Antonio Cervantes ~ Controversial Loss To Wilfred Benitez

[BoxBuzz]

Il Duce, your contributions are a dilemma for many of us.

In this specific case, I have a high regard for Antonio Cervantes whom I have met and had the honor and privilege to spend time with in Hawaii, I feel I got to know a little of who he is with in that brief encounter.

I'd love to imagine he could have beaten Benitez that night. In fact I think if he would have taken the youngster seriously, he would have trained in a manner that would have lead to his victory. And I'd like to say, that I sense that the Antonnio Cervantes that I spent time with, was nothing if not a genuine sportsman.

So wherever you choose to take this thread, I will never buy into anything that hints at him giving into the cheating for profit scenario. He was PRIZE FIGHTER yes, but a SPORTSMAN, GENTLEMAN and HONEST HUMAN BEING first and foremost.

In my humble opinion, it's one thing to shoot your bullshit twinkie derringer at one of the most famous and most controversial personalities the world has ever known.
Because for most of us, our opinions are already set, and we've heard it all before, both the positive and the negative.

But this is a man most of us know little about outside of his boxing career, it pains me to think that his reputation AS A PERSON would suffer at your vile vomiting of vebage.


I would like to take this time to testify in this man's behalf, and assure any readers of this thread, that if IL DUCE makes an assertion of compromised principles in regards to Antonio, that it is pure horse shyt. Plain and simple.

For the most part, all boxers would be considered public figures and are fair game for folks like the Big Douche to take shots at as they please. So one may have the right to:

A: Imagineer, and invent any story they wish, and
B: Do some lame detective work, and "attempt to connect the dots" which is what Il often Duce does in his inimitable and often insane ways.

When it's benign or positive, I have an easier time with his fiction. And some of what he writes may be spot on, but it's like searching for Waldo, within all the tripe he produces.

And of course Duce always want to assert that everything he says is NOT OPINION but is certifiable.

Actually his stuff does come from a "certifiable" source. Il Duce himself.

As the saying goes:
Let the buyer/reader beware.


Buzz


Now here is some interesting reading on a totally unrelated topic.

The word "nincompoop" has certainly earned its ranking as one of the most enjoyable words to pronounce in the English language, regardless of the fact that no one quite knows how or when it was coined. Essentially, a word describes a fool, a stupid person whose incompetence or naïveté is quite apparent. It is often used to describe people of a much lower social ranking, although some may describe an unpopular or incompetent leader as an "utter nincompoop." For others, the word could be used interchangeably with other pejoratives such as "nimrod," "ninny" or "numb skull." In military circles, an incompetent non-commissioned officer may be called a "noncompoop".

The origin of this word is a matter of speculation, although there are a few interesting theories. One of the earliest literary uses of "nincompoop" occurred in a 1676 play called The Plain Dealer, written by British playwright William Wycherley. One character scolds another, calling him a "senseless, impertinent, quibbling, drivelling, feeble, paralytic, impotent, fumbling, frigid nincompoop." Even earlier references contain the variant spellings "nicompoop" and "nickumpoop."

Some have speculated that the word is a nonsense word that combines elements of other words implying ignorance or stupidity. The word "ninny," for example, was a corruption of "innocent," meaning a naïve or gullible person. In Dutch, the word poop was often used to describe a fool. It is conceivable that the originator of "nincompoop" was seeking to combine several unsophisticated words into one nonsensical but descriptive word.

[BoxBuzz]

I'm sure I don't know Ramiro as well as you do.

But while we are asking simple innocent yet probing questions.

Where were you, in terms of longitude and latitude lines, when you lost every lick of common sense yo momma done gave you?


Now keep in mind,

I'm only "asking" the question, and waiting for an educated response.

[wouter]

In my humble opinion, it's one thing to shoot your bullshit twinkie derringer at one of the most famous and most controversial personalities the world has ever known.
Because for most of us, our opinions are already set, and we've heard it all before, both the positive and the negative.

But this is a man most of us know little about outside of his boxing career, it pains me to think that his reputation AS A PERSON would suffer at your vile vomiting of vebage.

