BoxRec

United - WBA was nearly as one sided as this poll

stujones wrote:

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:UNTILL we know more about Khan and also about Prescott, it is hard to call.

Can I just refer everyone to the very first post I made on this thread:

"Stu Jones thinks it's a 'hard call' although he concedes the evidence points towards Khan.

Over the years I've been on here, I've found Stu to be pedantic and bloody minded at times, deliberately taking up causes that have little merit and going on about them for several posts which annoys me greatly."

Nuff said (though it won't be, will it?)

So I am not aloud to agree when other posters make good points? I am not allowed to respond to OTHER posters who clearly have misread me (e.g. apparently a few different posters since your rant about me still reckon I went for Khan). I might be repeating myself, and it might bore you - but I don't want people to think I voted Khan.... seems like lots think I did and started posting about and making comments on my posts after I said I would stop (cause its all dull and hypothetical) - misreading me etc, so am I not to respond?

And you think I am the only one with this "fault"... note how many times Mr Terrence replies to a so called "dead" subject.... including this one. If anyone has to have the "last word" it is him.... even claiming that EPO didn't have any influence on Shane Mosley's performances just to "win" an arguement.

You are beginning to sound like Spud "everyone is ganging up on me". Its a stupid bloody thread anyway, the two fighters just cant be compared. One has mixed in World class and conquered his division while the other has failed so far at a much lower level.

Terence wrote:Stu, I cannot honestly say I understand what you and Gobbles are arguing for, against, or if you are even arguing at all, or if you are even speaking English, you could be exchanging archaic Welsh poetry for all the sense you are making.
As for Khan-Limond, Willie opened him up with body shots and head shots, I would post a Youtube snippet if it wasn't for that fact that a) the quality would be shit b) I tend to watch full fights. Khan was so discombobulated he arsed up his own count.

It is hard to say who hits harder P4P out of Lewis and Prescott? Eh? Lewis hit at a higher level, so at this stage the answer would be Lewis, resoundingly. Ditto for the chin question. Amir got knocked out by a relative novice, and stayed down; Haye got knocked down by the premier fighter in his division, and got up to win.

This reminds me of when you refused to accept the idea that Tyson is a bully, going all psychological on me in the face of the common perception/evidence that Tyson is, in fact, a bully. Or that Oscar, whatever it was we argued about in regards to Oscar. You are now flying in the face of the fact that Khan was brutally KO'd and Haye, in his sole defeat, was stopped gamely on his feet. Haye has never been in the type of trouble Khan has been in, he has also mixed at a higher class, so his chin must be better, failing that you will have to argue that Haye's defence is far better, another lost cause, another five page thread.

In fact, why not open a 'David Haye's Willie Pep like defence is masking his chin problems' thread?

doesn't Welsh poetry have a lot to do with lost causes, or is that irish?

stujones wrote:

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:UNTILL we know more about Khan and also about Prescott, it is hard to call.

Can I just refer everyone to the very first post I made on this thread:

"Stu Jones thinks it's a 'hard call' although he concedes the evidence points towards Khan.

Over the years I've been on here, I've found Stu to be pedantic and bloody minded at times, deliberately taking up causes that have little merit and going on about them for several posts which annoys me greatly."

Nuff said (though it won't be, will it?)

So I am not aloud to agree when other posters make good points? I am not allowed to respond to OTHER posters who clearly have misread me (e.g. apparently a few different posters since your rant about me still reckon I went for Khan). I might be repeating myself, and it might bore you - but I don't want people to think I voted Khan.... seems like lots think I did and started posting about and making comments on my posts after I said I would stop (cause its all dull and hypothetical) - misreading me etc, so am I not to respond?

Stu, you're allowed to do whatever you like within the rules of the forum and I'm well aware you didn't vote for Khan. As for gobbles who said it's mob rule on here, it isn't, in my view. It's all about having different opinions - but you stretch logic to the limit and, unfortunately, on this thread have simply proven everything I've said about you in post number one.

You didn't vote for Khan but are still saying it's a 'hard call' when 94% of people on the most knowledgeable British boxing forum think otherwise (and PLEASE don't come back and say that you are one of the 94% ergo many might actually have thought it to be a 'hard call' - they don't). People are saying it's a daft poll - because the answer is so obvious.

