BoxRec

Who wuld win this battle at Lightweight?.... both were great crowd pleasers with a big punch and tendency to cut and be hurt.... this wouldn't go the distance I think!.
I edge to Mancini.... by a late stoppage with both cut and hurt but Mancini having just that little extra to carry him through... views anyone?... 8)

Mancini was a cut above Gatti.

Boom Boom gave Alexis Arguello and Livingstone Bramble long hard fights and I have always felt Gatti just slighty overated.

Mancini TKO 10 in an entertaining fight.

KOJOE90 wrote:Boom Boom gave Alexis Arguello and Livingstone Bramble long hard fights and I have always felt Gatti just slighty overated.

Mancini TKO 10 in an entertaining fight.

I think the Mancini who fought Arguello would have too much for Gatti... he was getting bust up pretty easily by the time he fought Bramble but could still hold his own...

Ray "boom boom"Mancini was terrible. He came in with his head down and punched in circles........just a poor example of a boxer. No jab. He was a little media darling. He milked his relationship with his father and how he was going for the title for him, for all it was worth. People bought into the BS. As soon as he fought a decent fighter, he was KO'd. Alexis Arguello destroyed him. It was no contest. Livingstone "pitbull" Bramble gave him 2 ass beatings..........Mancini was fun to watch, if you like watching Italians get their ass broke as they chased more talented fighters around the ring. He lacked the skills to compete with real fighters......

Gatti at least can box somewhat....and jab....that is all he would need to beat "Boom Boom".

ringsider wrote:Ray "boom boom"Mancini was terrible. He came in with his head down and punched in circles........just a poor example of a boxer. No jab. He was a little media darling. He milked his relationship with his father and how he was going for the title for him, for all it was worth. People bought into the BS. As soon as he fought a decent fighter, he was KO'd. Alexis Arguello destroyed him. It was no contest. Livingstone "pitbull" Bramble gave him 2 ass beatings..........Mancini was fun to watch, if you like watching Italians get their ass broke as they chased more talented fighters around the ring. He lacked the skills to compete with real fighters......

Gatti at least can box somewhat....and jab....that is all he would need to beat "Boom Boom".

Mate I think you're only trying to wind us up!. Ok if you think Gatti would win thats fine but to say Mancini was a terrible fighter is just bull...
you obviously haven't even watched Mancini's fight with Arguello... he gave him a damn good fight and was even perhaps lightly ahead at the end!... try watching his bouts before you criticise the man!.
Perhaps you should go back to the current scene if they'll let you back... I know you've already had some posts deleted there, I wonder why???....

....you obviously haven't even watched Mancini's fight with Arguello... he gave him a damn good fight and was even perhaps lightly ahead at the end!.......

Hahaha That is funny....I have too watched his fights.......that is what I based my assesment on........he stunk. Lead with his head, punched with his head down looking at the floor. His "Big Punch" was a poor leaping left hook, that he could never catch anyone who was any good with. His right was nonexistant. He had no jab.....What made him marketable was his little story, and the LW divison was low on talent at the time. That is just the the way it was.

ringsider wrote:

....you obviously haven't even watched Mancini's fight with Arguello... he gave him a damn good fight and was even perhaps lightly ahead at the end!.......

Hahaha That is funny....I have too watched his fights.......that is what I based my assesment on........he stunk. Lead with his head, punched with his head down looking at the floor. His "Big Punch" was a poor leaping left hook, that he could never catch anyone who was any good with. His right was nonexistant. He had no jab.....What made him marketable was his little story, and the LW divison was low on talent at the time. That is just the the way it was.

The only stink here is you, your boxing knowledge is laughable!...hahahaha!!!........

That would be a great brawl.

How could you not like Boom Boom? Actually it would be a good match up, tough to pick...the winner possibly being the one who sustains the fewer cuts/eye swelling...I'd go with Boom Boom...How could you not like Boom Boom?

Ok here's my two cents. I honestly think if you take the brawling Gatti it's a toss up either could win and I won't pick one But I would pay to see it!.

