History of (and sad Deterioration of ) RING MAGAZINE

bfanalyst · Post by **bfanalyst** » 19 Oct 2003, 21:05

Nigel Collins is on the money with Dempsey. I too don't acknowledge him as one of the greatest heavyweights of all-time. The man was a racist that flat out refused to fight many fighters of color. Pre-integration boxing needs to be locked up in a closet.

bfanalyst · Post by **bfanalyst** » 19 Oct 2003, 22:44

At least he had the balls to fight Langford before he became champion. The same cannot be said about Jack Dempsey.

When rating the great fighters of years past, I only rate fighters that came post-integration. Dempsey doesn't belong.

bfanalyst · Post by **bfanalyst** » 20 Oct 2003, 01:03

terap wrote:Are you and your buddy and fellow expert Nigel Collins the least bit concerned that Jack Johnson kept three great black heavyweights--
Sam Langford, Joe Jeannette, and Sam McVey, from getting their rightful chance at the heavyweight title?

My previous post addresses that point.

I basically stated that Johnson did fight Langford unlike Dempsey and frankly, I don't care much for either of them.

bfanalyst · Post by **bfanalyst** » 20 Oct 2003, 12:55

Someone has a reading comprehension problem.

bfanalyst · Post by **bfanalyst** » 20 Oct 2003, 21:06

terap wrote:bfan is in the process of trashing all the threads on boxrec with a single MANTRA from the modern boxing media.

bfan and the salesmen in the modern media he is parroting are incompetent to do with the subject of boxing and have NO *INTEREST in boxing.

Their ONLY INTEREST is in spewing out and spreading currently politically correct mantras as far as they can.

bfan and the salesmen in the modern media he is parroting are so incompetent that
THEY HAVE NEVER HEARD OF George Dixon, who won the bantamweight title in 1890 and won the featherweight title in 1891.
THEY HAVE NEVER HEARD OF Joe Walcott who won the welterweight title in 1901.
THEY HAVE NEVER HEARD OF Joe Gans who won the lightweight title in 1902.
etc etc etc

bfan and the salesmen in the modern media he is parroting are so incompetent
that they DO NOT KNOW that Jack Johnson refused to fight THREE great black heavyweights who were the top contenders during the time he held the title. Johnson kept Sam Langford, Joe Jeannette and Sam McVey from ever getting their rightful chances at the heavyweight title.

bfan and the salesmen in the modern media he is parroting are so incompetent
that their ONLY use for boxing is to use it as one of MANY subjects they have no interest in other than as a forum to spread propaganda for the modern politically correct agendas they espouse.

Here bfan has arrived to try to trash a thread started by a poster who has a genuine interest in the subject of boxing and even an interest in the earlier eras of boxing of which most are so ignorant today.

Spread your political mantras, bfan.

Spread your ignorance of the subject of boxing.

Use the topic of boxing as a further way to spread and spew out your tired political agenda.

What a tiresome and sorry spectacle.

As I wrote here on another thread

I once was talking to Jack Obermayer--so called "boxing writer" who wrote for a number of boxing magazines in cluding Ring magazine.

The name Stanley Ketchel came up.

"He never fought a black fighter," Obermayer crowed.

"Ketchel fought Jack Johnson for the heavyweight title," I said pleasantly. "Any six year old who had a genuine interest in boxing would know that."

"Either you don't know that---or you think Johnson was a white fighter?"

"Ketchel also fought Sam Langford , who out weighed him by a good amount."

Ketchel also fought other black fighters earlier in his career.

That was decades ago.

And now bfan comes here to present the same tired mantra courtesy of the modern media selling machine.

Are you trying to tell me that boxing was fully integrated during the early 1900s because a handful of fighters of color were given a few title shots or managed to win a few titles? I know you aren't that stupid. Ignorant, yes. Stupid, no.

The facts are there. Johnson was the first African-American to hold the heavyweight title. After Johnson, African-Americans we're not allowed to challenge for the title for quite some time. Boxing, like many other American sports, was playing under a different set of social rules.

Full-integration of sport was not yet introduced. That is a fact!

Anything prior to the 1930s is hogwash. God praise equality and the inclusion of all ethnic groups!!! 8)

bfanalyst · Post by **bfanalyst** » 21 Oct 2003, 01:23

terap wrote:Tell me all about Tiger Flowers, you half-witted shill for the media mantras.

You DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT earlier eras of boxing.

A natural reaction in (stupid) human beings is to say,

"If I don't know it, then it's no good."

You--and the media salesman whose lines you parrot to the letter---

are IGNORANT of earlier eras of boxing. Totally and completely ignorant.

And PROUD that you are.

What raw garbage you have to "offer."

The tripe you put here is useless---and worse ---your repetition of the media mantras clutters up what could be good and interesting threads.

The repetitive spewing out of your mantras make you the most useless clutterer and waster of others time imaginable.

Keep spewing out your useless and pathetic mantras, halfwit.

Answer this question. When did boxing become fully integrated Einstein? When were African-Americans and Latinos allowed to participate and acquire title shots on a consistent basis? You know it was somewhere between the 1930s-50s.

Accept the truth and it shall set you free. Pre-1930s was a time of mass bigotry that boasted social injustices of epic proportions and segregation in many facets of American life. Like I said earlier, pure hogwash. You're a joke, you closet racist.

bfanalyst · Post by **bfanalyst** » 21 Oct 2003, 03:08

terap wrote:bfan is mentally ill.

He is fixated on one item---as seriously mentally people are.

And he is trashing thread after thread on boxrec with his sick fixation.

What a piece of garbage he is.

I believe I've proven my point. Thank you. My work is done. 8)

Sweet Scientist · Post by **Sweet Scientist** » 21 Oct 2003, 11:08

terap wrote:bfan is mentally ill.

He is fixated on one item---as seriously mentally people are.

And he is trashing thread after thread on boxrec with his sick fixation.

What a piece of garbage he is.

Seems to me, Terap old pal, that if one was to substitute "Terap" in place of "bfan" on this post, it makes MUCH MORE SENSE!!!

Your fixation on trashing Muhammad Ali shows YOUR true colors...

Your paranoid, deluded posts about some great media consiracy are meritless...

It seems that every fight that didn't end the way you would have liked was "fixed"...of course, YOU NEVER OFFER SUBSTANTIATED PROOF...

You believe your opinions are facts...and some of your opinions would be laughed out of the room by the majority of boxing historians...

You absolutely, positively HAVE NO OBJECTIVITY AT ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If this were a courtroom, nothing you say would be believed, you've already lied too many times...("Henry Cooper beat the dog sh*t out of your 1960's Ali"). You're also blind.

If this were a boxing match, you'd have been disqualified for repeated fouls...

Tonight on ESPN Classic, Ali fights Karl Mildenberger...don't watch it...you'll probably be posting how Mildenberger beat the dog sh*t out of him...Do you really thnk people believe your B.S.?

You're a piece of work, pal...and whatever boxing knowledge you have gets lost in your paranoid delusions....

Roll With The Punches · Post by **Roll With The Punches** » 21 Oct 2003, 11:23

Terap, it seems as though you really overate old timers

how do you rank all of todays top fighters?? I would be interested in seeing your top 10 of all time list of several divisions