BoxRec

For the record G.I. I've always thought Jim Lampley did a pretty good job of calling dramatic moments with an appropriately excited voice. Sometimes he oversells moments that weren't that dramatic, but usually he's on the money pretty well. At least as far as being an excitable commentator at the right time anyhow.

Wayne McCullough V Scott Harrison. That fight should have been stopped. Wayne's ear was near the size of his head by the time that ended.

gilgamesh wrote:For the record G.I. I've always thought Jim Lampley did a pretty good job of calling dramatic moments with an appropriately excited voice. Sometimes he oversells moments that weren't that dramatic, but usually he's on the money pretty well. At least as far as being an excitable commentator at the right time anyhow.

"Bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang, bang..."

gilgamesh wrote:For the record G.I. I've always thought Jim Lampley did a pretty good job of calling dramatic moments with an appropriately excited voice. Sometimes he oversells moments that weren't that dramatic, but usually he's on the money pretty well. At least as far as being an excitable commentator at the right time anyhow.

Fair enough. As stated, I am a big fan of his on the whole, I just see that as a weakness for him. The line of comparison I often draw is between his call of Tyson taking Douglas' uppercut against Bob Sheridan's reaction to it. As critical as people are of The Colonel, he has an electric excitabilitity to him. Lampley lacks that quality for mine, but to each, their own.

I very much enjoy him regardless.

i cant believe not one person mentioned holmes - cobb
damn i could not believe that the ref would not stop this masacre
cobbs face looked like ground beef

Vaca-Brown was a terrible mauling too. Vaca went down 5-6 times each time like he had been shot. To make matters worse the match was held outside in the midday heat at the end Vaca was laid out bleeding worse than minter-hagler on the floor.

Calzaghe / Lacy & Calzaghe / Roy Jones spring instantly to mind....

absolute beatdowns of the worst kind...

Calzaghe-Lacey i can accept. Although it was on a mini scale it had many of the same ingrediants as Duran-Moore, and Breland-Honeyghan. A raucous alcohol fueled baying crowd anxious for blood, a sustained overprolonged beatdown of a guy confident going in...and Lacey was never the same like the other two. All these matches sadly are a sadists dream and ugly viewing for the rest of us

Calzaghe-JOnes was no where near a "beatdown" just a oldish guy in his prime, beating a older guy pretty much shot and ruined who was once many leagues out of this world from the competition.

It says much about Jones's talent that even shot he could in that last SM run beat people like lacey, trinidad and push calzaghe for the first 3 rounds until blood and calzaghes fast pace put him in survival mode.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:Castillo/Corrales should have been stopped during the mouthpiece bull shit, Chico had nothing left.

As incredible as I think the comback was, if I was a ref, I def. would've stopped that fight the second time Diego went down. He received an incredible amount of recovery time but he's always dangerous. And because we look at it as one of the greatest comebacks in the history of boxing which it is, it can't be igonored that this fight had very bad officiating.

mugabi wrote: It says much about Jones's talent that even shot he could in that last SM run beat people like lacey, trinidad and push calzaghe for the first 3 rounds until blood and calzaghes fast pace put him in survival mode.

all at light heavy my friend

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:For the record G.I. I've always thought Jim Lampley did a pretty good job of calling dramatic moments with an appropriately excited voice. Sometimes he oversells moments that weren't that dramatic, but usually he's on the money pretty well. At least as far as being an excitable commentator at the right time anyhow.

Fair enough. As stated, I am a big fan of his on the whole, I just see that as a weakness for him. The line of comparison I often draw is between his call of Tyson taking Douglas' uppercut against Bob Sheridan's reaction to it. As critical as people are of The Colonel, he has an electric excitabilitity to him. Lampley lacks that quality for mine, but to each, their own.

I very much enjoy him regardless.

I never liked Jim Lampley calling fights. He is better doing documentaries.

mugabi wrote:Calzaghe-Lacey i can accept. Although it was on a mini scale it had many of the same ingrediants as Duran-Moore, and Breland-Honeyghan. A raucous alcohol fueled baying crowd anxious for blood, a sustained overprolonged beatdown of a guy confident going in...and Lacey was never the same like the other two. All these matches sadly are a sadists dream and ugly viewing for the rest of us

Calzaghe-JOnes was no where near a "beatdown" just a oldish guy in his prime, beating a older guy pretty much shot and ruined who was once many leagues out of this world from the competition.

