BoxRec

terrez wrote:I find allot of people who don't follow boxing don't get the weight divisions and cant understand how there is more then '1 world champion'. I have tried to explain to friends about the different organisations within the weights. LOL

I hate it when the Boxing News put the phrase "world" champion like that..........why the inverted comma......is it really necessary??.......IBF WBO etc etc it should just say World Champion it really pisses me off.

Coffee Aroma wrote:

J wrote:yeah it often hapepns that a 5.67 guy weighing 11 stone beats up a 16 stone 6 foot 3 guy....jesus..ive heard of nuthuiggin but this is ridiculous.

Poor ol' Bruce Lee must be spinnin' in his grave.

On a more serious note; it' semantics really in a boxing contest controlled or uncontrolled I'd have to agree: but if your uncontrolled contest is an anything goes fight and I do mean a brutal no rules tear-up between two skilled boxers; I would never bet on a result based on build and stature alone unless of course the big man was Audley Harrison i'd bet all day on an aggressive little man taking his beer money off him in a pub car park
If you've got speed, skills and a killer instinct size don't mean that much IMHO

read the post i said often.

Haye would squish pacqiuo like a bug, get real.

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:

terrez wrote:I find allot of people who don't follow boxing don't get the weight divisions and cant understand how there is more then '1 world champion'. I have tried to explain to friends about the different organisations within the weights. LOL

I hate it when the Boxing News put the phrase "world" champion like that..........why the inverted comma......is it really necessary??.......IBF WBO etc etc it should just say World Champion it really pisses me off.

Gets right on my tits that does.

Bomber 1 wrote:This is one that still makes me laugh to this day, The guy posts on here too. I can't say his name as he'd never forgive me

I was taping my hands just before training this day, My friend says to me.. "Why are you taping your hands like that" I said "cos it helps to protect them and that's how it's done come fight time" He said "No it's not" I said "It is trust me mate this is how they wrap me hands" he then delivers the money shot.. "But that's not how they do it in the Rocky film"

I still cry laughing now, I wouldn't mind but he's a bright lad when he put's his mind to it.. Righthook is a good lad.. ;;-) ;;-)

The kid's getting slaughtered when he pops up

J wrote:

Coffee Aroma wrote:

J wrote:yeah it often hapepns that a 5.67 guy weighing 11 stone beats up a 16 stone 6 foot 3 guy....jesus..ive heard of nuthuiggin but this is ridiculous.

Poor ol' Bruce Lee must be spinnin' in his grave.

On a more serious note; it' semantics really in a boxing contest controlled or uncontrolled I'd have to agree: but if your uncontrolled contest is an anything goes fight and I do mean a brutal no rules tear-up between two skilled boxers; I would never bet on a result based on build and stature alone unless of course the big man was Audley Harrison i'd bet all day on an aggressive little man taking his beer money off him in a pub car park
If you've got speed, skills and a killer instinct size don't mean that much IMHO

read the post i said often.

Haye would squish pacqiuo like a bug, get real.

read the post i said often :??

F*#k the the post I'm saying it depends on the man and the situation!
I'm not talking about anyone in particular.
I AM talking about the difference between a full-on street fight and a controlled; or uncontrolled boxing match between (any two men with boxing skills) the reality is: size is not top of the list of the many variables when trying to predict an outcome.

Jeez I only posted for a laugh now my brain really hurts!
I'm indifferent to the two fighters in question that said they are both excellent boxers (but thinking about it the Pac Man is a ferocious little f*#ker and it would be interesting to see how he would do against the bigger man on the cobbles) ........No scratch that I'm just kiddin' .................Please no pedantic reply's to this from anyone I don't care enough,
i only have an opinion based on what i have learned in life and that is: If there are no rules: Don't underestimate anyone.

P.S.. "Haye would squish pacqiuo like a bug".......'scuse me mista what does nuthuggin' mean :?? ........... only kiddin' Im outta here

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:

terrez wrote:I find allot of people who don't follow boxing don't get the weight divisions and cant understand how there is more then '1 world champion'. I have tried to explain to friends about the different organisations within the weights. LOL

I hate it when the Boxing News put the phrase "world" champion like that..........why the inverted comma......is it really necessary??.......IBF WBO etc etc it should just say World Champion it really pisses me off.

