Well I find it far more offensive to see a fighter biting another fighter rather than a fighter hitting another fighter after they have gone down. For one thing hitting someone low or when they have gone down can be accidential or something done in the heat of the moment. However biting is a whole different thing, how do you bite someones ears accidentailly?.... twice??. When Butler threw that punch it was very offensive because it was after the fight had finished and when his opponent was going to shake his hand... but Tysons actions were no less abhorent. The thing here is the intent behind the actions...barry wrote:>>>You did bring Leonard vs Britton up as an example, but you haven't told me how Leonards disq compares with Tysons?.<<<
That's because it doesn't compare...they both were DQ'd for breaking the rules and they both were DQ'd and lost because of it, that's all there is to it...neither bout is less offensive than the other, they both lost and that's is the only thing comparable and which is the only thing that I have been saying...you're the one trying to make it into a comparision, of which I have ignorned because it's silly...as I said at the very beginning...Leonard was a lightweight, Tyson a heavyweight!
So in direct contradiction to your post,
"This coming from someone who compares Mike Tyson to Benny Leonard!!!..."
It is you that is trying to compare the two...not me, so quit trying to make things up because I'll certainly throw it back into your face when you do!
Tyson Could've Been The Greatest, Hands Down.
Re: re
Barry your arguments are made up of and I quote..."you know nothing...you are full of shit...do you think anyone agrees with you...you are childish etc etc etc. You say everyone talks crap and doesn't give any evidence but that is exactly what you do!
4 people on this thread agree with me so the fact you keep saying..."do you think people believe what you say etc.." is rubbish and shows you don't understand other people opinions.
Ok Barry instead of dodging the issues, ranting on and not giving evidence answer me one question......
What experience do you have of boxing? Have you ever boxed? Because I can't believe someone with such a high opinion of themselves and their boxing knowledge has not boxed. You keep giving it big time so I want to know how and why you think you know so much and why you think you are always right and everyone else knows nothing when they disagree with you. I'll be happy to discuss my experience if you want?
4 people on this thread agree with me so the fact you keep saying..."do you think people believe what you say etc.." is rubbish and shows you don't understand other people opinions.
Ok Barry instead of dodging the issues, ranting on and not giving evidence answer me one question......
What experience do you have of boxing? Have you ever boxed? Because I can't believe someone with such a high opinion of themselves and their boxing knowledge has not boxed. You keep giving it big time so I want to know how and why you think you know so much and why you think you are always right and everyone else knows nothing when they disagree with you. I'll be happy to discuss my experience if you want?
Re: re
Wow ,I did not know that Tyson came out for that round without his mouthpiece in! Thanks for that info didnt know that. Unreal.silkov wrote:barry wrote:>>>Do you really think hitting someone in the heat of the moment when they are down on one knee compares with biting someones ears off twice???....<<<
O'kay, you want another example fine...something newer...Tomas Molinares knocking Marlon Starling out cold after the bell!
Yeah Molinares pulled back to throw the punch when the bell rang and still threw it koing Starling... how does this compare with Tyson biting Holyfield?... it was accidental and deemed I think a real knockout because Molinares pulled back to throw the punch before the bell rang.
Another example is when I think a fighter named tony anothony?? (not clear on the name) floored Mike Waever after the bell of their 1st round I think... the punch was thrown fully after the bell and was clearly a foul.
Another example which is probably closest to Tyson biting Holyfield is when James Butler punched his opponent after the end of their bout (which he'd lost) koing him and breaking his jaw... this is the worst thing I've seen in the ring other than the Tyson spectacle.
Its worth noting that Butler served time in jail for what he did and Tyson could have been looking at a jail sentence for his bites but Holyfield didn't want to take things any further.
Another thing to remember is that Tyson went out in that round without his mouthpeice in and so had decided on what he was going to do befor the start of the round.... its not possible to bite your opponent with your mouthpeice in....
Re: re
Well that shows the intent doesn't it?... this wasn't someone having a brainstorm and not knowing what they were doing (not that thats an excuse either) but this was someone who had decided what he was going to do before hand... the fact that he did it twice bears this out.expug wrote:Wow ,I did not know that Tyson came out for that round without his mouthpiece in! Thanks for that info didnt know that. Unreal.silkov wrote:barry wrote:>>>Do you really think hitting someone in the heat of the moment when they are down on one knee compares with biting someones ears off twice???....<<<
O'kay, you want another example fine...something newer...Tomas Molinares knocking Marlon Starling out cold after the bell!
