Is Manny Pacquiao the Most Overrated Boxer of All Time?

[Upgrade Dave]

C/S 100% i LOVE a dominant fighter..Manny IS that.Thats what always impress me about fighters like that.Why try go the distance whe you can go all out with an impressive win.IMO there are alot of fighters out there looking to kill the clock..they are satisfied with just a win no matter how they get it.Thats why i miss fighers like Sugar Ray Leonard..SURE he could out box the average fighter, But he was not only was GOOD he also had the Killer instink PacMan has that as well..if he can Blow you OUT thats what he sets out to do

Who was the last guy Manny knocked out? Oh yeah, the same last guy Floyd knocked out: Ricky Hatton.
Leonard's a childhood hero but he fought in a diffent era. There was very little running out the clock in the 15 rds days. Somebody was going to give after that 13th round.

I am trying to cut back on the sarcasm and condescension but you're making it really fucking difficult.

Glad you see it. I'm trying to work on me, on some self help shit.

 

[merce77]

One thing that does aggrevate the hell out of me is when people degrade the career status of a fighter based on their current state. Of course the lightweight shane was better than the current one. Doesn't so much mean it was his best weight but dude is damn near 40! I still have much more respect for the way manny beats the common opponents he has with floyd than the way floyd beat them. More dominant. Now if manny thoroughly kick shanes ass or stops him, I believe floyd would go into their fight with more to prove than him. Tell me this, what will be more remembered over time, floyds split decision over oscar or mannys dominants making him quit on his stool?

How will it be viewed by boxing historians is the real question. Historians actually know boxing. Laymen love a good ass whuppin, it's why MMA is so popular and also why it's losing it's steam. People love to see SKILL. I mean if even a layman can't see that THAT was NOT Oscar in the ring, they shouldn't even be allowed to comment. Using Dave's basketball analogy - what's more impressive? A team who scaores 150 points and allows 130(Manny gets hit A LOT, even Clottey had his face lookin like raw burger and he barely threw) OR a team who holds their opponents to 50 points(Floyd is that dominant defensively) while scoring 100(his offense is heavily underrated)? I would say the latter.
Look I'm just as disappointed in Floyd as the next man, but there wasn't one of us that didn't come on this board after his last fight and weren't totally fucking amazed. He TOTALLY dominated Mosley, offensively and defensively. Do I give Manny more credit for being consistently out there fighting, to an extent, I mean his boss is Arum and he has a cash cow. Let's see if Manny was his own boss and not giving Arum 40% of his earnings if he would be fighting as much or sigining off on bills in congress.

“Invincibility lies in the Defense; the possibility of victory in the Attack.” - Sun Tzu.

 

[Upgrade Dave]

How will it be viewed by boxing historians is the real question. Historians actually know boxing. Laymen love a good ass whuppin, it's why MMA is so popular and also why it's losing it's steam. People love to see SKILL. I mean if even a layman can't see that THAT was NOT Oscar in the ring, they shouldn't even be allowed to comment. Using Dave's basketball analogy - what's more impressive? A team who scaores 150 points and allows 130(Manny gets hit A LOT, even Clottey had his face lookin like raw burger and he barely threw) OR a team who holds their opponents to 50 points(Floyd is that dominant defensively) while scoring 100(his offense is heavily underrated)? I would say the latter.
Look I'm just as disappointed in Floyd as the next man, but there wasn't one of us that didn't come on this board after his last fight and weren't totally fucking amazed. He TOTALLY dominated Mosley, offensively and defensively. Do I give Manny more credit for being consistently out there fighting, to an extent, I mean his boss is Arum and he has a cash cow. Let's see if Manny was his own boss and not giving Arum 40% of his earnings if he would be fighting as much or sigining off on bills in congress.

“Invincibility lies in the Defense; the possibility of victory in the Attack.” - Sun Tzu.

To further my b-ball analogy one last time, the teams you described where the Phoenix Suns and the San Antonio Spurs.

Good point on MMA. As fighters have more to lose and become more well rounded, the rate of spectacular knockouts drops and more fights go the distance. Dana White does have a good policy and reward system with Knockout of the Night and Fight of the Night bonuses, boxing could use some of that.

 

[Alaskanredman]

To further my b-ball analogy one last time, the teams you described where the Phoenix Suns and the San Antonio Spurs.

Good point on MMA. As fighters have more to lose and become more well rounded, the rate of spectacular knockouts drops and more fights go the distance. Dana White does have a good policy and reward system with Knockout of the Night and Fight of the Night bonuses, boxing could use some of that.

