BoxRec

world ranked wrote: ↑07 Oct 2020, 18:32

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑07 Oct 2020, 18:08

world ranked wrote: ↑07 Oct 2020, 18:05

Yeah Evander said Pacquaio beat Floyd so....

It's a quote from lampley commentary when he dropped bowe while they all were screaming for the fight to be stopped. So....

Never doubt in the ring sure, but outside not so sure with that bad take.

Most fighters are the worst predictors and judges you can find. Russ Thompson told me he schooled Vargas and called me a faggot when I pointed out nando stopped him and spit on him.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑07 Oct 2020, 18:55

world ranked wrote: ↑07 Oct 2020, 18:32

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑07 Oct 2020, 18:08

It's a quote from lampley commentary when he dropped bowe while they all were screaming for the fight to be stopped. So....

Never doubt in the ring sure, but outside not so sure with that bad take.

Most fighters are the worst predictors and judges you can find. Russ Thompson told me he schooled Vargas and called me a faggot when I pointed out nando stopped him and spit on him.

I agree and sometimes just as bias as fans.

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑07 Oct 2020, 13:04

gilgamesh wrote: ↑07 Oct 2020, 12:48

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑07 Oct 2020, 12:40
The IBHoF has a separate category for old timers. And I think it's because the people voting in that category are historians/researchers that aren't necessarily experts on the sport of boxing.

People like Dan Rafael have previously refrained from posting votes in that category. And I'm guessing other journalists/pundits have too.

And let's be honest, most of the written accounts of many of the old-timers were written by people that have researched those individuals rather than having seen them in person themselves.

I'm not going to have the legacy debate with you, but I wholeheartedly agree there should be a completely different category for old-timers, because we can't draw honest comparisons with their modern-day counterparts.

It would seem that what constitutes the difference to the IBHOF between Old Timers and Modern era is the access to video footage of them. Most in the Old Timers category there's 'either no or very limited film footage of. In the Modern era there are still guys you may not see everything on, but video footage will be much more readily available if you care to search it out.

You can still do top research of a fighter without video footage. As far as the Old Timers fighters go. Some of these guys go to Libraries, and seek out every bit of Newspaper articles and fight reports they can find of these guys so it takes a ridiculous amount of time and research to find out all this stuff, so it should certainly be considered. A guy that was a big star, and major draw in terms of attracting an audience anywhere he fought had to have a reputation for some reason.

I don’t think there’s anything wrong about respecting an old-timer or even consider them as being an all-time-great (based on their historical contribution to the sport).

What I completely disagree with though, is people dishonestly pretending that someone like Harry Greb could beat GGG or any other modern-day fighter. And I’m not talking about speculation, I am referring to people that I’ve previously discussed this with who were adamant in their beliefs.

Boxing isn't a religion, whereby our faith is solely based on reading books written by authors conveying a seconhand account of often unverified historical events.

Those that don’t believe in the bible aren’t any less credible or knowledgeable than those that do.

Whether or not so and so would beat another fighter from another era is and always will be speculation, but there's no speculation to be had about who had a better career or more noteworthy wins. Generally speaking the guy with more noteworthy wins and accomplishment is gonna go down in the annals of the sport as the better fighter.

For instance, there are quite a few guys that could potentially beat Joe Louis that came after him, but yet they didn't accomplish what he did. So while you can speculate that you think they might beat him, and you may well be right, you can't say they were a better fighter because he proved more than they did in his time.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑08 Oct 2020, 06:34
Whether or not so and so would beat another fighter from another era is and always will be speculation, but there's no speculation to be had about who had a better career or more noteworthy wins.

Well... sure there is. They're both subjective assessments.

squiggy wrote: ↑08 Oct 2020, 07:42

gilgamesh wrote: ↑08 Oct 2020, 06:34
Whether or not so and so would beat another fighter from another era is and always will be speculation, but there's no speculation to be had about who had a better career or more noteworthy wins.

Well... sure there is. They're both subjective assessments.

Well yeah I phrased that wrong. There is indeed speculation to be had, but in some cases, the evidence begins to be overwhelming in some cases about who had a better career.