Do I detect some double standards here, or do you regard Rudi Lubbers as one of the most famous and most controversial persons the world has ever known?

[palooka]

Harry Greb was one of the most famous and most controversial personalities the world has ever known?

[BoxBuzz]

In my humble opinion, it's one thing to shoot your bullshit twinkie derringer at one of the most famous and most controversial personalities the world has ever known.
Because for most of us, our opinions are already set, and we've heard it all before, both the positive and the negative.

But this is a man most of us know little about outside of his boxing career, it pains me to think that his reputation AS A PERSON would suffer at your vile vomiting of vebage.

Do I detect some double standards here, or do you regard Rudi Lubbers as one of the most famous and most controversial persons the world has ever known?

Yes, in this case I have a clear double standard.....perhaps not quite in the way that you mean.

It is clearly Il Duce's right to fictionalize, and or ask questions.

In the case of Antonio, I simply am exercising my right to defend the man on this forum. So I do, and will, because I can.

I don't have that option in Rudi's case, since I never met him. My guess is it's the same situation. But my standard would be to hone in, if I could shed light on Rudi as well.

I believe Il Duce upsests some of us, because he chooses to. He will say he is simply informing us of things we were not aware of.
I will say he makes up much of it as it goes along.
We need to be wise and exercised of mind enough, to know that we should not gobble down every little tidbit of info he pukes out, and imagine it to be so.

In this case, I'm simply issuing notice, that this tidbit, is most likely horse puckey, based on MY thoughts of what this man is truly like, based on my time spent with this honorable and humble gentleman.

Wouter in this case, you (just like me) has to decide what the eff he's up to.......again. Maybe it's enlightenment?.......Nah.

[Broomhall]

Il Duce, if you have evidence Cervantes was corrupt, and can prove this, then please publish it and tell us what it is and what you know.

If it is all hearsay and supposition then you should not be slurring a fighting mans reputation. If you have proof let us have it. Or at least tell us what you know.

[giacomino]

I generally stay out of the discussions on Ol' Mussolini's stories, but ya'll are taking his shite too seriously. The internet is full of people who make shite up or ask questions aimed at making people respond emotionally. In the U.S., Fox News and MSNBC provide 24 hours of such bullshite. Was Michael Jordan a transvestite? Was Hilter Jewish? Was Margaret Thatcher a man? Is Obama a Kenyan Socialist who hates America? Were all 20 Ali title defenses fixed? Did the Cowboys purposely blow the 1967 Ice Bowl? I was a huge Cervantes fan during the 70s, but he wasn't infallible. Il Duce isn't going to provide proof. He's just asking a question and looking for a reaction. Fox oughta hire him

[BoxBuzz]

Are you a bad researcher? All signs point to it. But that doesn't mean it's so. Maybe you're not a researcher at all.

[BoxBuzz]

any good parts?

[Bobbyptsd]

I generally stay out of the discussions on Ol' Mussolini's stories, but ya'll are taking his shite too seriously. The internet is full of people who make shite up or ask questions aimed at making people respond emotionally. In the U.S., Fox News and MSNBC provide 24 hours of such bullshite. Was Michael Jordan a transvestite? Was Hilter Jewish? Was Margaret Thatcher a man? Is Obama a Kenyan Socialist who hates America? Were all 20 Ali title defenses fixed? Did the Cowboys purposely blow the 1967 Ice Bowl? I was a huge Cervantes fan during the 70s, but he wasn't infallible. Il Duce isn't going to provide proof. He's just asking a question and looking for a reaction. Fox oughta hire him

I see your point, but respectfully disagree. Duce is not just "asking a question", we all know that. He's trying to imply something bad. The same way people try to imply something bad when they have a vested interest on the topics you mentioned, as well as many others.

We are all smart enough to see the difference between asking an innocent question, and trying to insinuate something without wanting to say it directly. And that's what gets me the most, it's that he doesn't even have the guts to say directly what he thinks. I'd actually respect him a bit if he did that, oddly enough.