It also happens when fighters keeping moving up in weight (ex: everyone even Pac now) or fight more skilled opponents (ex: Jermain Taylor is best recent example that I can think of and chasing that KO killed his career).

 

[will_right]

Who was the last guy Manny knocked out? Oh yeah, the same last guy Floyd knocked out: Ricky Hatton.
Leonard's a childhood hero but he fought in a diffent era. There was very little running out the clock in the 15 rds days. Somebody was going to give after that 13th round.



Glad you see it. I'm trying to work on me, on some self help shit.

Thats good man continue to work on You..i applaud you on taking on such a difficult task at hand now where was i oh yea But where in my post do u see me type K followed by O? Nowhere did i mention anyone being KO'd..I'm speaking on him being Dominant fighter..as in the Blow outs he's been putting on cats azz like Plaster Man and Cotto as well as Oscar..i could name more. None of those were official KO's IMO but Blow outs they mos DEF were..now lemme see you dissagree on the 3 fights in question and them not being a complete Blow out.

 

[Alaskanredman]

The problem with that argument is that Shane devolved as he went up in weight but let's compare them at their optimum weights at 135. Shane takes him, he was even faster, and he actually boxed. Or do you not remember the boxing lesson he gave Oscar in their first match, he turned into a one hitter quitter type of slugger at welter and up. But when Shane was at 135 people were calling him the p4p and there was talk of him being possibly one of the greatest lightweights ever. By the time floyd fought him, Mosley was a shell. Just imagine had Floyd been in trouble in the 2nd round with the young Shane - you still think the same thing happens? No way in hell. Floyd would have been under constant fire from a guy who was just as fast if not faster and had a hair trigger when it came to firing shots. Floyd's never had to face that kind of adversity. He faced it in the fight with Mosley at 39 years old but let's keep that in the proper context. Totally different fight if they are both in their mid twenties and at 135. Shane was Roy Jonesesque in his prime.

I think Mosley in his prime would have been a tough fight for both. I give Floyd a better chance then you might, but we could've seen the fight... if Shane didn't have a tooth ache.

 

[merce77]

I think Mosley in his prime would have been a tough fight for both. I give Floyd a better chance then you might, but we could've seen the fight... if Shane didn't have a tooth ache.

Floyd used to make a lot of noise back then. Remember him calling out Winky at 154? Winky accepted and Floyd sat the fuck down. Mosley was busy fighting guys who meant more money, this was before Floyd was a star, back then only the hardcore knew Floyd. Then Floyd became the star and didn't need Shane anymore.

 

[merce77]

BTW Manny doesn't make it out of the 9th round against a prime Mosley. It's moot because they wouldn't have let Manny anywhere near that dude. Just like Arum don't want any part of Floyd for Pacman right now.

 

[Upgrade Dave]

It also happens when fighters keeping moving up in weight (ex: everyone even Pac now) or fight more skilled opponents (ex: Jermain Taylor is best recent example that I can think of and chasing that KO killed his career).

Chasing a knockout instead of taking the win is how he got beat by Froch. He wins that fight he might have jumpstarted his career, at least for a little while longer.

Thats good man continue to work on You..i applaud you on taking on such a difficult task at hand now where was i oh yea But where in my post do u see me type K followed by O? Nowhere did i mention anyone being KO'd..I'm speaking on him being Dominant fighter..as in the Blow outs he's been putting on cats azz like Plaster Man and Cotto as well as Oscar..i could name more. None of those were official KO's IMO but Blow outs they mos DEF were..now lemme see you dissagree on the 3 fights in question and them not being a complete Blow out.

There's no argument about the onesided nature of those fights but he was supposed to dominate Margarito, Roach stacked the deck in the Cotto fight and he beat not only an old DLH but a drained one. Of those three, Cotto was the best win and he should get full credit for that one. He's considered p4p top guy for a reason (I still would vote for Martinez right now). But Mayweather hasn't had a close fight since Castillo in their first fight so he's had some pretty dominant showings as well, plus he fought and manhandled the guy who Pacquaio wanted no parts of at the time: Shane Mosley.

 

[Upgrade Dave]

Floyd used to make a lot of noise back then. Remember him calling out Winky at 154? Winky accepted and Floyd sat the fuck down. Mosley was busy fighting guys who meant more money, this was before Floyd was a star, back then only the hardcore knew Floyd. Then Floyd became the star and didn't need Shane anymore.