Yeah Molinares pulled back to throw the punch when the bell rang and still threw it koing Starling... how does this compare with Tyson biting Holyfield?... it was accidental and deemed I think a real knockout because Molinares pulled back to throw the punch before the bell rang.
Another example is when I think a fighter named tony anothony?? (not clear on the name) floored Mike Waever after the bell of their 1st round I think... the punch was thrown fully after the bell and was clearly a foul.
Another example which is probably closest to Tyson biting Holyfield is when James Butler punched his opponent after the end of their bout (which he'd lost) koing him and breaking his jaw... this is the worst thing I've seen in the ring other than the Tyson spectacle.
Its worth noting that Butler served time in jail for what he did and Tyson could have been looking at a jail sentence for his bites but Holyfield didn't want to take things any further.
Another thing to remember is that Tyson went out in that round without his mouthpeice in and so had decided on what he was going to do befor the start of the round.... its not possible to bite your opponent with your mouthpeice in....
The reason I keep going back to the Holyfield fights is because they show more then anything Tysons mental flaws and why he shouldnt be regarded as an all time great champion because of these flaws....
And he did it twice!... people forget that had he not done it again the fight would have carried on even though Tyson had bitten a bit of Evanders ear off!!. I really feel he should never have been allowed to fight again after that night, it sullied boxings reputation so much.... and lets not forget all the other fouls Mike commited in his career... low blows, headbutts, armlocks! etc... its really nothing short of ludicrous that Tyson sought to defend his biting by saying Evander butted him...Decagon wrote:You can't compare taking off a part of a man's ear to hitting someone while they're down. Part of the reason Tyson got banned from boxing in Nevada was that.
re
>>>4 people on this thread agree with me so the fact you keep saying<<<
Four people agree...who are they and what do they agree? Some of you cats try to make up more than you actually try to debate, so you'll have to point out what it is because you have spouted out so much silly nonsense in this thread it's difficult to figure if you are faking, or just really that dense!
By the way, no one is trying to compare unintentional low blows, or head-butting in the heat of battle as being the same, but when someone winds up and just nails his opponent in the balls, well sorry, but it's no better than biting an opponent, which is why the person will be more than likely immediately be DQ'd.
>>>What experience do you have of boxing? Have you ever boxed? Because I can't believe someone with such a high opinion of themselves and their boxing knowledge has not boxed. You keep giving it big time so I want to know how and why you think you know so much and why you think you are always right and everyone else knows nothing when they disagree with you. I'll be happy to discuss my experience if you want?<<<
So now you want to know what experience I have...well I have followed the sport since 1978, I have been a very dedicated researcher of the sport since around 1985...I have two bookcases full of history books, biographies, record books from the early 1900s up to today, I have close to 23,000 photo's, tons and tons of newspaper reports, tons and tons of fight results from newspapers, every IBRO jounral that has ever been published, I correspond on a daily basis with some of the absolute top historians in the world from several different countries, I correspond with some former world champions and former top contenders, which is who I go to to ask questions about actual in-ring data, such as what is it like to fight with a really bad cut, does it take extra heart to do so, or does it really effect you, which was answered by some of the most qualified people that could answer the question, or any other questions that I might have I would go to them that really know, plus I have between 1000 and 2000 various magazines dating from the late 1800s up to the present day of which I have pretty much read every issue that I have, so basically I have 20+ years and countless hours of dedicated research and study on the sport, but it is never anything that I have tried to brag about, but since you wanted to know, then I'll tell you....so now wise-ass, tell me what qualifies you better than me.
Four people agree...who are they and what do they agree? Some of you cats try to make up more than you actually try to debate, so you'll have to point out what it is because you have spouted out so much silly nonsense in this thread it's difficult to figure if you are faking, or just really that dense!
By the way, no one is trying to compare unintentional low blows, or head-butting in the heat of battle as being the same, but when someone winds up and just nails his opponent in the balls, well sorry, but it's no better than biting an opponent, which is why the person will be more than likely immediately be DQ'd.
