Re: The Eamonn Magee Book is Incredible....but how good was he in your opinion?
Posted: 24 Jul 2018, 09:35
what were his best wins aside from nery and thaxton
Your appraisal of the Urkal fight is correct I say...I had it close but no issue that Urkal got it...dominated the middle rounds.Twinkle Toes wrote: ↑24 Jul 2018, 17:19 I think the Urkal fight was his best performance, but it also highlighted his flaws.
He was aggressive in that fight, but when forced to work on the front foot he wasn't overly accurate and looked a bit wild. I don't think he was a defensive wizard either and could be hit quite easily. Quite willing to take a few to try and land one.
He was a talent, but I think we saw the best he had to offer.
I totally agree with this. IMO Mike Tyson has been a huge beneficiary of this. Obviously he was a brilliant fighter but he seems to be elevated by many as his losses get blamed on outside influences, not training hard enough etc. But that comes down to lifestyle and discipline and lacking in those departments is, in my opinion, no more of an excuse than having a glass jaw is. These mental or other factors are as much a part of the fighter's character and make-up as their physical attributes and a fighter should be judged ultimately on what he achieved, not on how good he could have been had he been more dedicated. Don't get me wrong, it makes for interesting debate and I understand why we do it, but when it comes down to placing a fighter's achievements what matters is what a fighter did, not what they could have done but for x,y or z.Deserter wrote: ↑23 Jul 2018, 15:40 The problem with this type of speculation is that you're trying to separate the inseparable.
Bizarrely it seems to only happen with mental situations rather than physical ones e.g. you never see a thread saying 'how far do you think Billy Joe Saunders could go if he could punch like Nigel Benn?' That's because people know he can't and so view it as a pointless debate. But this is almost always true in those cases that are more mental rather than physical as well.
The bottom line is that Magee's lifestyle and its consequent impact on his performances was a direct reflection of who he was - as much a part of his DNA as his southpaw stance.
Thats such a great post, closes out the debate emphatically for me. Every fighter that ever lived could say "what if I had this or that in my locker" but we can really only deal in reality and the mental side of the game is as important as the physical.Matt W wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 06:33I totally agree with this. IMO Mike Tyson has been a huge beneficiary of this. Obviously he was a brilliant fighter but he seems to be elevated by many as his losses get blamed on outside influences, not training hard enough etc. But that comes down to lifestyle and discipline and lacking in those departments is, in my opinion, no more of an excuse than having a glass jaw is. These mental or other factors are as much a part of the fighter's character and make-up as their physical attributes and a fighter should be judged ultimately on what he achieved, not on how good he could have been had he been more dedicated. Don't get me wrong, it makes for interesting debate and I understand why we do it, but when it comes down to placing a fighter's achievements what matters is what a fighter did, not what they could have done but for x,y or z.Deserter wrote: ↑23 Jul 2018, 15:40 The problem with this type of speculation is that you're trying to separate the inseparable.
Bizarrely it seems to only happen with mental situations rather than physical ones e.g. you never see a thread saying 'how far do you think Billy Joe Saunders could go if he could punch like Nigel Benn?' That's because people know he can't and so view it as a pointless debate. But this is almost always true in those cases that are more mental rather than physical as well.
The bottom line is that Magee's lifestyle and its consequent impact on his performances was a direct reflection of who he was - as much a part of his DNA as his southpaw stance.
Exactly. If I wasn't a fat, slow, lazy, non-punching, cowardly midget, I would've kicked fornicate out of that bum Tyson Fury...Jackson328 wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 17:32Thats such a great post, closes out the debate emphatically for me. Every fighter that ever lived could say "what if I had this or that in my locker" but we can really only deal in reality and the mental side of the game is as important as the physical.Matt W wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 06:33I totally agree with this. IMO Mike Tyson has been a huge beneficiary of this. Obviously he was a brilliant fighter but he seems to be elevated by many as his losses get blamed on outside influences, not training hard enough etc. But that comes down to lifestyle and discipline and lacking in those departments is, in my opinion, no more of an excuse than having a glass jaw is. These mental or other factors are as much a part of the fighter's character and make-up as their physical attributes and a fighter should be judged ultimately on what he achieved, not on how good he could have been had he been more dedicated. Don't get me wrong, it makes for interesting debate and I understand why we do it, but when it comes down to placing a fighter's achievements what matters is what a fighter did, not what they could have done but for x,y or z.Deserter wrote: ↑23 Jul 2018, 15:40 The problem with this type of speculation is that you're trying to separate the inseparable.