There's a way of framing the discussion(a discussion he always starts, at that) which clearly puts a negative bias on it. If that's not trolling and mods deem that he should stay that's fine, but let's not pretend he's just "Asking a question". To put it another way:

"I wonder what that Giacomino guy does for a living?"

and:

"I wonder if that Giacomino guy is actually a criminal? I'm not saying he is, but is he? I think he might be, just a feeling I have"

Are two vastly different things for me to say. One is a simple question, the other is a seed planted in bad faith. If I'm allowed to plant that seed, I suppose it is what it is, but we shouldn't sit around pretending I'm "just asking a question".

[wouter]

Of course > Antonio 'Kid Pambele' Cervantes was a Great Fighter, as I posted many details of his bouts that I researched, and found about 25 other bouts that I added to Box/Rec.

You mean the bouts found by 'Paul Cesarine' with help from 'Colombian journalist Alberto Contreras'? I'm afraid we're going to have to take a 'long and critical look' at these.

[Dart340]

One thing I've learned in my time on boxing message boards is that no fighter ever threw a fight, ever. Not even if they could make more money throwing said fight, take much less physical punishment, and broker a deal for an even more lucrative rematch. Never happened. All boxers are "Salt of the Earth" types who live for the integrity of the sport and are not motivated by money and would instinctively turn down any offer that even hints of corrupting the sport they hold so dear. Even when they are managed by Carnies and mobsters. That's why we all love boxing so much.

Is Duce working off rumors and innuendos? You betcha he is. Get the criticism. But he's probably closer to the truth more often that you'd like to think.

And BoxBuzz, your passionate defense of Cervantes, a man you've never met and have no idea of his financial motivations, character, or management, was as silly as anything Duce has ever said on this board.

[BoxBuzz]

ouch....you really need to read my contribution.

I have met him, but from your perspective I'm sure my imaginings are no different than Duce's.

And, yes as I quite often say in such cases, this is "my take" so definitely both an opinion, and an imagining.

I would venture to guess, that in every human endeavor there are cheats, they represent probably about the same percentage in boxing as they do across every walk of life. When I met this man, I felt I met an honest man.

So...my take on his good honest character was nothing more than that an opinion.....never claimed otherwise.

My innuendo vs Il Duce's darker innuendo.

Take your pick.


Funny how I feel different about people talking respectfully and positively about people behind there backs, than I do about the opposite behavior.

Just a character flaw I suppose.

[BoxBuzz]

This started back on December 11, 1975 >

As Don King was trying to 'lock up' a bout between Robert Duran vs. Antonio Cervantes for April/May 1976
and had 'signed' agreements between both representatives.

Don King had a '3-Bout' deal signed with Carlos Eleta, with Roberto defending his WBA Lightweight Title
against >
* Leonico Ortiz {December > in Puerto Rico}
* Angel Mayoral {February 1976> in Puerto Rico or Las Vegas}

17 year-old Wilfred Benitez wasn't even a 'Blimp-on-the-Radar' at that time.

A "Blimp" has a rather large Radar Signature.

[p4p1]

On a related note, when was Benitez's true age found out? Did he or his father receive any punishment and couldn't have there been grounds to rule his pro wins before he was 18 NCs?

[BoxBuzz]

I believe that would be the "Puerto Rican Goodyear Blimp".

Good...worried it might have been the Hindenburg Zeppelin.

[Giancarlo]

Of course > Antonio 'Kid Pambele' Cervantes was a Great Fighter, as I posted many details of his bouts that I researched, and found about 25 other bouts that I added to Box/Rec.

You mean the bouts found by 'Paul Cesarine' with help from 'Colombian journalist Alberto Contreras'? I'm afraid we're going to have to take a 'long and critical look' at these.

Anything this clown comes up with in the records section should be deleted pending a proper investigation after the "Bunky Birthday Bullsh1t".

[Giancarlo]

Is Duce working off rumors and innuendos? You betcha he is. Get the criticism. But he's probably closer to the truth more often that you'd like to think.

Did we ever find out why he made up Bunky's birthday and tried to get it inserted into the record section?

You condone that sort of thing Mr Dart?