>>>What experience do you have of boxing? Have you ever boxed? Because I can't believe someone with such a high opinion of themselves and their boxing knowledge has not boxed. You keep giving it big time so I want to know how and why you think you know so much and why you think you are always right and everyone else knows nothing when they disagree with you. I'll be happy to discuss my experience if you want?<<<
So now you want to know what experience I have...well I have followed the sport since 1978, I have been a very dedicated researcher of the sport since around 1985...I have two bookcases full of history books, biographies, record books from the early 1900s up to today, I have close to 23,000 photo's, tons and tons of newspaper reports, tons and tons of fight results from newspapers, every IBRO jounral that has ever been published, I correspond on a daily basis with some of the absolute top historians in the world from several different countries, I correspond with some former world champions and former top contenders, which is who I go to to ask questions about actual in-ring data, such as what is it like to fight with a really bad cut, does it take extra heart to do so, or does it really effect you, which was answered by some of the most qualified people that could answer the question, or any other questions that I might have I would go to them that really know, plus I have between 1000 and 2000 various magazines dating from the late 1800s up to the present day of which I have pretty much read every issue that I have, so basically I have 20+ years and countless hours of dedicated research and study on the sport, but it is never anything that I have tried to brag about, but since you wanted to know, then I'll tell you....so now wise-ass, tell me what qualifies you better than me.
re
>>>I really feel he should never have been allowed to fight again after that night, it sullied boxings reputation so much....<<<
That is just such bullshit. Do you think Tyson was the first fighter to take chunk out of an opponent? It has happened often in boxing, but what is even worse than that was former German contender Peter Muller knocking out the referee...yet he was able to fight again, but I guess you wouldn't even hold him as accountable as Tyson...right? There have been far worse tragedies than Tyson biting Holyfield...you are just too melodramatic that one incident and less uninformed about some of the rule-breaking that has went on in boxing through the years...Tyson is just an easy target as his deeds have been publicized all over the world!
That is just such bullshit. Do you think Tyson was the first fighter to take chunk out of an opponent? It has happened often in boxing, but what is even worse than that was former German contender Peter Muller knocking out the referee...yet he was able to fight again, but I guess you wouldn't even hold him as accountable as Tyson...right? There have been far worse tragedies than Tyson biting Holyfield...you are just too melodramatic that one incident and less uninformed about some of the rule-breaking that has went on in boxing through the years...Tyson is just an easy target as his deeds have been publicized all over the world!
re
>>>Tyson has punched a referee, remember?<<<
Muller didn't punch a ref...he fornicating knocked him cold...I have the photo somewhere...all it shows is the follow-thru of the left hook and the ref falling to slumberland...and I don't care what anyone tries to argue...clocking the ref is a hell of a lot worse than biting your opponent, but a DQ is a DQ and breaking the rules is breaking the rules and one guy should be held just as accountable as the next...regardless of what infraction it was...if it was serious enough for him to be DQ'd then it is bad regardless and it all has the same end result...A DQ!
Muller didn't punch a ref...he fornicating knocked him cold...I have the photo somewhere...all it shows is the follow-thru of the left hook and the ref falling to slumberland...and I don't care what anyone tries to argue...clocking the ref is a hell of a lot worse than biting your opponent, but a DQ is a DQ and breaking the rules is breaking the rules and one guy should be held just as accountable as the next...regardless of what infraction it was...if it was serious enough for him to be DQ'd then it is bad regardless and it all has the same end result...A DQ!
Re: re
Bullshit is it?... well thats a very considered response I must say... tell me of another fighter who bit a chunk out of his opponents ears then if this is such a common occupation.barry wrote:>>>I really feel he should never have been allowed to fight again after that night, it sullied boxings reputation so much....<<<
That is just such bullshit. Do you think Tyson was the first fighter to take chunk out of an opponent? It has happened often in boxing, but what is even worse than that was former German contender Peter Muller knocking out the referee...yet he was able to fight again, but I guess you wouldn't even hold him as accountable as Tyson...right? There have been far worse tragedies than Tyson biting Holyfield...you are just too melodramatic that one incident and less uninformed about some of the rule-breaking that has went on in boxing through the years...Tyson is just an easy target as his deeds have been publicized all over the world!
You keep bringing up examples like Starling vs Molinares which have no comparison at all to what Tyson did. And how do you know who I would hold accountable?... are you a mind reader now too amongst your many other occupations?... I don't know the circumstaces of what Muller did but find it strange that he was able to carry on boxing... was he banned for a time???.... any fighter who did such a thing as that over here would be banned and I know of about two cases where this happened and the culprit never boxed pro again.