It says much about Jones's talent that even shot he could in that last SM run beat people like lacey, trinidad and push calzaghe for the first 3 rounds until blood and calzaghes fast pace put him in survival mode.

Beating an equally shot Trinidad who was a natural 147-154lber says, "a lot," about Jones' talent? Not that the other points were credible, but this one takes the cake.

You are a dilettante.

Good thread. I'm gonna go out on a limb just a bit with this one and say Hagler-Roldan should have been stopped after the 3rd round(The thumb round) and should have been ruled a NC3(No Contest). Then they should've scedualed a rematch for 2 or 3 months later.

Surprised no one has mentioned The "Mancini-Kim" bout.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:The line of comparison I often draw is between his call of Tyson taking Douglas' uppercut against Bob Sheridan's reaction to it. As critical as people are of The Colonel, he has an electric excitabilitity to him. Lampley lacks that quality for mine, but to each, their own.

While it became almost a catchphrase, his delivery of "It happened" when Foreman KO'd Moorer was too deadpan for such a dramatic moment.

Tszyu vs Ruelas was a beating and should have been stopped much earlier IMO

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

mugabi wrote:Calzaghe-Lacey i can accept. Although it was on a mini scale it had many of the same ingrediants as Duran-Moore, and Breland-Honeyghan. A raucous alcohol fueled baying crowd anxious for blood, a sustained overprolonged beatdown of a guy confident going in...and Lacey was never the same like the other two. All these matches sadly are a sadists dream and ugly viewing for the rest of us

Calzaghe-JOnes was no where near a "beatdown" just a oldish guy in his prime, beating a older guy pretty much shot and ruined who was once many leagues out of this world from the competition.

It says much about Jones's talent that even shot he could in that last SM run beat people like lacey, trinidad and push calzaghe for the first 3 rounds until blood and calzaghes fast pace put him in survival mode.

Beating an equally shot Trinidad who was a natural 147-154lber says, "a lot," about Jones' talent? Not that the other points were credible, but this one takes the cake.

You are a dilettante.

Trinidad was as much a natural 147-154 lber as Jones was a natural 154-160 lber. The fact one spent most his career in that bracket and the other only the first 5-6 years of his career is moot as Jones only went up to SM and than LH and HW for money and titles. The fact that he came back all the way down to 168 and spent a good part of his declining years there proves my point. By the time they met at 168 both were well past their prime, but Jones looked very good in that fight against Trinidad. Yes it does say a lot about Jones's talent that in that fight at an advanced age he still had the blistering handspeed and combinations it was a thing of beauty and like I say said much about Jones's natural gifts. Perhaps if you understood the point it may than become credible to you bruce?

mugabi wrote:

Goodnight, Irene wrote:

mugabi wrote:Calzaghe-Lacey i can accept. Although it was on a mini scale it had many of the same ingrediants as Duran-Moore, and Breland-Honeyghan. A raucous alcohol fueled baying crowd anxious for blood, a sustained overprolonged beatdown of a guy confident going in...and Lacey was never the same like the other two. All these matches sadly are a sadists dream and ugly viewing for the rest of us

Calzaghe-JOnes was no where near a "beatdown" just a oldish guy in his prime, beating a older guy pretty much shot and ruined who was once many leagues out of this world from the competition.

It says much about Jones's talent that even shot he could in that last SM run beat people like lacey, trinidad and push calzaghe for the first 3 rounds until blood and calzaghes fast pace put him in survival mode.

Beating an equally shot Trinidad who was a natural 147-154lber says, "a lot," about Jones' talent? Not that the other points were credible, but this one takes the cake.

You are a dilettante.

Trinidad was as much a natural 147-154 lber as Jones was a natural 154-160 lber. The fact one spent most his career in that bracket and the other only the first 5-6 years of his career is moot as Jones only went up to SM and than LH and HW for money and titles. The fact that he came back all the way down to 168 and spent a good part of his declining years there proves my point. By the time they met at 168 both were well past their prime, but Jones looked very good in that fight against Trinidad. Yes it does say a lot about Jones's talent that in that fight at an advanced age he still had the blistering handspeed and combinations it was a thing of beauty and like I say said much about Jones's natural gifts. Perhaps if you understood the point it may than become credible to you bruce?

