Page 1 of 1
Is it time for a heavyweight Sticky?
Posted: 28 Dec 2006, 10:48
by Expug
There are currently over 20 threads on the first page about heavies.
Some of them are repetitive.
Its not up to the moderators guys, lets use the search function and bring back some of the old ones.
There are some good ones from the past if you look a bit.
Just a suggestion.
Posted: 28 Dec 2006, 11:11
by Seamus
I hear you ! I could start a Buster Mathis vs Tony Galento thread, and I'll bet it would get more answers than a Jimmy Wilde vs Pascual Perez one.
Posted: 28 Dec 2006, 15:31
by BoxBuzz
Perhaps in the U.S. where food is plentiful the HW division is the darling of all fight enthusiasts. I mean the U.S. is the only country where the average 5'6 guy would end up in the HW division.
America runs on Dunkin.
Posted: 28 Dec 2006, 17:09
by Expug
Decagon wrote:It's simple. If you're the World Heavyweight Champion, you can beat any man in the world in a fair fight.
Well that depends on your definition of a fair fight.
Posted: 28 Dec 2006, 17:29
by BoxBuzz
I"m assuming Queensbury=Fair?
Posted: 28 Dec 2006, 21:21
by Expug
Decagon wrote:Throughout the history of the sport, "boxing" has always been about making the fight as fair as possible, in contrast to "wrestling," which is more about making the fight as safe as possible. Usually, a "fair" fight has been thought of as one in which:
- There are only two competitors
- No striking with any part of the body other than the fists
- No striking below the belt
- No attacking an opponent unable to defend himself (controversially, this usually includes a downed fighter)
Boxing was originally a poor man's sport; contested by men unable to afford the weaponry used in more noble competitions. The word "box" meaning "punch" has its derivation in Middle English, which suggests that the sport has been around for at least 800 years. It was only in the 1600s and 1700s that boxing became a popular sport among middle-class and upper-class spectators, as the use of medieval weaponry in combat waned in favor of the use of firearms.
Mankind is a stubborn beast, and he stuck to traditional martial arts the way flies stick to s
hit. It has only been in the 20th century that the use of multiple martial arts in military training has become widespread. In the 1930s, the Soviet Union produced a wonderful combat art that blended Western wrestling with judo, and fewer-rules competitions became popular. Meanwhile, in Brazil, a new form of jiu-jitsu was becoming popular, and many men were partaking in no-holds-barred fights. This has become a sensation in Japan and America in the past 20 years.
Modern martial arts began with the idea that there wasn't a "right" way to punch; just different ways to punch. You can credit boxing, with its woebegone origins for that. Sometimes, basic forms of music, combat and literature can have profound effects on culture. [/rant]
Well thank you for that info Decagon.
http://www.elitemaf.com
hit about us and scroll down to Brian Higgins. Judo instructor.
my profile should say Amateur and proffesional boxer 1976-1989.
Thats me .
But thankyou for the info.
Im givin you a hard time.
Hey I know you were a karateka , check out the credentials on my partner the karate instructor John Fonseca.
You ever heard of him.
He is one of the best.
Posted: 30 Dec 2006, 17:04
by silkov
BoxBuzz wrote:Perhaps in the U.S. where food is plentiful the HW division is the darling of all fight enthusiasts. I mean the U.S. is the only country where the average 5'6 guy would end up in the HW division.
America runs on Dunkin.
Buuuurrrrrpppppp!!!....
:x
8)
Re: Is it time for a heavyweight Sticky?
Posted: 30 Dec 2006, 18:30
by KOJOE90
expug wrote:There are currently over 20 threads on the first page about heavies.
Some of them are repetitive.
Its not up to the moderators guys, lets use the search function and bring back some of the old ones.
There are some good ones from the past if you look a bit.
Just a suggestion.
I agree with the above statement. The SEARCH function is very usefull as there are some real hiddem gems in this forum.
It is also true that there are many repetitive threads, when I have the time I often post a link to earlier threads on the repetitve ones.
This forum of late has become 'Heavyweight' biased I agree. I have posted a number of non-Heavyweight posts in the last few days, but they are never as popular as the ones on the big boys.
Having said all this we are all equally able to post new threads on this forum about Heavyweights or below, so I am NOT in favoure of a Heavyweight sticky.
Posted: 31 Dec 2006, 08:04
by JC
expug, I agree I'm also sick of all the heavyweight threads, they result in us having the same arguements about the same few fighters over and over, it's getting quite tedious. Rocky Marciano, Mike Tyson and Lennox Lewis are the ones I'm most bored off.
A heavyweight sticky is a good idea but I don't think it would work in practice. Nobody would adhere to it and would always want a new thread for their topic, which would mean a whole lot of locking and deleting by the mods resulting windging by people who have their threads locked.
Posted: 31 Dec 2006, 10:24
by silkov
I agree about the people who keep bringing up Marcinao and Tyson, but these are usually the Marcinao nut huggers like Brock and Irish, I've tried ignoring certain threads on these guys but there is often such bull written on them that its a crime to let it get away without a touch of realistic criticism. Marcinao even cropped up on a thread recently debating who were the most underrated fighters of all time, ...which just about says it all really.
Lets just ban Marcinao and Tyson from this forum altogether I say!... 8)