BoxRec

palooka wrote:I'm still trying to get my head around how Mike Tyson and Evander Ho!yfoeld went broke, if they can after earning all that money, anyone can.

Counter-puncher wrote:

Ricky_ wrote:

Undefeated49-0 wrote:
Calls me a Troll but is the one following me around in every thread complaining about my personal opinion of Jim Lampley who will never read this forum nor is able to stop me from making such a statement about him.

Boxrec have been threatened in the past, they are responsible for content published on here wether it's your personal opinion or not.

You said Lampley has a racist agenda. A libellous statement that is now published on Boxrec.

I never thought about Lampley in the context of any kind of racial agenda

I find I easier to think of him in terms of being an utter wanker

palooka wrote:I'm still trying to get my head around how Mike Tyson and Evander Ho!yfoeld went broke, if they can after earning all that money, anyone can.

Baby Face Finster wrote:

Like a Boss wrote:Nobody squanders a fortune as spectacularly as a boxer does.

A Dictator surely?

Ricky_ wrote:$750,000 in child support? Kid's got expensive taste.

gp. wrote:

Ricky_ wrote:$750,000 in child support? Kid's got expensive taste.

It's not about the kid's tastes. it's about Tarver's income. The law says that you can't keep yourself in a millionaire lifestyle and just pay out the bare minimum your kid needs to survive. That seems quite right and fair to me.

Truthseeker wrote:
Wonder what the comparison is with boxers - havent come across a similar study yet for that population.

gp. wrote:

Ricky_ wrote:$750,000 in child support? Kid's got expensive taste.

It's not about the kid's tastes. it's about Tarver's income. The law says that you can't keep yourself in a millionaire lifestyle and just pay out the bare minimum your kid needs to survive. That seems quite right and fair to me.

Truthseeker wrote:Thanks for that.

There's major psychological problems waiting for many NFL athletes on retirement - here are some statistics from Weir's (2009) study comparing psychological outcomes of NFL athletes to the general population.

Between ages of 30-49 15% of NFL athletes unable to work - compared to 6.2% within the GP.

3% of NFL athletes are dependent on others through disabililty - compared to .9% within the GP).

Depression incidence among NFL athletes higher than GP for both 30-49 and 50+ age groups.

Approx. 60% of NFL athletes broke 5 years after retirement.

Wonder what the comparison is with boxers - havent come across a similar study yet for that population.

sucracristo wrote:

Truthseeker wrote:Thanks for that.

There's major psychological problems waiting for many NFL athletes on retirement - here are some statistics from Weir's (2009) study comparing psychological outcomes of NFL athletes to the general population.

Between ages of 30-49 15% of NFL athletes unable to work - compared to 6.2% within the GP.

3% of NFL athletes are dependent on others through disabililty - compared to .9% within the GP).

Depression incidence among NFL athletes higher than GP for both 30-49 and 50+ age groups.

Approx. 60% of NFL athletes broke 5 years after retirement.

Wonder what the comparison is with boxers - havent come across a similar study yet for that population.

USF tracked down every NFL player in the modern era and collected data.
the average life expectancy for an NFL lineman is around 50

sucracristo wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:Can someone please explain how the US tax system allows people not to file tax returns for 8 years?

no real way to prevent people from doing illegal stuff. just punish them after. there is withholding from
regular wages of most employees, but independent contractors have to file quarterly as they all have
different expenses and tax situations and usually don't have taxes withheld (and because they don't
have employers paying payroll taxes their self employment tax is double fica). the biggest issue here
is that tarver owes probably more than he makes in child support, which is not tax deductible for the
payor nor taxable to the payee. in other words, tarver could earn a million $, have his former girlfriend
drag him into court and take it all (and she pays no taxes on it), and then the next day the IRS would
drag him into court to pay taxes on the million he never saw, meaning he has to go out and find another
few hundred thousand somewhere, which she could then take, and then the IRS comes back again...
if the IRS doesn't get paid, eventually they will freeze all his assets and accounts and slap a lien on that
house. they also will garnish his wages so it won't be a matter of waiting for him to file anymore. he will
get paid and never see the check. he could be riding a bicycle and sleeping on a couch in the gym for
all they care. i heard iran barkley actually was sleeping under a bridge a while back and heard of many
others almost as bad off. if he had decent accountants and advisors who could hide his stuff, and he just
spent like a somewhat normal rich person, he wouldn't be in this position.

i heard iran barkley actually was sleeping under a bridge a while back and heard of many
others almost as bad off

ImranSarwar wrote:You impress me! You think, you know that whole FIELD well enough that IF you worked in big Government you could administrate some adjustments? And..you can suggest those pots we need to look at? Or, you think the system works as is..just..."how it is"/will always take a few trips around the block before the right levers are pulled down (?)

Ricky_ wrote:

gp. wrote:

Ricky_ wrote:$750,000 in child support? Kid's got expensive taste.

It's not about the kid's tastes. it's about Tarver's income. The law says that you can't keep yourself in a millionaire lifestyle and just pay out the bare minimum your kid needs to survive. That seems quite right and fair to me.

Tarvers income? He's a washed up drug cheat who might have made a decent purse ten years ago, and maybe got a few bucks for appearing in a Rocky film.

Is the mother obliged to invest the same amount in her child? If so, what kid in the history of planet earth has needed $1.5m?

$750k is an absurd amount of money, way in excess of what a kid needs. I mean seriously wtf does a child need other than adequate housing, clothing, books/gadgets for education and a college fund? $100k is way more than what is needed.

No wonder the global economy is in such a mess, if everyone on planet earth was given an equal share of the world's money, we'd all have roughly about $5000 each. Giving a child $750k... how is that sustainable in any context.

palooka wrote:

gp. wrote:

Ricky_ wrote:$750,000 in child support? Kid's got expensive taste.

It's not about the kid's tastes. it's about Tarver's income. The law says that you can't keep yourself in a millionaire lifestyle and just pay out the bare minimum your kid needs to survive. That seems quite right and fair to me.

It doesn't help that the lawyer for the mum will have used upper level income projections to calculate support. The net worth of the fighter (dad) should be used and a boxers income is highly likely to drop off greatly once they are no longer a champion.

sucracristo wrote:yeah, his finances are a mess, but i never understood how these guys can
owe $750k for one kid. what kid costs $750k?!?! he has made payments
in the past, too, so that is just how much he is behind now.