I must just remind those people I thought that too and simply set it up to see if I could convince you. I shouldn't be surprised that even this suitably chastening experience hasn't helped!

WildWaylon wrote: You are beginning to sound like Spud "everyone is ganging up on me". Its a stupid bloody thread anyway, the two fighters just cant be compared. One has mixed in World class and conquered his division while the other has failed so far at a much lower level.

Perhaps I am, well I know I am... in this case (this one particular thread) I think it is the case. There have been one or two comments on here that have, possibly, in my opinion resembled school bullying and been more about "me" than the thread in question... infact, more than half of the original post was about my past posting style - when infact to which the original thread where this was disgust I had made just 1 post on the topic and mainly cause there was an interesting discussion between Gobbles and Ian (infact siding with Ian, but saying I'd like to see more evidence before making a final decision). There was also posts in which the OP would like to bring it to "everyones attention" (a sign of gobbles' mob rule there)- why not just make a note of it himself? or even just say (as he has before, which was fine) - "there you go again Stu". I'm sure we all have opinion of each other based on the years we have spoken on here, and this is supposed to be just a fun thing to wind down after work, or when people are in work - so why go personal? This thread was singly designed for Ian to show to the forum my "faults" - something he has implied in his last post.

I agree with his last post, that opinions are all its is about. It is his opinion that I have DELIBRATEDLY taken my stance... I don't really know why, to wind him/other posters up? I did take a bit of a stand about that, cause it is not true. I said it is "hard to say", and I stick by it. Right, wrong, rediculous - well I respect all opinions, but I haven't said it just to stir things up - I believe it, and I say that cause we don't know enough about Khan/Prescott yet. To be honest, I've gone past caring about this debate and gone past caring what people think I am like. I said my bit, stuck to my opinion on the matter someone made a post with which I agree about - and got taken to town for it for wanting the last word.

Problem is, seems like there is lots of people who want the "last word" in this thread.

stujones wrote:

WildWaylon wrote: You are beginning to sound like Spud "everyone is ganging up on me". Its a stupid bloody thread anyway, the two fighters just cant be compared. One has mixed in World class and conquered his division while the other has failed so far at a much lower level.

Perhaps I am, well I know I am... in this case (this one particular thread) I think it is the case. There have been one or two comments on here that have, possibly, in my opinion resembled school bullying and been more about "me" than the thread in question... infact, more than half of the original post was about my past posting style - when infact to which the original thread where this was disgust I had made just 1 post on the topic and mainly cause there was an interesting discussion between Gobbles and Ian (infact siding with Ian, but saying I'd like to see more evidence before making a final decision). There was also posts in which the OP would like to bring it to "everyones attention" (a sign of gobbles' mob rule there)- why not just make a note of it himself? or even just say (as he has before, which was fine) - "there you go again Stu". I'm sure we all have opinion of each other based on the years we have spoken on here, and this is supposed to be just a fun thing to wind down after work, or when people are in work - so why go personal? This thread was singly designed for Ian to show to the forum my "faults" - something he has implied in his last post.

I agree with his last post, that opinions are all its is about. It is his opinion that I have DELIBRATEDLY taken my stance... I don't really know why, to wind him/other posters up? I did take a bit of a stand about that, cause it is not true. I said it is "hard to say", and I stick by it. Right, wrong, rediculous - well I respect all opinions, but I haven't said it just to stir things up - I believe it, and I say that cause we don't know enough about Khan/Prescott yet. To be honest, I've gone past caring about this debate and gone past caring what people think I am like. I said my bit, stuck to my opinion on the matter someone made a post with which I agree about - and got taken to town for it for wanting the last word.

Problem is, seems like there is lots of people who want the "last word" in this thread.

To be honest Stu, I respect your knowledge of boxing and memory of statistics etc and couldnt see why you needed to plead from the dock about comments you made. We all have opinions and if the differ its the purpose of the forum, other peoples views are important. No I dont like it when people get personal, abusive or racist it spoils Boxrec which gives me such a lot of pleasure. BTW I always read your posts because I find them both informative and interesting.

mrbassie wrote:Khan obviously. I can't see Willie Limmond dropping Haye.

