I know really this should be a reply to an earlier thread, but I feel it deserve a new topic all of it own. Wellington writes "highly respected boxing pundit colin hart". Highly respected by who? Does anyone on this forum honestly believe Hart to be some mythical boxing soothsayer or some old has-been journalist who is still feeding of his days at being ringside for Ali, Foreman and Frazier (if he did actually go to them?).........?
He's like a British Larry Merchant in his bumbling, inept style.
Yes John O'Connell is a great prospect, but as topper123 said if who win 2 aba, gold medals at the junior Olympics, four nations, a European bronze medal and then turn pro with one of the best promoters in the country in hardly a wonderful spot if you suddenly notice the kid two years later!
Let's look at his two wonderful other "spots".
2006 John Murray........
I quite like this one, as before Colin picked him as "the one to watch" he appeared on Eurosport as a anaylist with John Murray appearing on the undercard of a show in Canada. Colin post fight review of Murray's performance went something like this "good, but he seems a little big at light-welterweight and will probably grow into a full blown welterweight soon". For the record Murray's weight for that show was 9st 81/2lbs and he was a definite super-featherweight at the time. Hart cocks it up again!
2005 Kevin Mitchell...........
Mitchell wins the senior aba's at 18, turns pro with allegedly and is called "the Wayne Rooney of boxing". Nearly two years later (come on Colin, catch up) Hart picks him as the man to watch in 2005. Hardly rocket science is it?
For the record I would like to say John O'Connell, John Murray and Kevin Mitchell are all great prospects who I admire. It just that I reckon they deserve a better cheerleader then Colin Hart.
Colin Hart Knows Nothing
-
yiddo14
- Heavyweight
I like Harty,although quite a few people don't share my opinion.
He is forthright,and say's what he feels.
His 'hot tips' are pretty well known fighters to proper boxing fans,but you have to remember,he is writing this in a public newspaper,of which 80-90% of it's readers know absolutely jack shit about boxing.
By raising these young fighters profiles,he is doing them,and the british boxing scene a favour.
I mean,it's the sun.If you were to see Colin Hart tipping Kevin Mitchell for success in say...boxing news,you would have more of a point,as regular readers would be into boxing,and would have noticed that Mitchell has been tipped for big things for donkeys years(even if he is vastly over rated!)
He is forthright,and say's what he feels.
His 'hot tips' are pretty well known fighters to proper boxing fans,but you have to remember,he is writing this in a public newspaper,of which 80-90% of it's readers know absolutely jack shit about boxing.
By raising these young fighters profiles,he is doing them,and the british boxing scene a favour.
I mean,it's the sun.If you were to see Colin Hart tipping Kevin Mitchell for success in say...boxing news,you would have more of a point,as regular readers would be into boxing,and would have noticed that Mitchell has been tipped for big things for donkeys years(even if he is vastly over rated!)
good post yiddo, very succinctyiddo14 wrote:I like Harty,although quite a few people don't share my opinion.
He is forthright,and say's what he feels.
His 'hot tips' are pretty well known fighters to proper boxing fans,but you have to remember,he is writing this in a public newspaper,of which 80-90% of it's readers know absolutely jack shit about boxing.
By raising these young fighters profiles,he is doing them,and the british boxing scene a favour.
I mean,it's the sun.If you were to see Colin Hart tipping Kevin Mitchell for success in say...boxing news,you would have more of a point,as regular readers would be into boxing,and would have noticed that Mitchell has been tipped for big things for donkeys years(even if he is vastly over rated!)
I don`t know if what Colin Hart writes initially gets typed out wrong by the time it gets into the paper..but...
Some of what gets written in his name is laughable to be honest...most pieces are so far from the facts that it really reminds you that it is a tabloid he writes for....his age excuses his pro-Ali worship but when he tries to mention the real old boxers thats when he really loses it big time
And thats real bad because these so called facts get repeated by other non-knowledgable so called boxing historians
So lets not forget its the Sun he writes/wrote for
Some of what gets written in his name is laughable to be honest...most pieces are so far from the facts that it really reminds you that it is a tabloid he writes for....his age excuses his pro-Ali worship but when he tries to mention the real old boxers thats when he really loses it big time
And thats real bad because these so called facts get repeated by other non-knowledgable so called boxing historians
So lets not forget its the Sun he writes/wrote for
His anti Lewis stuff was bang on, Lewis for all his record suggests is still the most forgetable undisputed champion of all times.Terence wrote:I don't read The Sun much but when I have read his stuff his anti-Lewis mind-set seems a bit irrational, on the other hand if you want completely objective boxing writing read a ring record. His job is to put forward opinions, my only other gripe is that he seems a bit "been there, done that, watched Ali, can't be arsed with the rest of it because boxing is going down the shitter these days", fair enough but in that case why not retire?