Maybe you think I'm melodramatic but I like to think that I actually still hold some ideals in this rather rough world and I like to think that some people still belive in standereds and honour and biting your opponent etc doesn't fall into this catagory... and looking at recent posts I'm not alone in thinking this either.....
Re: re
Well actually there are different disq, because if what you do causes physical damage then you can be prosecuted. As I said earlier, Tyson could have been jailed for what he did to Evander had Holyfield taken things further, but he didn't... which says a lot for Evanders character.barry wrote:>>>Tyson has punched a referee, remember?<<<
Muller didn't punch a ref...he fornicating knocked him cold...I have the photo somewhere...all it shows is the follow-thru of the left hook and the ref falling to slumberland...and I don't care what anyone tries to argue...clocking the ref is a hell of a lot worse than biting your opponent, but a DQ is a DQ and breaking the rules is breaking the rules and one guy should be held just as accountable as the next...regardless of what infraction it was...if it was serious enough for him to be DQ'd then it is bad regardless and it all has the same end result...A DQ!
Tyson didn't just foul Holyfield he maimed him... I know what I'd prefer if I was boxing, low blow, butt or being bitten... biters are seen as the lowest of the low by boxers and I'm surprised you don't aknowledge this.... your loyalty to Mikey is boundless it seems...
re
>>>I actually still hold some ideals in this rather rough world and I like to think that some people still belive in standereds and honour and biting your opponent etc doesn't fall into this catagory<<<
But you feel it is alright to whack someone in the nuts...I heard some old man the other day talking about how the world and America especially has become very womanized in it's views...I don't really agree with that, but I can see where he is coming from. But like I have said from the very beginning, I condemn both fighters, those who bite and those who intentionally hit an opponent in the balls...you're the one who has been trying to make all kinds of excuses for fighters head-butting and nut-whacking and I am saying they should be held just as accountable as biting...and there has been several instances throughout the last 100 years where an opponent has been a chunk out of an opponent, but it may take me a while to dig up the occurences if I wanted to, but I don't...I consider both to be punks for biting, or hitting in the nuts...they are both cowardly and neither one is more prominent than the other...you can excuse one and damn the other all you want...I'll continue trying to be less bias toward certain fighters and judge them all alike!
But you feel it is alright to whack someone in the nuts...I heard some old man the other day talking about how the world and America especially has become very womanized in it's views...I don't really agree with that, but I can see where he is coming from. But like I have said from the very beginning, I condemn both fighters, those who bite and those who intentionally hit an opponent in the balls...you're the one who has been trying to make all kinds of excuses for fighters head-butting and nut-whacking and I am saying they should be held just as accountable as biting...and there has been several instances throughout the last 100 years where an opponent has been a chunk out of an opponent, but it may take me a while to dig up the occurences if I wanted to, but I don't...I consider both to be punks for biting, or hitting in the nuts...they are both cowardly and neither one is more prominent than the other...you can excuse one and damn the other all you want...I'll continue trying to be less bias toward certain fighters and judge them all alike!
re
>>>biters are seen as the lowest of the low by boxers and I'm surprised you don't aknowledge this<<<
You think so, based on what evidence...on what you think? I don't know of any surveys where fighters have said that they would rather be bombed in the nuts as opposed to being bitten...it just sounds like more made-up shit to me! Well I'll put the question out to some who are qualified to answer, but I'll bet that you are in for a rude awakening when most people will say that they would rather be bitten than whacked in the nuts, but then again maybe not...it'll take a few days for responses to come in, but I'll send the question out in the morning!
You think so, based on what evidence...on what you think? I don't know of any surveys where fighters have said that they would rather be bombed in the nuts as opposed to being bitten...it just sounds like more made-up shit to me! Well I'll put the question out to some who are qualified to answer, but I'll bet that you are in for a rude awakening when most people will say that they would rather be bitten than whacked in the nuts, but then again maybe not...it'll take a few days for responses to come in, but I'll send the question out in the morning!
Silkov you are right. Barry you criticise other people's responses and look what you come out with. Bullshit??? Great response mate! Tyson did harm boxing's reputation like other boxers have. You can't deny that.
As for my experince I have boxed for 18 years thats my experience! I now train some professional boxers as well. You may have me in one of your books or magazines. Send me a PM and I'll let you know who I am and you can look me up!