No it shouldn't. It shouldn't say world at all. It should just say which board they are the current belt holder of.

A little knowledge is a dangerous thing. One typcial comment you get when speaking to boxing fans about my age is:

'Yeah, but Naz was overrated, wasn't he? Fought a load of mugs and as soon as he stepped up, got beat." Then again, some people on here think that.

After one show I was having a beer or two with Big Tim Witherspoon. Pissed bird comes up with her increasingly embarrassed husband:

'When was it that you fought Mike Tyson again?'
'I never fought Mike Tyson.'
'Yes you did!'
'No, honestly, I didn't.'
'YES YOU DID!' etc repeat scenario several times....

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

NorthEastBoxingFan wrote:

terrez wrote:I find allot of people who don't follow boxing don't get the weight divisions and cant understand how there is more then '1 world champion'. I have tried to explain to friends about the different organisations within the weights. LOL

I hate it when the Boxing News put the phrase "world" champion like that..........why the inverted comma......is it really necessary??.......IBF WBO etc etc it should just say World Champion it really pisses me off.

No it shouldn't. It shouldn't say world at all. It should just say which board they are the current belt holder of.

I disagree. It's a way of bottling out of taking an editorial stand. For instance, most would say a WBC, WBA, IBF or WBO champion is a world champion, but Boxing News mess the lines but just writing every title as a "world" title, thus giving the same credibility to the WBF, WBU etc.

While I can understand the not calling a guy world champion and would agree they should be called WBC champion, or whatever, to not call a recognised title a world title is just ridiculous.

gobbles wrote:I disagree. It's a way of bottling out of taking an editorial stand. For instance, most would say a WBC, WBA, IBF or WBO champion is a world champion, but Boxing News mess the lines but just writing every title as a "world" title, thus giving the same credibility to the WBF, WBU etc.

While I can understand the not calling a guy world champion and would agree they should be called WBC champion, or whatever, to not call a recognised title a world title is just ridiculous.

I completely understand your first point.

I disagree with your second point. It's the belts that are ridiculous.

There's no such thing as a world champion anymore. Just a handful of fighters who are the best in the world.

Adamj1987 wrote:

bigjack wrote:Most people will say " i'd get in the ring with tyson for a million quid ",yeah right,sure you would.

i'd get in with anyone for a million quid and run like eff for 3 min just to say i lasted a round before being KO'd i'd make mayweather and pernell whitaker look out right offensive

Bomber 1 wrote:

Adamj1987 wrote:

bigjack wrote:Most people will say " i'd get in the ring with tyson for a million quid ",yeah right,sure you would.

i'd get in with anyone for a million quid and run like eff for 3 min just to say i lasted a round before being KO'd i'd make mayweather and pernell whitaker look out right offensive

Spot on, there isn't a man alive I wouldn't get in the ring with for a million. I'd run and run and hope to beat the 30 seconds Maarvis Fraizer lasted with Mike. Fact is the first time he landed it would be enough to put me down irrespective of where it lands and very few serious long term injuries have been caused by one punch KO's so it would be a fairly easy million.

That said I would be absolutely shitting myself.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

gobbles wrote:I disagree. It's a way of bottling out of taking an editorial stand. For instance, most would say a WBC, WBA, IBF or WBO champion is a world champion, but Boxing News mess the lines but just writing every title as a "world" title, thus giving the same credibility to the WBF, WBU etc.

While I can understand the not calling a guy world champion and would agree they should be called WBC champion, or whatever, to not call a recognised title a world title is just ridiculous.

I completely understand your first point.

I disagree with your second point. It's the belts that are ridiculous.

There's no such thing as a world champion anymore. Just a handful of fighters who are the best in the world.

Well, would you say Amir Khan had won a world title? I would.
Would you say that Matthew Hatton boxed for a world title? I wouldn't.

Calling Amir Khan "the world champion" is different from saying he won a world title.

gobbles wrote:Well, would you say Amir Khan had won a world title? I would.
Would you say that Matthew Hatton boxed for a world title? I wouldn't.

Calling Amir Khan "the world champion" is different from saying he won a world title.