[Dart340]

Buzz, like you as a Mod and a poster, seemed like you were reacting half cocked against Duce and getting really emotional over something that didn't deserve it. I'd say, though, considering the state of boxing as we knew it then, that if Kid Pambele took a payoff to lose to Benitez for a big score and let himself wear the cuffs that I would not see that as a complete indictment of his character or worth as a person. Might have been the smart move financially and healthwise for him. If he did, I'd say he was playing the cards dealt at the table he was sitting and I wouldn't blame him.

Giancarlo, don't know who "Bunky" is, but if Duce committed a crime against him then I believe the book should be thrown full weight against him. I think you spend waaayyyyyy too much time being "offended and outraged" by what Duce posts instead of amused.

Myself, I'd clank a beer with Duce any day of the week, his lifelong campaign against Ali notwithstanding. He makes great threads about obscure fighters from the 70's, digs up stuff I have questions about, and I remember him thoroughly (and I mean thoroughly) debunking the whole Ayala Jr-Cuevas sparring nonsense on another message board with absolute bulletproof logic and documentation. For that alone, I'd catch his tab.

You guys need to stop taking Duce so seriously. Seriously. Surely there some disadvantaged kids somewhere being taken advantage of that deserve your outrage more than him.

[Giancarlo]

Myself, I'd clank a beer with Duce any day of the week, his lifelong campaign against Ali notwithstanding. He makes great threads about obscure fighters from the 70's, digs up stuff I have questions about, and I remember him thoroughly (and I mean thoroughly) debunking the whole Ayala Jr-Cuevas sparring nonsense on another message board with absolute bulletproof logic and documentation. For that alone, I'd catch his tab.

You guys need to stop taking Duce so seriously. Seriously. Surely there some disadvantaged kids somewhere being taken advantage of that deserve your outrage more than him.

So, after banging on about how you believe every story he makes up, you tell us we shouldn't take him seriously.

Every heard of irony, Dart?

[giacomino]

I generally stay out of the discussions on Ol' Mussolini's stories, but ya'll are taking his shite too seriously. The internet is full of people who make shite up or ask questions aimed at making people respond emotionally. In the U.S., Fox News and MSNBC provide 24 hours of such bullshite. Was Michael Jordan a transvestite? Was Hilter Jewish? Was Margaret Thatcher a man? Is Obama a Kenyan Socialist who hates America? Were all 20 Ali title defenses fixed? Did the Cowboys purposely blow the 1967 Ice Bowl? I was a huge Cervantes fan during the 70s, but he wasn't infallible. Il Duce isn't going to provide proof. He's just asking a question and looking for a reaction. Fox oughta hire him

I see your point, but respectfully disagree. Duce is not just "asking a question", we all know that. He's trying to imply something bad. The same way people try to imply something bad when they have a vested interest on the topics you mentioned, as well as many others.

We are all smart enough to see the difference between asking an innocent question, and trying to insinuate something without wanting to say it directly. And that's what gets me the most, it's that he doesn't even have the guts to say directly what he thinks. I'd actually respect him a bit if he did that, oddly enough.

There's a way of framing the discussion(a discussion he always starts, at that) which clearly puts a negative bias on it. If that's not trolling and mods deem that he should stay that's fine, but let's not pretend he's just "Asking a question". To put it another way:

"I wonder what that Giacomino guy does for a living?"

and:

"I wonder if that Giacomino guy is actually a criminal? I'm not saying he is, but is he? I think he might be, just a feeling I have"

Are two vastly different things for me to say. One is a simple question, the other is a seed planted in bad faith. If I'm allowed to plant that seed, I suppose it is what it is, but we shouldn't sit around pretending I'm "just asking a question".

Bobby, I think you misunderstood me or I was unclear. I am saying he is trolling and posts like this should be ignored. Just as I ignore the nonsense trolling on Fox and MSNBC with their "questions," I simply think feeding someone trolling just makes them more hungry. Il Duce obviously feeds off responses.

And I just added one

[BoxBuzz]

Not sure dart is saying he believes him, but that he don't mind listening while Duce flaps his gums. And on occasion just like the stopped clock, he may be right.