That's exactly what happened and he made Shane wait like a motherfucker.
What was that Wright shit about? He doesn't fight at 154 now and it's been years, why even bring Wright up? That boy I tell you

 

[Alaskanredman]

Thats good man continue to work on You..i applaud you on taking on such a difficult task at hand now where was i oh yea But where in my post do u see me type K followed by O? Nowhere did i mention anyone being KO'd..I'm speaking on him being Dominant fighter..as in the Blow outs he's been putting on cats azz like Plaster Man and Cotto as well as Oscar..i could name more. None of those were official KO's IMO but Blow outs they mos DEF were..now lemme see you dissagree on the 3 fights in question and them not being a complete Blow out.

Nevermind I didn't get the context of this

 

[Upgrade Dave]

Nevermind I didn't get the context of this

A little back and forth jibber jabber between me and will. Pay it no mind.

 

[Alaskanredman]

A little back and forth jibber jabber between me and will. Pay it no mind.

I know but I replied with something that was a little harsh cause I took what he was saying out of context. I edited my reply to clarify just in case cause I misunderstood what he was saying.

 

[Alaskanredman]

Chasing a knockout instead of taking the win is how he got beat by Froch. He wins that fight he might have jumpstarted his career, at least for a little while longer.

Shit he could have beat Pavlik if he kept it simple and let the KO come to him. I remember Taylor had one of the snappiest, powerful jabs that I've seen in a while. He stopped using it.

 

[will_right]

I know but I replied with something that was a little harsh cause I took what he was saying out of context. I edited my reply to clarify just in case cause I misunderstood what he was saying.

No shit..you seem to Always misunderstand what i be saying and you've offten been as you so called it a little harsh more times than not but it's cool. I aint even mad at'cha i'm starting to become accustomed to your misunderstanding of what i say

 

[Upgrade Dave]

Shit he could have beat Pavlik if he kept it simple and let the KO come to him. I remember Taylor had one of the snappiest, powerful jabs that I've seen in a while. He stopped using it.

Jermain had the skills but not the mental part. When talking about Mayweather and Pacquiao we always talk about their physical skills but those two have the two best tactical trainers and corners in boxing with the outside except of Naazim Richardson.

 

[Alaskanredman]

No shit..you seem to Always misunderstand what i be saying and you've offten been as you so called it a little harsh more times than not but it's cool. I aint even mad at'cha i'm starting to become accustomed to your misunderstanding of what i say

No, I understand you very well... I explained in the other Manny thread exactly why you get shitted on (among others here) and later on in that same thread you proved my point by not being able to put together a decent reason why the Mosley/Pac fight would be a great fight. Shit you could have looked at other threads were cats have put together more convincing arguments and copied/pasted, but most of them weren't saying it would necessarily be a great fight... They were saying Mosley could win if he can pull it together and they hoped that Shane had one more good performance left in him, but they were clear that there were a lot of "ifs" involved. Your shit was just another weak response.

This time I didn't read the previous post to see why you were saying that because I was limited on time. Kudos to you for making the obvious observation that Manny has been dominant like that hasn't been said by everyone. That doesn't change the negatives. The same shit is said about Floyd and that's why they need to fight the best... each other.

I'm only harsh because you Always say shit that isn't thought out or based on reality.

 

[Rick Ronson]

No there were others the fans jumped behind who ducked the up and comings and sought old vets.

This is common in boxing.

Nothing new at all.

 

[Upgrade Dave]

No there were others the fans jumped behind who ducked the up and comings and sought old vets.

This is common in boxing.

Nothing new at all.

Not sure how this relates to Manny, Rick. No one is accusing him of ducking any up and comers. In fact, it's old vets he's not fighting. He won't fight Marquez again and he didn't want to fight Mosley until after he got smashed by Mayweather.
I don't see anything wrong with fighting the old vets, that's the surest way for a lesser known guy to become a big name. Mayweather didn't become a household name based off beating Castillo or Corrales, both in their prime, he made his name beating a declining Oscar De La Hoya. Same with Pacquaio, who was a boxing star but still unknown outside hardcore circles until his De La Hoya fight.

 

[will_right]

jermain had the skills but not the mental part. When talking about mayweather and pacquiao we always talk about their physical skills but those two have the two best tactical trainers and corners in boxing with the outside except of naazim richardson.

c/s 100%

 

[Zeferino]

Jermain had the skills but not the mental part. When talking about Mayweather and Pacquiao we always talk about their physical skills but those two have the two best tactical trainers and corners in boxing with the outside except of Naazim Richardson.

I'm not sure Roger Mayweather is one of the best tactical trainers. I'd give Roach more credit because you can see the growth in technique in Pac since he got with Roach. Floyd is pretty much already made and hasn't changed much since he became a professional kind of like Roy Jones. Both of those guys could have probably thrived with almost any other trainer. Of course they both became seasoned pros and learned to pace themselves,etc, but they were both essentially ready made talented fighters with not much of anything to fix. Roach went to work on Pac and it shows.