Unlike you Barry I have been knocked down, Koed someone, been cut, been hurt etc etc. So unlike finding out second hand I know what its like in a boxing ring. What did say..."I've asked people what its like to fight with a cut?"...You mug get in the ring and find out! Have you even been to a boxing fight? You are a reseacher, not a boxing fan. You may know who fought who, where, when and what the temperature was but you don't actually know what its like inside boxing.
I love people like you. Think you know it all, criticise boxers, tell other people what boxing is like, who are the best, who are the worse. How can you judge anyone when you don't even know what its like to box? You mug! I now know you know fornicate all because you get all your info from videos and books and from other people.
DO yourself a favour get your own opinion not other peoples. And why don't you put on some gloves and actually try the sport rather than watching from the back and dicatating to everyone about how much you supposely know!
As for my experince I have boxed for 18 years thats my experience! I now train some professional boxers as well. You may have me in one of your books or magazines. Send me a PM and I'll let you know who I am and you can look me up!
Unlike you Barry I have been knocked down, Koed someone, been cut, been hurt etc etc. So unlike finding out second hand I know what its like in a boxing ring. What did say..."I've asked people what its like to fight with a cut?"...You mug get in the ring and find out! Have you even been to a boxing fight? You are a reseacher, not a boxing fan. You may know who fought who, where, when and what the temperature was but you don't actually know what its like inside boxing.
I love people like you. Think you know it all, criticise boxers, tell other people what boxing is like, who are the best, who are the worse. How can you judge anyone when you don't even know what its like to box? You mug! I now know you know fornicate all because you get all your info from videos and books and from other people.
DO yourself a favour get your own opinion not other peoples. And why don't you put on some gloves and actually try the sport rather than watching from the back and dicatating to everyone about how much you supposely know!
-
Collins2000
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 4175
- Joined: 06 May 2002, 06:13
Re: re
barry, barry, barry, you're starting to get over-excited again.barry wrote:>>>biters are seen as the lowest of the low by boxers and I'm surprised you don't aknowledge this<<<
You think so, based on what evidence...on what you think? I don't know of any surveys where fighters have said that they would rather be bombed in the nuts as opposed to being bitten...it just sounds like more made-up shit to me! Well I'll put the question out to some who are qualified to answer, but I'll bet that you are in for a rude awakening when most people will say that they would rather be bitten than whacked in the nuts, but then again maybe not...it'll take a few days for responses to come in, but I'll send the question out in the morning!
I'm with Silkov on this. I'd like to see a list of all those instances you know of where boxers have 'taken chunks' out of opponents. I think it's much rarer than you'd have us believe.
Now don't get all bent out of shape again. It's a reasonable request isn't it?
Re: re
I base this onbarry wrote:>>>biters are seen as the lowest of the low by boxers and I'm surprised you don't aknowledge this<<<
You think so, based on what evidence...on what you think? I don't know of any surveys where fighters have said that they would rather be bombed in the nuts as opposed to being bitten...it just sounds like more made-up shit to me! Well I'll put the question out to some who are qualified to answer, but I'll bet that you are in for a rude awakening when most people will say that they would rather be bitten than whacked in the nuts, but then again maybe not...it'll take a few days for responses to come in, but I'll send the question out in the morning!
1. the response in the press from other boxers at the time...
2. My experience of what many boxers that I talked to at the time told me what they thought... quite a few people I knew felt betrayed by Tyson because of his behaviour and these were people who like me idolised him in the 80s and were prepared to give him the benifit of the doubt after he got out of jail... I know many boxers who felt genuine anger at Tyson like me... he would have gained far more respect had he just taken a beating and gone out like a man... And these people were actual boxers and I can tell you support or understanding for Tyson was very much in the minority.
Beleive it or not there are people in the world who hold different views to you and they may not all be wrong...
re
Well it looks like you have took one too many punches...you need to give it a long rest. You can box yourself silly for a 100 years, if you have not followed the sport and studied it then the only thing you can comment on is what is like in the ring...Sorry, but your "experience" in the ring has no bearing on debates like this and certainly does not mean that you know what you are talking about, other than that you know what is like to be knocked out...tell me, from being knocked out can you give me somje examples of DQ's that have resulted from serious personal files...does getting knocked out give you that knowledge, or can you tell me about all the tid-bits about boxing history that are debated on boxing forums? Sorry, but just because you was in the ring certainly does not make you any more an authority on the history of the sport than me...no matter how many times were knocked out.
Did Nat Fleischer ever box? How about Richard Fox, or Tom Andrews...some of the early respected historians...!