Line for line he will probably bury most people on some of the bigger name fighters.
And who can blame Hart for keep making references to fighters of the 70's & 80's.....boxing along with other things like music ect have gone down the sh!tter and we will never see the likes of again.
Hart is probably the only boxing journalist left who really knows what he's talking about, ok sometimes he may get it wrong but 99% of the time he's bang on with what he's saying and usually he doesnt say things just to please people... maybe Hart has an air of having seen it all and done it all but to be fair he has, he was right in there during the golden 60s and 70s and he knows as well as we do that it wont get any better than that and is more likely just to get worse and worse... but the guy deserves respect...
I can tolerate people having different opinions than myself, what I don`t like is people not knowing enough of the subject their speaking of.
Who can say a person is wrong to believe a certain rookie boxer will be a future star...much the same as saying a boxer early on in their career won`t be a star...look at Johnny Nelson and Steve Robinson.
I respect Harts opinion in as much as he has been around the game a long time, its just when he mentions some old time boxers his facts are normally almost always wrong.
How many of his age group still call Joe louis..Joe Louie?
They heard a commentator mispronounce it as Louie..and they have never bothered to find out that Joe Louis pronounced it as Louis...slightly off subject but I hope you get what I mean.
Who can say a person is wrong to believe a certain rookie boxer will be a future star...much the same as saying a boxer early on in their career won`t be a star...look at Johnny Nelson and Steve Robinson.
I respect Harts opinion in as much as he has been around the game a long time, its just when he mentions some old time boxers his facts are normally almost always wrong.
How many of his age group still call Joe louis..Joe Louie?
They heard a commentator mispronounce it as Louie..and they have never bothered to find out that Joe Louis pronounced it as Louis...slightly off subject but I hope you get what I mean.
Again someone comes on here trying to be clever and makes himself look like an ass.tonyevs wrote:I can tolerate people having different opinions than myself, what I don`t like is people not knowing enough of the subject their speaking of.
Who can say a person is wrong to believe a certain rookie boxer will be a future star...much the same as saying a boxer early on in their career won`t be a star...look at Johnny Nelson and Steve Robinson.
I respect Harts opinion in as much as he has been around the game a long time, its just when he mentions some old time boxers his facts are normally almost always wrong.
How many of his age group still call Joe louis..Joe Louie?
They heard a commentator mispronounce it as Louie..and they have never bothered to find out that Joe Louis pronounced it as Louis...slightly off subject but I hope you get what I mean.
"Louis" should be pronounced "Louie" as is origins are French...."Lewis" is spoke as it reads.
Louis can be pronounced either way you gimp.SIMPSONS wrote:Again someone comes on here trying to be clever and makes himself look like an ass.tonyevs wrote:I can tolerate people having different opinions than myself, what I don`t like is people not knowing enough of the subject their speaking of.
Who can say a person is wrong to believe a certain rookie boxer will be a future star...much the same as saying a boxer early on in their career won`t be a star...look at Johnny Nelson and Steve Robinson.
I respect Harts opinion in as much as he has been around the game a long time, its just when he mentions some old time boxers his facts are normally almost always wrong.
How many of his age group still call Joe louis..Joe Louie?
They heard a commentator mispronounce it as Louie..and they have never bothered to find out that Joe Louis pronounced it as Louis...slightly off subject but I hope you get what I mean.
"Louis" should be pronounced "Louie" as is origins are French...."Lewis" is spoke as it reads.
-
Twinkle Toes
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 3340
- Joined: 22 Sep 2003, 08:38
[/quote]
Again someone comes on here trying to be clever and makes himself look like an ass.
"Louis" should be pronounced "Louie" as is origins are French...."Lewis" is spoke as it reads.[/quote]
The French pronounce Louis as Louie...much the same as they pronounce Jean as John....what have the French got to do with it? and who the f--k is talking about lewis
It is not trying to be smart to know how somebody pronounes their name correctly...Its just knowledge
..I understand you know very little about boxing, but let somebody who knows alot more than you tell you that Joe louis pronounced his name very clearly as louis
Ooops are you French ..if so, I excuse you for being you
Again someone comes on here trying to be clever and makes himself look like an ass.