Such as would be the case when comparing guys like Greb and Golovkin for instance, and I'm a huge huge fan of Golovkin so I'm not insulting him at all. I've greatly enjoyed watching him.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑08 Oct 2020, 06:34Whether or not so and so would beat another fighter from another era is and always will be speculation...

Yes, I completely agree.

My only gripe is when people are utterly convinced about an old-timer, like Harry Greb, definitely being better than a modern-day boxer, such as Gennadiy Golovkin, simply because they read a few books written by a historian that only read several newspaper articles.

We should never even attempt to compare the pugilistic ability of two fighters from different eras if we've never seen one or both of them compete. In this scenario, only accomplishments can be evaluated.

Don't you agree that it's monumentally stupid to attempt to consider mythical match-up's involving fighters we've only ever read about.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑08 Oct 2020, 06:34...but there's no speculation to be had about who had a better career or more noteworthy wins.

I agree with this point also... to a certain extent.

Unfortunately, very few people genuinely possess expert knowledge of the opposition that old-timers faced during their respective eras.

What I’ve found is... most people cite jargon, obscure terminology, names and acronyms, in order to dishonestly pretend they possess “expert” knowledge.

They do so in a lemming-like manner, simply because “if other people reckoned these guys are ‘great’, then they must be”, despite themselves knowing almost nothing whatsoever about the subject matter.

It’s almost as if they feel they cannot consider themselves as being a hard-core fan of the sport of boxing if they don’t regard the likes of Harry Greb as being an “all-time-great”, which I feel is an utterly bizarre attitude to have.

So they’ll always try to fit in with the crowd, by passionately asserting Harry Greb’s all-time-great credentials, even though they’ve never seen him fight and also knowing very little about the man himself and the opponents’ he’s faced.

If you’ve ever followed any of my previous debates about old-timers, every single one of their advocates (without fail) cannot answer any simple questions about the historical figures they're defending. None at all!

gilgamesh wrote: ↑08 Oct 2020, 06:34Generally speaking the guy with more noteworthy wins and accomplishment is gonna go down in the annals of the sport as the better fighter.

Yes, I agree with this.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑08 Oct 2020, 06:34For instance, there are quite a few guys that could potentially beat Joe Louis that came after him, but yet they didn't accomplish what he did. So while you can speculate that you think they might beat him, and you may well be right, you can't say they were a better fighter because he proved more than they did in his time.

I agree with this point too.

"Muhammad Ali is on a different level. Mike Tyson is almost the same level, but the personality of Muhammad Ali is a different level. For me to become like this is a really hard question. When I was growing up, I knew this guy was the greatest. I don't know if I can ever become close to these people. I didn't have this goal. I just want to win my fights. But we'll see in the future, because I'm not finished yet.''

Khabib won't ever be nearly as popular as either of 'em. Not in the U.S. anyway.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 15:44 Khabib won't ever be nearly as popular as either of 'em. Not in the U.S. anyway.

He has khabib posters on his bedroom ceiling. Khabib is about to join loma.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 16:17

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 15:44 Khabib won't ever be nearly as popular as either of 'em. Not in the U.S. anyway.

He has khabib posters on his bedroom ceiling. Khabib is about to join loma.

What's this troll talking about again? I didn't ask the question, the reporter did. It looks like you didn't like it.

The point is, Floyd can see himself as TBE, while the reporters don't mention Floyd's name to Khabib even when Floyd said they can box with Khabib, they only mention about Ali and Tyson to Khabib, and Khabib says he doesn't know if he could come close to Ali.

Tevfik1907 wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 16:24

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 16:17

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 15:44 Khabib won't ever be nearly as popular as either of 'em. Not in the U.S. anyway.

He has khabib posters on his bedroom ceiling. Khabib is about to join loma.

What's this troll talking about again? I didn't ask the question, the reporter did. It looks like you didn't like it.

The point is, Floyd can see himself as TBE, while the reporters don't mention Floyd's name to Khabib even when Floyd said they can box with Khabib, they only mention about Ali and Tyson to Khabib, and Khabib says he doesn't know if he could come close to Ali.

Reporters don't mention Floyd's name to Khabib because they don't compete in the same sport

Why not ask Khabib about Lebron James while you're at it.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 16:17

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 15:44 Khabib won't ever be nearly as popular as either of 'em. Not in the U.S. anyway.