Bizarrely it seems to only happen with mental situations rather than physical ones e.g. you never see a thread saying 'how far do you think Billy Joe Saunders could go if he could punch like Nigel Benn?' That's because people know he can't and so view it as a pointless debate. But this is almost always true in those cases that are more mental rather than physical as well.
The bottom line is that Magee's lifestyle and its consequent impact on his performances was a direct reflection of who he was - as much a part of his DNA as his southpaw stance.
We all coulda been a contender ya know![]()
Maybe I wasn't clear in my original post, or maybe you are guilty reading the title and jumping to the end.Jackson328 wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 17:32Thats such a great post, closes out the debate emphatically for me. Every fighter that ever lived could say "what if I had this or that in my locker" but we can really only deal in reality and the mental side of the game is as important as the physical.Matt W wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 06:33I totally agree with this. IMO Mike Tyson has been a huge beneficiary of this. Obviously he was a brilliant fighter but he seems to be elevated by many as his losses get blamed on outside influences, not training hard enough etc. But that comes down to lifestyle and discipline and lacking in those departments is, in my opinion, no more of an excuse than having a glass jaw is. These mental or other factors are as much a part of the fighter's character and make-up as their physical attributes and a fighter should be judged ultimately on what he achieved, not on how good he could have been had he been more dedicated. Don't get me wrong, it makes for interesting debate and I understand why we do it, but when it comes down to placing a fighter's achievements what matters is what a fighter did, not what they could have done but for x,y or z.Deserter wrote: ↑23 Jul 2018, 15:40 The problem with this type of speculation is that you're trying to separate the inseparable.
Bizarrely it seems to only happen with mental situations rather than physical ones e.g. you never see a thread saying 'how far do you think Billy Joe Saunders could go if he could punch like Nigel Benn?' That's because people know he can't and so view it as a pointless debate. But this is almost always true in those cases that are more mental rather than physical as well.
The bottom line is that Magee's lifestyle and its consequent impact on his performances was a direct reflection of who he was - as much a part of his DNA as his southpaw stance.
We all coulda been a contender ya know![]()
what she look likeTerminator666 wrote: ↑28 Jul 2018, 12:24 I’ve just finished reading the book- anyone fancies a freebie - pm me
Fair enough. I think he had lots of natural talent and under-achieved in his career but its hard to imagine what he could have done if not for the drink as it seemed to be his nemesis. I remember a photo of him after the Hatton fight when Ricky had gone to his dressing room to thank him for a great contest and there was Magee swigging a can of cider! Hardly the correct way to rehydrate after a gruelling contest but seemed to sum him up.thepocketrocket wrote: ↑28 Jul 2018, 11:46Maybe I wasn't clear in my original post, or maybe you are guilty reading the title and jumping to the end.Jackson328 wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 17:32Thats such a great post, closes out the debate emphatically for me. Every fighter that ever lived could say "what if I had this or that in my locker" but we can really only deal in reality and the mental side of the game is as important as the physical.Matt W wrote: ↑27 Jul 2018, 06:33
I totally agree with this. IMO Mike Tyson has been a huge beneficiary of this. Obviously he was a brilliant fighter but he seems to be elevated by many as his losses get blamed on outside influences, not training hard enough etc. But that comes down to lifestyle and discipline and lacking in those departments is, in my opinion, no more of an excuse than having a glass jaw is. These mental or other factors are as much a part of the fighter's character and make-up as their physical attributes and a fighter should be judged ultimately on what he achieved, not on how good he could have been had he been more dedicated. Don't get me wrong, it makes for interesting debate and I understand why we do it, but when it comes down to placing a fighter's achievements what matters is what a fighter did, not what they could have done but for x,y or z.
We all coulda been a contender ya know![]()
The post was never 'how good could Magee have been if he wasn't drunk?'....I was asking if those who had seen him, like me, were expecting more from him, when in fact he may have been a cagey counter-puncher who was never going to have that much of a work rate, drunk or not. Therefore he could have maybe reached his natural level, irrespective of drink and lifestyle. The book implies he was cut off at the knees because of drink...that may be flawed style wise
Had some good answers though...
There is that but Magee is an extreme case.Coco wrote: ↑06 Sep 2018, 07:39 Re-iterating what has been already said, he could have been a champ if he could punch, wasn't chinny etc
The fact is Magee didn't have the mentality to be a champ even in the alphabet era. Of course a quality fighter, but no more.
Often too some fighters drink, don't train etc to give themselves a ready made excuse for not making it. It's another part of self doubt.