BoxRec

Pureist wrote:Well then you should be able to tell me what punches I missed, where the phantom punches are that you refer to so often, you are all full of crap, just a bunch of armchair experts that were legends in their own lunch boxes, put up or shut up

Ricky_ wrote:x2, put up or shut up. Floyd groupies actin like you have something to hide objecting so heavily to a poster doing a round-by-round punch count vid replay.

Ricky_ wrote:x2, put up or shut up. Floyd groupies actin like you have something to hide objecting so heavily to a poster doing a round-by-round punch count vid replay.

Pureist wrote:Those clowns don't stress me man, I'm sure they've looked over what I've done so far and can't fault it, that's why they're stressed, theyre so biased that they can't comprehend that someone can be level headed and impartial, when the best defence they have is to post pics of baby's crying I know they're in trouble

koolkc107 wrote:The problem Purist has- no matter how many missed or blocked punches he wants to count as landed- is that scores of folks vastly more qualified to score a fight (and certainly more objective than Purist as well) saw the fight in person and scored it an easy win for Floyd.

People who don't even like Floyd scored it wide for him.

They saw it live in person, heard punches land and not land.

Look at all the tape you want and see whatever it is you want to see.

Won't change the facts that Mayweather won, did it easily, and rendered Manny Pacquiao as ineffective as we have ever seen him in a boxing ring.

Pureist wrote:

kimf wrote:Very interesting.
Please don't take anything personal. This is one subject we don't agree on but I'm sure there are 100's we do. Sometimes when scoring fights we need to take emotions out of it. The reason there are so many controversies in boxing is because the criterias for scoring fights are opinion based.
I believe the dela Hoya vs Mayweather fight was a lot closer than this fight which Mayweather won.
Again I don't like Mayweather or the tactics he uses to win fights but unless they change the rules he has every right to win like he does and he used those tactics to easily win this fight.

i dont get emotional about boxing, im a trainer, i dont actually mind floyd, i get sick of these idiots blowing smoke up his ares so i just like pointing things out to them, i scored the fight a draw, 1 round either way, no worries, but those scorecards were ridiculous, i watched the fight with my father, ex pug, best mate ex aussie title holder, they both scored it the same, very close, could go either way, floyds hands are exceptionally quick making most people think punches land when they actually dont, watching on tv can also look very different to seeing a bout live, snr obviously thought the fight was close saying to floyd "your giving this fight away" those who believe those scorecards to be true are either not very knowledgable or are lieing to themselves, notice not many of the normal floyd groupies are commenting on the video, its hard to argue when the video is broken down

Pureist wrote:You still butthurt from the other day when you made yourself look like an imbecile by posting that link trying to make me look bias but it actually had me posting that I love Floyd's style, comprehension isn't your strong point, we all know that. I have gone through some of the video so far being meticulous, not missing a thing, I will finish all the rounds left the same way, lots of people had this fight close where the judges didn't so this is an exercise in accuracy, it won't change history but it will show how competent judges and compubox are or are not, why don't you have a look and see if MY punch count is correct instead of making yourself look like a moron

Ricky_ wrote:Anyone else interested in what Brut's next username is going to be? "Midnite Prowler" now... that's a bit creepy even for you Brut

Ricky_ wrote:Anyone else interested in what Brut's next username is going to be? "Midnite Prowler" now... that's a bit creepy even for you Brut

fergusg wrote:You’ve submitted a rather noble post, which I mostly agree to, but you do need to realise that Pureist was a member of the anti-Floyd brigade before he commenced his rather tedious and blindly-biased journey of trying to dishonestly cite punch stats that he allegedly gathered by watching the entire Mayweather-Pacquiao fight multiple times in quarter speed slow-motion.
...
If you think I’m wrong, please review Pureist’s posting history?

Pureist wrote:Totally agree james, judges don't get video on the night but how else can you scrutinize judges better than make sure their scorecards are accurate, most sports in the world, scoring with accuracy isn't an issue, shooting baskets, kicking goals etc, most sports scrutinize their own refs who are the officials for the scoring aswell, punters bet on boxing so it should be deemed to be critical that judges be accurate but way too often they are miles off, if all title fights were scrutinized in this way and judges rated on their performance maybe boxing wouldn't be seen as the most corrupt sport in the world

man wrote:

fergusg wrote:Before May 2nd 2015, Pureist was a deeply passionate member of the anti-Mayweather brigade that aggressively believed that punch stats were utterly irrelevant when evaluating the result of any fight.

From the 3rd May 2015, Pureist subsequently claimed that Floyd Mayweather Jr. did not deserve to emerge victorious from his fight with Manny Pacquiao. and to back this up, he claims to have watched the fight multiple times at quarter-speed slow-motion in order to gather punch stats, an exercise he maintains was performed in an objective manner (i.e. without "bias").