I never knew Tito was a natural LHW until now. RJJ was, "a thing of beauty," beating him?

The best part about you is you're in Other Sports bleating about your treatment in here, yet you post material like this, so backward it begs for ridicule.

AngryGoon38 wrote:Surprised no one has mentioned The "Mancini-Kim" bout.

That fight was competitive all the way. Kim was knocked down at the beginning of the round and the ref waved it off even if Kim did get to his feet. I'm not sure what the ref could have done differently.

Totally agree with the Moore/Duran, and the Breland/Honeygan fights and, I'm afraid to say, the Benn/McLellan fight.

The signs of repetitive eye blinking and the desperate gulping for air, that can be signified by the trying to force the gumshield out of the mouth, is the brain telling the body that it is not coping. They are signs that ref.’s and corner men have to react to. The very least should be a time out for a doctor to assess.

The signs were even commentated on by Jim Watt for several preceding rounds before the final one during the Benn McLellan fight. The self-same signs were prevalent after the preceding knockdowns that Johnny Owen took before the fatal one against Pintor.


If the benefit of hindsight is of any damned use at all, it is that it must inform and effect the future.

We've moved on a great deal and learnt and instilled much better practices since the 80's and early 90's, but now and again you hear yourself pleading at the screen "Referee! Stop the fight! Stop the fight!"

I think Benn-McClellan ended at just the right moment, personally.

Earlier, and McClellan wouldnt have suffered lasting damage. Later, and he may have died, preventing the living hell he now deservedly occupies. This bout had a, "Goldilocks," feel to it.

Agree, though, that Duran-Moore needed stopping earlier. They should have DQ'd Duran for sure. It sickens me seeing fans laud this performance as great. A lot of them even have the hide to complain about Leonard's tactics during their rematch! Thats like shooting someone with a rifle and then b!tching they tagged you in paintball.

They should also have stopped Lewis-Tyson to lynch referee Eddie Cotton for his, "performance," during that bout. Fucken travesty.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:I think Benn-McClellan ended at just the right moment, personally.
gEarlier, and McClellan wouldnt have suffered lasting damage. Later, and he may have died, preventing the living hell he now deservedly occupies. This bout had a, "Goldilocks," feel to it.

So the "just about right" moment to use your slightly distasteful Goldilocks analogy, leads to preferable lasting damage and a deserved living hell?! I've gotta give you the benefit of the doubt here, maybe your phrasing is confusing what you actually mean.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Agree, though, that Duran-Moore needed stopping earlier. They should have DQ'd Duran for sure. It sickens me seeing fans laud this performance as great. A lot of them even have the hide to complain about Leonard's tactics during their rematch! Thats like shooting someone with a rifle and then b!tching they tagged you in paintball.

I really think this excuses what was clearly the ref's responsability/irresponsablity and tastes a little like anti Duran/pro Leonard vitriol, rather than a clear point to made on the failure of some fights to be stopped at the right time.

Let me be clear --- sometimes, bad things befall bad people. Such was the case for McClellan.

On Duran-Moore, the justification for the fouls is its the refs responsibility? So if I elbow or butt someone, and the ref somehow misses it, "Good on me?" All I can say to that is I strenuously disagree.

Stick around. You'll see how, "pro-Leonard," I am.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:On Duran-Moore, the justification for the fouls is its the refs responsibility? So if I elbow or butt someone, and the ref somehow misses it, "Good on me?"

But Duran didn't elbow or butt him. Nor did he commit any other type foul that in any way could have been missed by the ref.

Goodnight, Irene wrote:Let me be clear --- sometimes, bad things befall bad people. Such was the case for McClellan.Stick around. You'll see how, "pro-Leonard," I am.

Oh you have been quite clear all right regarding your pejorative and asinine views on McCllellan; I certainly wont be sticking around to hear any more of them.

Jake Hughes wrote:Oh you have been quite clear all right regarding your pejorative and asinine views on McCllellan; I certainly wont be sticking around to hear any more of them.

It's pretty well established that McClellan was a real piece of shit. You may argue that he didn't deserve what happened to him but if it had to happen to a guy..

hhaehre wrote:It's pretty well established that McClellan was a real piece of shit. You may argue that he didn't deserve what happened to him but if it had to happen to a guy..

No-one should ever have to argue that anyone deserves to have that happen to them.