He has little genuine corroboration. And though he can spin whole yarns that seem plausible at times..his overall body of work seems more insidious and odd than anything else.

But insidious and odd can be of interest, as long as you don't imagine that his alternate take on the universe has any necessary relationship with the one we live in.


I sort of like having a conversation about him as if he's not here Partly because I suspect he's really NOT all here.

[Bobbyptsd]

I generally stay out of the discussions on Ol' Mussolini's stories, but ya'll are taking his shite too seriously. The internet is full of people who make shite up or ask questions aimed at making people respond emotionally. In the U.S., Fox News and MSNBC provide 24 hours of such bullshite. Was Michael Jordan a transvestite? Was Hilter Jewish? Was Margaret Thatcher a man? Is Obama a Kenyan Socialist who hates America? Were all 20 Ali title defenses fixed? Did the Cowboys purposely blow the 1967 Ice Bowl? I was a huge Cervantes fan during the 70s, but he wasn't infallible. Il Duce isn't going to provide proof. He's just asking a question and looking for a reaction. Fox oughta hire him

I see your point, but respectfully disagree. Duce is not just "asking a question", we all know that. He's trying to imply something bad. The same way people try to imply something bad when they have a vested interest on the topics you mentioned, as well as many others.

We are all smart enough to see the difference between asking an innocent question, and trying to insinuate something without wanting to say it directly. And that's what gets me the most, it's that he doesn't even have the guts to say directly what he thinks. I'd actually respect him a bit if he did that, oddly enough.

There's a way of framing the discussion(a discussion he always starts, at that) which clearly puts a negative bias on it. If that's not trolling and mods deem that he should stay that's fine, but let's not pretend he's just "Asking a question". To put it another way:

"I wonder what that Giacomino guy does for a living?"

and:

"I wonder if that Giacomino guy is actually a criminal? I'm not saying he is, but is he? I think he might be, just a feeling I have"

Are two vastly different things for me to say. One is a simple question, the other is a seed planted in bad faith. If I'm allowed to plant that seed, I suppose it is what it is, but we shouldn't sit around pretending I'm "just asking a question".

Bobby, I think you misunderstood me or I was unclear. I am saying he is trolling and posts like this should be ignored. Just as I ignore the nonsense trolling on Fox and MSNBC with their "questions," I simply think feeding someone trolling just makes them more hungry. Il Duce obviously feeds off responses.

And I just added one

Sorry about that, I suppose I missed the forest for the trees in your post back there.

And don't feel too bad, I add to his threads sometimes of course. But I think compared to some of the threads where he's discussing solely by himself, or with his sock puppet account, it isn't that big of a deal.

[Dart340]

You guys are missing the point. BoxBuzz, you should get it. Giancarlo, you act like an enraged child on this board following Duce around raging at everything he says and I don't think you can get it. You're like an old widow woman shrieking about overcooked cornbread and you contribute absolutely Zilch to any thread I've ever seen you "participate" in. Whether Duce eventually gets bounced or not, doubt that will change.

It's really simple. I click on threads Duce starts that I believe will be interesting. The "Bad News" Wallace thread, for instance. Or I start a thread and Duce adds something substantial. I get something good. Duce and I get along and the world is a harmonious place.

I see the 765th Ali thread or a Harry Greb "Let's bait Klompton" thread and I either avoid it altogether (see how easy this is?) or I read it and don't take it as some titanic threat (see how easy that is?) to the hallowed halls of boxing history and start petitions to ban him off the board or send e-mails to my Congressman. I get the good from Duce, ignore the bad and the world is still a harmonious place. This tactic works well in other areas of life too and allows you to find value in folks you don't always agree with.

I don't believe everything anyone says, especially on this board. It's a message board to voice OPINIONS on classic boxing, for Chrissakes. I come here for entertainment, a diversion from the stress of life, and to occasionally relive or learn something about my favorite period in a sport that has largely died and isn't likely ever coming back to life the way I want to remember it.

Is it really that hard to understand?

[Giancarlo]

Dart, please keep posting.

I find your long-winded gibberish and lack of self-awareness quite funny.