But if you take the Gatti that lost to Floyd or better said the post Gatti/Ward 1 Gatti.......did that make sense?................ I'd put some coin on Gatti. But I might watch a movie while the fight was on.

SS your polar opposite of me right? Had to throw that in.

BoxBuzz wrote:
SS your polar opposite of me right? Had to throw that in.

...not really...


....aaaand, by the way, concerning our previous discussions...Real Sports, HBO (7/26--I believe)...will have a piece about Holyfield and whether or not he should be allowed to fight again...perhaps they'll offer the consensus you mentioned the other day...I'll be watching...check it out...

I saw both fight, and I'd have to go with Mancini. It would have been a great fight either way

Arturo Gatti's future would be similar to Deuk-Koo Kim's.

Grimm

A bit harsh and in sensitive there

Grimm you are a total prat, just fornicate off and grow up and try and grow a brain cell or two....... arsehole.

Deuk-Koo Kim's.

If it wasn't for Deuk-koo Kim's death title fights would still be 15 rounds.....Like they should be. He was giving Mancini an ass beating. Sadly what became of his tragic death was a black eye to boxing and title fights were dropped to 12 rounds.

Grimm wrote:Arturo Gatti's future would be similar to Deuk-Koo Kim's.

Poor taste.

KOJOE90 wrote:

Grimm wrote:Arturo Gatti's future would be similar to Deuk-Koo Kim's.

Poor taste.

Thats the sort of thing that should get someone chucked off as far as I'm concerned.... I don't think I'm being over sensitive to say that there should be no place on this forum for people who make those kind of comments.

Why Silkov? What kind of pansy are you? This is a boxing forum. It is his opinion, and he is entitled to it. It is you namby-pampy types that want everything you deem offensive kicked off.......What I find offensive is your lack of knowing anything, but the moderaters do not kick you off for being low in the IQ department.

ringsider wrote:Why Silkov? What kind of pansy are you? This is a boxing forum. It is his opinion, and he is entitled to it. It is you namby-pampy types that want everything you deem offensive kicked off.......What I find offensive is your lack of knowing anything, but the moderaters do not kick you off for being low in the IQ department.

If my IQ was as low as yours I'd worry about your opinion, but it's not so I don't!.

silkov wrote:

ringsider wrote:Why Silkov? What kind of pansy are you? This is a boxing forum. It is his opinion, and he is entitled to it. It is you namby-pampy types that want everything you deem offensive kicked off.......What I find offensive is your lack of knowing anything, but the moderaters do not kick you off for being low in the IQ department.

If my IQ was as low as yours I'd worry about your opinion, but it's not so I don't!.

Well you damn sure are worried about my opinion. If your going to act like your the bigger man don't do it half way.

Grimm wrote:

silkov wrote:

ringsider wrote:Why Silkov? What kind of pansy are you? This is a boxing forum. It is his opinion, and he is entitled to it. It is you namby-pampy types that want everything you deem offensive kicked off.......What I find offensive is your lack of knowing anything, but the moderaters do not kick you off for being low in the IQ department.

If my IQ was as low as yours I'd worry about your opinion, but it's not so I don't!.

Well you damn sure are worried about my opinion. If your going to act like your the bigger man don't do it half way.

I don't worry about your opinion either, I found your comment distasteful and said so, and quite a few other people agree with me.
Just because I don't care what you think doesn't mean I'm not going to say anything about outrageous remarks like that!.
As for who is 'the bigger man' thats the sort of schoolboy remark I'd expect from you.....

silkov wrote:

Grimm wrote:

silkov wrote:
If my IQ was as low as yours I'd worry about your opinion, but it's not so I don't!.

Well you damn sure are worried about my opinion. If your going to act like your the bigger man don't do it half way.

I don't worry about your opinion either, I found your comment distasteful and said so, and quite a few other people agree with me.
Just because I don't care what you think doesn't mean I'm not going to say anything about outrageous remarks like that!.
As for who is 'the bigger man' thats the sort of schoolboy remark I'd expect from you.....

So what I said was outrageous because I think that Gatti would die? Hey that's what the hell I believe.

You're just looking for an excuse to cry to the mods.

Silkov>>>>