Can you not detect the hypocrisy, dishonesty and also the irrationally biased nature of Pureists inconsistent stance?

as i see it the most interesting counterpart for
a fruitful debate is the one with the completely
opposite view ... provided he can keep his act
together and places debatable observations and
arguments.

purist always hated floyd? makes him a good
counterpart for a debate on the fight, not a bad
one. but he puts arguments on the table while
you run ad hominem attacks.

yet i guess proving that he is a hypocrite is
more satisfying to you than proving his punch
count is wrong or that punch counting as such
is not the determining factor.

i don't get it. whatever, thnx for the interaction.
but let's leave it like this. is a lost cause for both
of us to discuss this any further i guess.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

Pureist wrote:Totally agree james, judges don't get video on the night but how else can you scrutinize judges better than make sure their scorecards are accurate, most sports in the world, scoring with accuracy isn't an issue, shooting baskets, kicking goals etc, most sports scrutinize their own refs who are the officials for the scoring aswell, punters bet on boxing so it should be deemed to be critical that judges be accurate but way too often they are miles off, if all title fights were scrutinized in this way and judges rated on their performance maybe boxing wouldn't be seen as the most corrupt sport in the world

It's just not comparable. You can't use slow motion video as a criticism of a judge, as this isn't how they judge fights.

I used to write about boxing, at shows I would sometimes be right behind the judges, and the view was pretty lousy, often the fighters had their back to you, or the ref was in the way, so it was hard to tell how cleanly a punch landed, or indeed, whether it landed on a target area. So how is your method of spending literally weeks sifting through videos of a fight in slow motion relevant - that is not a tool judges have, therefore is not really a useful criticism. Scoring is always going to be subjective, there's no way around it, even if we used a compubox style method as Olympic boxing used to, you still have problems including human error. Fact is, when boxers fight at full tilt, it can be very hard to be sure how many clean shots are landed.

Football (soccer) has been shown to be massively corrupt, as have other sports, I see no direct evidence that boxing is more corrupt, it is more subjective, which lends itself to controversy. There are indeed bias' in boxing, but that's a longer story.

fergusg wrote:

man wrote:if you had floyd winning wide why bother arguing with someone who you simply disagree with?

I could not care less about Pureist’s opinion about the outcome of the Mayweather-Pacquiao fight, but I am mocking his hypocrisy and dishonesty.

man wrote:i honestly do not know his floyd bias history and i do not care enough to check it out.

If you are going to repeatedly support the stance of someone that is dishonest, unreasonably biased and also a proven hypocrite, without bothering to recognise their previous misdemeanours, then your opinion carries the same "value" as Pureist's.

man wrote:i find [punch] stats overrated anyways.

A few weeks ago Pureist claimed that punch stats were utterly irrelevant to gauge the winner of a fight, but it now appears that he's changed his mind, as they are seemingly critical to justifying his belief that Mayweather Jr. should not have been given the verdict over Pacquiao… and he has gone to preposterous extremes in a futile effort to persuade us that he is right.

man wrote:i am referring to is that someone is making an argument that he tries to back up as well as one possibly can and half a dozen people jump on him and either ridicule the effort or mostly resort to arguments like "most experts at ring side saw it differently." … not a terribly strong stance on a debating forum.

i have all the respect in the world for the way [Pureist] makes the case.

As I’ve already stated, I could not care less about Pureist’s opinion, but I am mocking his hypocrisy and dishonesty.

Before May 2nd 2015, Pureist was a deeply passionate member of the anti-Mayweather brigade that aggressively believed that punch stats were utterly irrelevant when evaluating the result of any fight.

From the 3rd May 2015, Pureist subsequently claimed that Floyd Mayweather Jr. did not deserve to emerge victorious from his fight with Manny Pacquiao. and to back this up, he claims to have watched the fight multiple times at quarter-speed slow-motion in order to gather punch stats, an exercise he maintains was performed in an objective manner (i.e. without "bias").

Can you not detect the hypocrisy, dishonesty and also the irrationally biased nature of Pureists inconsistent stance?

In terms of citing the common-held belief that Floyd Mayweather Jr. deservedly scored a sublimely comfortable decision victory over Manny Pacquiao, this is relevant, because the outcome of the fight has already been decided and the history books tend to always reflect the opinion of both the masses and the so-called “experts”.

For sure, there are bound to be a few exceptions to almost every rule, such as a handful of deluded or mentally-challenged people that cry “robbery” or “corruption”, simply because their favourite fighter lost, but the irrefutable fact that cannot possibly be undermined, is that the masses believe that Floyd Mayweather Jr. defeated Manny Pacquiao with ease.