I certainly understand the distinction you're making. Not many people outside our tiny, niche world would - and that's the problem.

You can say 'a' world title and not 'the' world title. Which, obviously, is absolute b*llocks.

None of them is 'the world champion'. You talk about an editorial stance - if you're bothered about accuracy, you can't write 'Amir Khan, the world light-welterweight champion' can you?

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

gobbles wrote:Well, would you say Amir Khan had won a world title? I would.
Would you say that Matthew Hatton boxed for a world title? I wouldn't.

Calling Amir Khan "the world champion" is different from saying he won a world title.

I certainly understand the distinction you're making. Not many people outside our tiny, niche world would - and that's the problem.

You can say 'a' world title and not 'the' world title. Which, obviously, is absolute b*llocks.

None of them is 'the world champion'. You talk about an editorial stance - if you're bothered about accuracy, you can't write 'Amir Khan, the world light-welterweight champion' can you?

your spot on its all symantics in our little boxing world but the avergae joe doesnt understand the difference and it doesnt help when someone rated number 3 holds 2 world belts and the others ranked above him dont

take the light welter for example
Devon Alexander holds 2 belts to Tim Bradley and Amir Khans 1. to the casual observer it looks as if Alexander is better - maybe maybe not. But there where times when i was younger and thought this so it's probable that there are people out there who don't follow boxing and class Alexander as 2 times better than Bradley or Khan and say he's awarded the IBO bauble for something maybe 3 times better. i think thats the state it's got too and the ring hardly clears things up because its belt can be lost to any challenger even if its a keep busy fight. example is when Casamayor almost lost to Santa Cruz theres no way i'd of classed Santa Cruz as the champion. its messed up and annoys the hell out of me

The problem is you have to make the distinction as the likes of the WBF and WBU thrive on fans ignorance.

gobbles wrote:The problem is you have to make the distinction as the likes of the WBF and WBU thrive on fans ignorance.

Absolutely. I don't even mention them or, if I do, make it clear that they are absolute shite.

i actually thinkthe man in the street with passing knowledge of boxing is aware that there are too many titles and too many weight divisions these days.

hoften they quote it as a reason that most boxing is a load of bollox.

Here's a belter.
Someone once asked me. " Is that Scott Harrison, is he any relation to Audley Harrison?"

ppb wrote:Here's a belter.
Someone once asked me. " Is that Scott Harrison, is he any relation to Audley Harrison?"

"So why are these two boxing when one has won all 14 fights, and the other guy has lost his last 24 - isn't that a bit unfair?"

"So, this African guy- he must be one of the best in the world to be challenging for the Commonwealth title."

"But it's not a real World Champion, is it, if there are 9 of them?"

this was me last night in the pub, i overheard a geezer saying 'the big white geezer to win, same as always'... i thought 'is that leading to something racist?' when he carries on with 'Klitschko his name is, fought them all, Lewis, and the bloke who knocked him out'

I hastened to point out that there were two Klitschkos, and that only one had fought Lewis, only the other had fought Rahman, and it was the latter who was fighting tomorrow

'to which our man replies, no mate, he fought Lewis, I was there'.... there is no helping some people, is there?

@Whicker - your first comment, my mum is always asking that, the best I can come up with - apart from the fact that boxing is intrinsically corrupt, is that its a bit like the FA Cup, the minnows sometimes fight the legends in the hope of an upset.

heh. i was at the boxing last sunday. overheard some locals talking about Richie Woodhall. and how Calzaghe was the only man to beat him. which I naturally had to correct.

I got into an argument with someone in a pub because he said 'Calzaghe is the best ever because he never lost a fight'

bigjack wrote:Most people will say " i'd get in the ring with tyson for a million quid ",yeah right,sure you would.

Yeah and you'd need that for medical care for the rest of your life... that's if you came out of the coma!

DIRT SUGAR wrote:

bigjack wrote:Most people will say " i'd get in the ring with tyson for a million quid ",yeah right,sure you would.

Yeah and you'd need that for medical care for the rest of your life... that's if you came out of the coma!

Nah you'd just get knocked out by the first light hearted punch he threw and wake up dazed and rich.