be a quiet, slow moving, more cerebral atmos like the library. It should take weeks for an interesting new conversation on Jimmy Wilde, Battling Siki, or Max Schmeling to evolve. If you want to hear braindead morons jabbering rapidly about nothing on the street corner you have current scene. I don't like these mindless fools hanging around my neighbourhood, up to no good.
I sound like an old man.
Last edited by SaadOffTheDeck on 07 Oct 2013, 14:41, edited 1 time in total.
-
SaadOffTheDeck
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 19602
- Joined: 04 Jun 2009, 07:38
Re: how about a section for hypothetical matchups?
Yeah, God forbid someone has to click page 2 to get back to these wondrous debates.BoxBuzz wrote:That's where we utilize the magic of the ol' bump....or comment....to RISE.....to the top.