Page 2 of 2

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 02 May 2014, 10:04
by palooka
stujones wrote:I think Earl needs the fight for his own piece of mind. I think the stoppage grates him and he needs closure. Hopefully the fight will be decisive either way so Earl can have closure.
The first fight was decisive enough; lets hope he doesn't have any issues over the Khan fight.

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 02 May 2014, 13:03
by expe
columbo wrote:
Datsue wrote:
Broomhall wrote:I often wonder if there is another sport which makes its competitors such tragic figures. So many of these guys end up broke and with dementia or some other brain injury.

I know pro wrestling isn't really a sport, but all its competitors seem to keel over due to a combination of drug-induced heart attacks, long-term steroid abuse, mental illness due to ring injuries & long-term recreational & steroid abuse, & being about 5 stone over a "natural" weight.

I know it doesn't have the gloomy misery of boxing greats shuffling their last in rented rooms, reduced to wrinkled & forgotten shadows of their former selves, dementia & infirmity laying them waste, & all these giant orange people's hearts exploding may at first glance have some inherent comedy value, but when you see a list like this it does bring it home that their "sport" is completely fvcked too:

http://prowrestling.about.com/od/whatsr ... deaths.htm
Professional sportsmen/women in general quite often seem to end up in a shitty situation at some point after their careers are over. I read the other day that ex cricketers have the highest rate of suicide amongst athletes. That was pretty surprising. I wonder why that is.
Cricket's probably the sort of sport that pushes people towards it more. It's not particularly well paid below the top level and players spend long periods of time travelling around the country and world, with the same group of players. That sort of thing brings people together, to then lose it when you retire must be difficult to replace.

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 02 May 2014, 18:45
by Taansend
palooka wrote:
stujones wrote:I think Earl needs the fight for his own piece of mind. I think the stoppage grates him and he needs closure. Hopefully the fight will be decisive either way so Earl can have closure.
The first fight was decisive enough; lets hope he doesn't have any issues over the Khan fight.
:OhYes:

And then he'll be after Castle to really clear things up.

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 02 May 2014, 19:23
by crusader
The ending to the first fight was odd, as I thought Earl did fairly well in the last round and he took a lot more punishment in the earlier rounds than he did immediately prior to being pulled out.

It just seemed like a questionable time to pull him out, though I obviously don't know how he was feeling.

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 02 May 2014, 19:29
by Wales
columbo wrote:
Datsue wrote:
Broomhall wrote:I often wonder if there is another sport which makes its competitors such tragic figures. So many of these guys end up broke and with dementia or some other brain injury.

I know pro wrestling isn't really a sport, but all its competitors seem to keel over due to a combination of drug-induced heart attacks, long-term steroid abuse, mental illness due to ring injuries & long-term recreational & steroid abuse, & being about 5 stone over a "natural" weight.

I know it doesn't have the gloomy misery of boxing greats shuffling their last in rented rooms, reduced to wrinkled & forgotten shadows of their former selves, dementia & infirmity laying them waste, & all these giant orange people's hearts exploding may at first glance have some inherent comedy value, but when you see a list like this it does bring it home that their "sport" is completely fvcked too:

http://prowrestling.about.com/od/whatsr ... deaths.htm
Professional sportsmen/women in general quite often seem to end up in a shitty situation at some point after their careers are over. I read the other day that ex cricketers have the highest rate of suicide amongst athletes. That was pretty surprising. I wonder why that is.
There is a book (name escapes me) that outlines the cricket thing, it is indeed sport with highest suicide rate.
Dean Windass spoke candidly about his suicidal thoughts after football, basically missing the daily grind and the Craic.

As for Earl Katsidis, a sparring session and payday at best, surely??

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 03 May 2014, 08:40
by palooka
Teddy's Toupee wrote:
Broomhall wrote:I often wonder if there is another sport which makes its competitors such tragic figures. So many of these guys end up broke and with dementia or some other brain injury.
Darts?
Croquet?

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 03 May 2014, 11:42
by n1ebf
ShadrachSimmo wrote:Katsidis should stop Earl in 1 then hopefully it's over for both of them as far as fighting goes.
how does punch resistance go from being pretty bloody resistant - able to get kicked by a horse/ punched by Katsidis and get up - to being virtually non-existent? Does taking even one battering, or more, just shut down the body's ability to take a level of punishment it used to be able to handle?
I'm not expecting a glut of responses here from posters with physiological expertise, but if anybody wants to chip in with what they think I'd be interested. Fact is, Graham Early took some huge shots from Katsidis - I seem to remember Kevin Bennett had him going as well to a lesser extent, before running into problems himself. But the Earl of his last couple of fights had much, much less resistance.

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 03 May 2014, 12:05
by Teddy's Toupee
palooka wrote:
Teddy's Toupee wrote:
Broomhall wrote:I often wonder if there is another sport which makes its competitors such tragic figures. So many of these guys end up broke and with dementia or some other brain injury.
Darts?
Croquet?
Don't be stupid. there's no comparison between the two. :shame:

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 03 May 2014, 12:14
by palooka
You're only jealous because your social betters play darts.

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 03 May 2014, 15:46
by Teddy's Toupee
palooka wrote:You're only jealous because your social betters play darts.
And dominos

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 03 May 2014, 16:02
by ShadrachSimmo
n1ebf wrote:
ShadrachSimmo wrote:Katsidis should stop Earl in 1 then hopefully it's over for both of them as far as fighting goes.
how does punch resistance go from being pretty bloody resistant - able to get kicked by a horse/ punched by Katsidis and get up - to being virtually non-existent? Does taking even one battering, or more, just shut down the body's ability to take a level of punishment it used to be able to handle?
I'm not expecting a glut of responses here from posters with physiological expertise, but if anybody wants to chip in with what they think I'd be interested. Fact is, Graham Early took some huge shots from Katsidis - I seem to remember Kevin Bennett had him going as well to a lesser extent, before running into problems himself. But the Earl of his last couple of fights had much, much less resistance.
It's a very good question.

Some fighters seem to be impervious to beatings though. They absorb brutal sustained punishment through long hard careers. It clearly depends on the individual it could as you say depend on the psyche of these individuals.

Re: Michael Katsidis vs Graham Earl rematch

Posted: 03 May 2014, 16:57
by Trojans44
n1ebf wrote:
ShadrachSimmo wrote:Katsidis should stop Earl in 1 then hopefully it's over for both of them as far as fighting goes.
how does punch resistance go from being pretty bloody resistant - able to get kicked by a horse/ punched by Katsidis and get up - to being virtually non-existent? Does taking even one battering, or more, just shut down the body's ability to take a level of punishment it used to be able to handle?
I'm not expecting a glut of responses here from posters with physiological expertise, but if anybody wants to chip in with what they think I'd be interested. Fact is, Graham Early took some huge shots from Katsidis - I seem to remember Kevin Bennett had him going as well to a lesser extent, before running into problems himself. But the Earl of his last couple of fights had much, much less resistance.
Think I can help you out mate and the answer is terrifying. When you see a boxer wobbled, knocked out or knocked down that's a concussion. A concussion is a brain injury and getting one makes it exponentially more likely you'll get another one. Essentially your damaging your brain. So when boxing fans say 'his punch resistance has gone' what that really means is that the fighter has suffered so many concussions that his brain can no longer cope!

There is clear evidence that multiple concussions lead to dementia and brain damage in general. Boxing is the only major contact sport where there is not major action taking place on concussion. Indeed we're quite the opposite sending clearly concussed lads out to get more blows to the head e.g Cleverly v Kovalev.

There's a brilliant documentary on YouTube called 'head games' if you're interested.