He has khabib posters on his bedroom ceiling. Khabib is about to join loma.

You think Gaethje is gonna beat him? I hope so. I like Gaethje.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 16:42

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 16:17

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 15:44 Khabib won't ever be nearly as popular as either of 'em. Not in the U.S. anyway.

He has khabib posters on his bedroom ceiling. Khabib is about to join loma.

You think Gaethje is gonna beat him? I hope so. I like Gaethje.

Yes, obviously not positive. Same as last week. Confident enough to bet and pick but far short of a guarantee.

If he can slow down the takedowns and pop up when he is taken down long enough to get in a handful of leg kicks it's ass whipping time.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 16:41
Reporters don't mention Floyd's name to Khabib because they don't compete in the same sport

Why not ask Khabib about Lebron James while you're at it.

Lol what?

They mentioned Ali's and Tyson's name to Khabib? What are you talking about gilgamesh?

The point is, Floyd is not close to Ali's and even Tyson's greatness in terms of legacy. You can hear Khabib saying he is the Floyd in mma,



But he doesn't think he can be close to Ali or Tyson.

Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑05 Oct 2020, 10:34 Some of the polls are daft.. Pac was never near his prime, nor was Mayweather for that matter..

ODLH was never in his prime in 2007, no matter who he fought.

It was a big fight in terms of media attention and revenue.

But in the grand scheme of things it had very little bearing on either man's legacy, they both put in the hard yards on that front years before.

The fact that Pac went on to get a couple good wins afterwards shows that it was still a solid win for Floyd though.

Tevfik1907 wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 17:04

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 16:41
Reporters don't mention Floyd's name to Khabib because they don't compete in the same sport

Why not ask Khabib about Lebron James while you're at it.

Lol what?

They mentioned Ali's and Tyson's name to Khabib? What are you talking about gilgamesh?

The point is, Floyd is not close to Ali's and even Tyson's greatness in terms of legacy. You can hear Khabib saying he is the Floyd in mma,



But he doesn't think he can be close to Ali or Tyson.

This may come as a shock to you, but I don't follow or watch every Khabib interview (or for that matter ANY Khabib interview), and I honestly couldn't give less of a sh*t what he has to say about anything as it relates to Boxing.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 17:06 This may come as a shock to you, but I don't follow or watch every Khabib interview (or for that matter ANY Khabib interview), and I honestly couldn't give less of a sh*t what he has to say about anything as it relates to Boxing.

You may not care, but Floyd cares about Khabib, which is why he is ok with boxing with Khabib.

I don't give a sh*t what Floyd has to say about Khabib either.

Floyd is retired, and still constantly gets headlines just for saying sh*t.

People are so stupid.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 17:16 I don't give a sh*t what Floyd has to say about Khabib either.

Floyd is retired, and still constantly gets headlines just for saying sh*t.

People are so stupid.

Floyd probably is interested in 100 million to kick the dogshit out of him. I wouldnt click either link for less than $20.

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 17:48

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 17:16 I don't give a sh*t what Floyd has to say about Khabib either.

Floyd is retired, and still constantly gets headlines just for saying sh*t.

People are so stupid.

Floyd probably is interested in 100 million to kick the dogshit out of him. I wouldnt click either link for less than $20.

That was a special case. I don't think just any UFC guy in Floyd's weight range would sell the way Conor did.

Particularly Khabib who is a ground fighter anyhow right?

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 17:50

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 17:48

gilgamesh wrote: ↑21 Oct 2020, 17:16 I don't give a sh*t what Floyd has to say about Khabib either.

Floyd is retired, and still constantly gets headlines just for saying sh*t.

People are so stupid.

Floyd probably is interested in 100 million to kick the dogshit out of him. I wouldnt click either link for less than $20.

That was a special case. I don't think just any UFC guy in Floyd's weight range would sell the way Conor did.

Particularly Khabib who is a ground fighter anyhow right?

No possible way it sells like that. Floyd made upwards of 400 million for McGregor. Yeah, khabib couldn't come close to beating conor or Justin boxing. Just saying, only reason he cares.