BoxRec

After reading the Haye v Khan chin topic with Stu and Gobbles being willing to argue their point against the whole forum and Gobbles saying "it's a real mob rule forum", is there a consensus forum opinion that you disagree with? I'll start...

The general consensus is that Brodie v Jorrin was a massive robbery on home soil and denied Michael a world title that should have been his.

I reckon Brodie wasn't robbed against Jorrin, the fight was close but I felt the right man won.

The general consensus was that Audley wasn't going to dominate HW boxing for a decade......... I disagreed

I disagreed when everyone was saying Margarito would beat Mosley

The general consensus on here is that Britain’s biggest promoter is a tiresome, blinkered, mis-match making, genuine title disregarding, real fight dodging, shameless, former fighter suing, WBO rating influencing, Steve Robinson shafting charlatan.

I don’t see where they are coming from

The general consensus that Ali was "The Greatest"

Was a very good fighter and he transended the sport - however, "The Greatest" he was not.

Herol graham should have been world champ!! How many cracks did he get? 3? Most fighters dont get 1 so he cant complain!

A lot of people seem to call Valuev/Holyfield a robbery, whereas I had it 115/113 to the big freak. And Lynes/Branco - I had it very close, quite possibly a draw, so I had no problem with the split that Branco received.

The general consensus that Floyd Jr. is one of the greatest fighters of all time, even though his biggest win was over an inactive fighter who had only fought 5 full rounds in nearly two years.

I disagreed stronly that De la Hoya would beat the Pacman.

That Joe Calzaghe beat Bernard Hopkins. He didn't in my book. The Executioner was robbed.

That every close decision is a "robbery", from Hatton-Collazo to Valuev-Holyfield

Ottke Reid was a robbery, close yes, bad reffing yes, "robbery" - nah

x good fighter is too slow, he cannot beat y good fighter and in fact has no chance

or maybe that belongs in KG's BoxRec Cliches thread

That Jack Kerouac will have a bigger impact on coming generations than William S. Burroughs; Kerouac's one-trick pony, narcissistic ramblings will one day fade into memory whilst Burroughs' innovative use of cut-ups, satire, appropriation of genre plot stylings & hardcore gay pron will be looked upon as...

Oh, hang on, were we talking about boxing?

Right then: I strongly disagree that James Toney is still fighting. He retired circa 1999 & the Pilsbury DoughBoy has been pulling a "ringer" for him ever since.

Haye and Macaroni was a competitive match up.

It wasn't, and that was proven in 2 rounds.

I disagree that Calzaghe beat Hopkins.

'Shoe Shining' old men does not make greatness, especially when you get flattened in the opener and get split-decision by the skin of your teeth.

I always thought that the first Holyfield v Lewis fight was a fair result, i couldn't see this great big robbery that everyone was shouting about.

I watched it whilst in Indoneasia, with non-english commentary, which means i wasn't swayed by any of them.

That Hagler was robbed against Leonard, should have been a UD for Leonard not an SD.

Jimmy Vincent lost to David Barnes, according to John Keene's scorecard....I say he didn't

Old bones Ian wrote:I always thought that the first Holyfield v Lewis fight was a fair result, i couldn't see this great big robbery that everyone was shouting about.

I watched it whilst in Indoneasia, with non-english commentary, which means i wasn't swayed by any of them.

Really? Blimey, that is a big call. Don't think I've ever met anyone who thought Lewis didn't win. Might have to torture myself and watch it again.

As for Reid-Ottke, I think it was a robbery BECAUSE of the appalling reffing. Actually, it was a robbery anyway, yeah. 8)

Oscar De La Hoya has been beaten 6 times. I strongly disagree, that only men to beat Oscar are refs and judges. FFS he was on the canvas having a time out, thinking about strategy against Hopkins and the few stopped the bloody fight. Bernard was so lucky that night!

Wales wrote:Ottke Reid was a robbery, close yes, bad reffing yes, "robbery" - nah

Holyfield was going to lose to Bowe in the rematch

Tyson was going to beat Buster Douglas

Leonard vs Hearns 2 is the worst decision in boxing history - Hearns might have nicked a close decision, very close.

Danny Williams wasn't going to KO Mike Tyson in round 4 (Dream inspired pick that one).

Oscar lost to Felix Sturm.

Amir Khan was in queer street against Gomez

I suppose the "worst" one was......

Calzaghe beat Kessler (draw on my card).

Old bones Ian wrote:I always thought that the first Holyfield v Lewis fight was a fair result, i couldn't see this great big robbery that everyone was shouting about.

I watched it whilst in Indoneasia, with non-english commentary, which means i wasn't swayed by any of them.

Mine is slightly different on this one - That over 24 rounds Lennox Lewis won more rounds than Evander Holyfield... I disagree. My cards are the same - fight 1 Lewis by 2, fight 2 Holyfield by 2.

Not really a general consensus issue, but I never change my prediction AFTER a fight. If I get it wrong, so be it, but when you read any of these forums after an upset, you'd swear 90% of the posters ALWAYS knew it was going to happen