Yeah. I also imagine that Fragomeni and Mormeck might well have given Khan some serious problems.

WildWaylon wrote: To be honest Stu, I respect your knowledge of boxing and memory of statistics etc and couldnt see why you needed to plead from the dock about comments you made. We all have opinions and if the differ its the purpose of the forum, other peoples views are important. No I dont like it when people get personal, abusive or racist it spoils Boxrec which gives me such a lot of pleasure. BTW I always read your posts because I find them both informative and interesting.

Thanks, and I completely agree - just believe the major purpose of this thread was to get personal on me, more so than the topic at hand... as all contributers have agreed it is silly (for various reasons). Note, I haven't found any of the comments aimed at me as offensive, racists, abusive. Although I do think there has been a little bit of a "gang" aimed at me and my posting style, as alot of the replies discussed my posting style and being "pompus" etc, reverting to past posts (and my posting style) in addition to what has been said. Well all you need to do is read the first post and anyone can see its a pretty personal start. I did and do laugh it off, but I do think its starting to cross the line when a post just wants to bring to everyones attention how pedantic/pompus whatever I am, based on agreeing on some good (IMO) points a new poster to the thread who brings in a new arguement. No response to the excellent post I agreed with, no contribution to the thread, just wanted to tell "everyone" about my faults - yes, I did see that as a bit of a "ganging" up and it was personal. Nothing about the thread, my points or anything - just about me.

Its not been abusive, racist or offensive, but its been personal for sure, and if it was just about my boxing opinions I wouldn't care - but it hasn't just been about that, hence my little rant that you responded to (with good points). The original post showed it was primarily about me, and my posting style, indeed the guy who disagreed with Ian in the original thread didn't even get a mention (I received a "dig" in the original thread and I hadn't even responded").

I haven't found it offensive, I can lock the thread when I want to but I don't want to.... nice for people to air the grievances once in a while.

Herol wrote:

mrbassie wrote:Khan obviously. I can't see Willie Limmond dropping Haye.

Yeah. I also imagine that Fragomeni and Mormeck might well have given Khan some serious problems.

lol these posts are imence lets just thrown khan in with em and see wahat happens and haye with prescott we'll son see whos got the better chin

stujones wrote:Problem is, seems like there is lots of people who want the "last word" in this thread.

You are wrong - again - on several points in your last post but I have no energy to deal with them and even if I did, there would be little point.

I put the poll up because I couldn't be arsed to thrash out the fact that the issue wasn't a 'hard call' at all with you as I knew what would happen. I thought I'd let others have a go.

They have, the vote is 95% but you've reacted exactly as I predicted anyway, writ large and now you feel bullied. That's wasn't the intention.

The thread is rather sad and simply confirms my points in post one. I won't bother anymore and my advice to others - for the negligible amount it's worth - is for others not to either. You have always been, and remain, utterly intractable.

You can lock the f*cking thing up for me.

Last word DD

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:Problem is, seems like there is lots of people who want the "last word" in this thread.

You have always been, and remain, utterly intractable.

quote]


what have tractors got to do with this?

J wrote:

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

stujones wrote:Problem is, seems like there is lots of people who want the "last word" in this thread.

You have always been, and remain, utterly intractable.

quote]


what have tractors got to do with this?

haymakers.

very good

now i really need to bale from this thread.

J wrote:very good

now i really need to bale from this thread.

I'm leaving this thread as well, that was the final straw

dont be so arable, and there no need to (oil seed) rape a thread either.
theres plenty of seeds of doubt sown in this thread, if you combine (harvester) all the issues, their must a be a few furrowed brows.

boooo time for a rum.

Hay!

That's enough of that.

Khan't we all just get along

mikey h wrote:Khan't we all just get along

what a terrible pun



made me lol alot keep up the good work and rember dont the puns just let them flow

Adamj1987 wrote:

mikey h wrote:Khan't we all just get along

what a terrible pun



made me lol alot keep up the good work and rember dont the puns just let them flow

We don't want no trouble on here lads................ Amir to keep the peace

where did the farming puns go?

bunch of khants