"Louis" should be pronounced "Louie" as is origins are French...."Lewis" is spoke as it reads.[/quote]
The French pronounce Louis as Louie...much the same as they pronounce Jean as John....what have the French got to do with it? and who the f--k is talking about lewis
It is not trying to be smart to know how somebody pronounes their name correctly...Its just knowledge
..I understand you know very little about boxing, but let somebody who knows alot more than you tell you that Joe louis pronounced his name very clearly as louis Ooops are you French
..if so, I excuse you for being you Again someone comes on here trying to be clever and makes himself look like an ass.tonyevs wrote:
"Louis" should be pronounced "Louie" as is origins are French...."Lewis" is spoke as it reads.[/quote]
The French pronounce Louis as Louie...much the same as they pronounce Jean as John....what have the French got to do with it? and who the f--k is talking about lewis
It is not trying to be smart to know how somebody pronounes their name correctly...Its just knowledge
..I understand you know very little about boxing, but let somebody who knows alot more than you tell you that Joe louis pronounced his name very clearly as louis Ooops are you French
..if so, I excuse you for being you [/quote]Funny, now go back to your pint and pork scratchings.
-
glittermonkey
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 2658
- Joined: 28 Feb 2004, 18:03
I'll speak up in favour of Hart too.
The man knows what he's talking about, and as said by someone else earlier, he's just pandering to the more casual fans with the prospects he picks out in his column (not that I'd ever touch that paper).
The only criticism is that he rarely gives modern fighters the credit they deserve. But also as said before, it's hard to pick many of the modern fighters over the ones he's seen in the 60's, 70's, and 80's.
The man knows what he's talking about, and as said by someone else earlier, he's just pandering to the more casual fans with the prospects he picks out in his column (not that I'd ever touch that paper).
The only criticism is that he rarely gives modern fighters the credit they deserve. But also as said before, it's hard to pick many of the modern fighters over the ones he's seen in the 60's, 70's, and 80's.
On the contrary I think he's a misunderstood modern day champion whose personality isn't everyone's cup of tea, and whose ring temperament veered wildly from power punching destroyer to safety first chess player. He failed to strike a chord with the underdog-loving british public & incurred the wrath of many a defensive Yank boxing writer, & was vastly underappreciated.SIMPSONS wrote:His anti Lewis stuff was bang on, Lewis for all his record suggests is still the most forgetable undisputed champion of all times.Terence wrote:I don't read The Sun much but when I have read his stuff his anti-Lewis mind-set seems a bit irrational, on the other hand if you want completely objective boxing writing read a ring record. His job is to put forward opinions, my only other gripe is that he seems a bit "been there, done that, watched Ali, can't be arsed with the rest of it because boxing is going down the shitter these days", fair enough but in that case why not retire?
Line for line he will probably bury most people on some of the bigger name fighters.
And who can blame Hart for keep making references to fighters of the 70's & 80's.....boxing along with other things like music ect have gone down the sh!tter and we will never see the likes of again.
Hart was a muckraker from my knowledge and jumped on the gay bandwagon after Riddick Bowe papered over his desire to duck Lennox by calling him a "fag."
LOL,Yeh because a couple of mediocre Yank fighters made him that way by strarching that a$$.....thats why.[/quote]SIMPSONS wrote:and whose ring temperament veered wildly from power punching destroyer to safety first chess player.
if it wasn't that it'd be something else. let's just say that the right handers that put him down were anything but mediocre, and consider how in rematches he had one guy crying (after everything went BADLY wrong) and the other on his back.
also, Lewis was a legit destroyer, judging by stoppages of Grant, Golota, Briggs, Ruddock, Morrison...and he certainly had Holy, Bowe and Tyson running for cover, so he must've got something right, you twit.
paul weller said it about NoTW, but it could just as easily apply here;
"The truth is in what you see - not what you read
Little men tapping things out - points of view
Remember their views are not the gospel truth"
"More than often its just a comic, not much more
Don't take it too serious - not many do"
"The truth is in what you see - not what you read
Little men tapping things out - points of view
Remember their views are not the gospel truth"
"More than often its just a comic, not much more
Don't take it too serious - not many do"