Did Nat Fleischer ever box? How about Richard Fox, or Tom Andrews...some of the early respected historians...!
re
>>>I know many boxers who felt genuine anger at Tyson like me...<<<
You see, you took it personal and now you have a genuine grudge, which shows in your argument. Tyson did not disgrace anyone but himself. I've never idolized him...I really enjoyed watching him fight, but it didn't break me up when Douglas knocked him out and it didn't break me up when Holyfield did either...I was just like, oh well. I did try to give him the benefit of the doubt for a while after prison, but not after so many screw-ups, but I most certainly will not damn him and excuse another who has broken the exact same rules that exsist for all fighters!
You see, you took it personal and now you have a genuine grudge, which shows in your argument. Tyson did not disgrace anyone but himself. I've never idolized him...I really enjoyed watching him fight, but it didn't break me up when Douglas knocked him out and it didn't break me up when Holyfield did either...I was just like, oh well. I did try to give him the benefit of the doubt for a while after prison, but not after so many screw-ups, but I most certainly will not damn him and excuse another who has broken the exact same rules that exsist for all fighters!
You can have all the info and statistics in the world but that won't make you right all the time because boxing is a subjective buisness... but this thread is supposed to be arguing whether or not Tyson could have been the greatest of all time and my answer in a roundabout way is no, because he didn't have the mentality or the heart. What is not subjective is Tysons mental flaws because they have dominated his career... and there you have it....Decagon wrote:Well, I'm not one to defend Barry terribly often, but Burt Sugar never boxed. Neither did Max Kellerman. There are several ways to be a part of boxing:Did Bert Sugar ever box? Not really, but I'd take his opinion over some pug with a 10-13-5 record. The only knock on Barry is that he's been a researcher too long, without doing any writing (to my knowledge). Researching without writing is like masturbating without having an orgasm.
- As a boxer
- As a trainer
- As a referee
- As a judge
- As a writer
- As a promoter
- As a commentator
- As a announcer
- As a researcher
- As a fan
re
>>>I'm with Silkov on this. I'd like to see a list of all those instances you know of where boxers have 'taken chunks' out of opponents. I think it's much rarer than you'd have us believe.<<<
I've never said that it was a common occurence, that's how some of you try to twist it, but it's plainly not what I have ever said. I has happened and it has been on several occasions throughout history...and if I happen to read back over the instances in the near future then I'll post it here, but I'm not going to spend a day researching to satisfy someone on a message board...if you want to really know there are plenty of sources on the net that you can look for yourself, so why don't you look for it, I've already read it!
I've never said that it was a common occurence, that's how some of you try to twist it, but it's plainly not what I have ever said. I has happened and it has been on several occasions throughout history...and if I happen to read back over the instances in the near future then I'll post it here, but I'm not going to spend a day researching to satisfy someone on a message board...if you want to really know there are plenty of sources on the net that you can look for yourself, so why don't you look for it, I've already read it!
re
>>>You can have all the info and statistics in the world but that won't make you right all the time because boxing is a subjective buisness... but this thread is supposed to be arguing whether or not Tyson could have been the greatest of all time and my answer in a roundabout way is no, because he didn't have the mentality or the heart. What is not subjective is Tysons mental flaws because they have dominated his career... and there you have it....<<<
I've never said that I am right all the time, just most of the time. But statistics have nothing to do with right and wrong, which is what my argument has been in that it is not right to damn one fighter and not hold another accountable...and that is wrong no matter what kind of excuses anyone tries to make! Was Tyson flawed, certainly, was he a nutcase, yes of which I don't think anyone has tried to deny...is he human, just as much as the next boxer, should he been condemned more than others who have been downright dirty in the ring...absolutely not. He should be held accountable for all of his actions, but so should everyone else! And that is more ethical and human than anything I have heard in this thread!
I've never said that I am right all the time, just most of the time. But statistics have nothing to do with right and wrong, which is what my argument has been in that it is not right to damn one fighter and not hold another accountable...and that is wrong no matter what kind of excuses anyone tries to make! Was Tyson flawed, certainly, was he a nutcase, yes of which I don't think anyone has tried to deny...is he human, just as much as the next boxer, should he been condemned more than others who have been downright dirty in the ring...absolutely not. He should be held accountable for all of his actions, but so should everyone else! And that is more ethical and human than anything I have heard in this thread!