 

[will_right]

No, I understand you very well... I explained in the other Manny thread exactly why you get shitted on (among others here) and later on in that same thread you proved my point by not being able to put together a decent reason why the Mosley/Pac fight would be a great fight. Shit you could have looked at other threads were cats have put together more convincing arguments and copied/pasted, but most of them weren't saying it would necessarily be a great fight... They were saying Mosley could win if he can pull it together and they hoped that Shane had one more good performance left in him, but they were clear that there were a lot of "ifs" involved. Your shit was just another weak response.

This time I didn't read the previous post to see why you were saying that because I was limited on time. Kudos to you for making the obvious observation that Manny has been dominant like that hasn't been said by everyone. That doesn't change the negatives. The same shit is said about Floyd and that's why they need to fight the best... each other.

I'm only harsh because you Always say shit that isn't thought out or based on reality.

You dude have serious opinionated issues. Do you realize that no matter what u said today tomorrow you can be made to look like a blazing jackass after the fight? And what da fuck does reality have to do with a fight that hasn't happended yet? You must have been refering to YOUR reality.It only becomes reality after the fight has been faught. All the shit that comes from your mouth holds no more merrit than anyone elses shit thats said..when one is refering to HOW a fight might play out. So again for the record I feel this fight has potential for being an action fight,even if only for one reason..they both are gona try to KO each other. We already know the strenths and weaknesses..i sum it up to Styles makes fights.IMO these two fighters style wise is a sure thing (action guaranteed ). NOW after the fight has happend YOU may end up sounding like an asshole OR you will be able to then say i told you so..or whatever da fuck makes your tongue feel slippery na mean.
Both guys are good, what should happen or what most feel should happen that being "Manny putting a beat down on Shane" may not happen at ALL.. hell things could go vise versa. A person like you might feel this CAN'T happen. Well i say sure it might be highly improbable but NOT imposible..SHIT HAPPENS when 2 are in the ring and i feel THIS fight has a good possibility of that happening come fight night. Now if i was forced to bet this fight i'd pick Manny for obvious reasons..for ME that would be shane has fell off some where as Manny has gotten even Better.

 

[Alaskanredman]

You dude have serious opinionated issues.

Do you realize that no matter what u said today tomorrow you can be made to look like a blazing jackass after the fight?

I not saying I'm a fortune teller but I base my opinion in the observations on what has already happened in the ring like anyone who gives an opinion on a future fights.

And what da fuck does reality have to do with a fight that hasn't happended yet?

The reality that Shane isn't a great or maybe even a good fighter anymore.

You must have been refering to YOUR reality.

My reality is watching fights. It tends to pan out more than feelings and hopes.

It only becomes reality after the fight has been faught.

Did you mean fought? If that is the case then yes. Shit can changed in the ring, and you can hit the lottery too. What is the point of even talking about any of this shit if we aren't going to speculate on future fights? How else do you provide realistic speculation if we throw out everything and just rely on the fact that anything could happen?

All the shit that comes from your mouth holds no more merrit than anyone elses shit thats said.. when one is refering to HOW a fight might play out.

This shit again. I guess we can say Gamboa could knockout Bute if they fight.... why not cause anything could happen right???? And that statement holds as much merit as any other statement on this board, right??? Do you see how stupid that sounds? That's what you get when we are giving merit to every statement.

So again for the record I feel this fight has potential for being an action fight,even if only for one reason..they both are gona try to KO each other.

Ahh... and Margarito's plan was to get beat up? No.... Shane's plan was hold off on trying to KO Mora cause he wanted to show off his boxing skills. You see why this is stupid?

We already know the strenths and weaknesses..i sum it up to Styles makes fights.IMO these two fighters style wise is a sure thing (action guaranteed ).

This is the reality part... Shane's style and attributes haven't been what they were for a few years now. I guess we are going with the possibility that Shane has a time machine.

NOW after the fight has happend YOU may end up sounding like an asshole OR you will be able to then say i told you so..or whatever da fuck makes your tongue feel slippery na mean.

Nigga, I don't mind being wrong. A good fight benefits us all, but I'm reasonable enough to know when I'm being sold a sack of shit over other fights that have the makings of just plain out better fights. If I'm right I don't care cause I'm not buying this shit. You spend your money, have a ball and you can post whatever you like.

Both guys are good, what should happen or what most feel should happen that being "Manny putting a beat down on Shane" may not happen at ALL.. hell things could go vise versa.

Ok.....

A person like you might feel this CAN'T happen. Well i say sure it might be highly improbable but NOT imposible..SHIT HAPPENS when 2 are in the ring and i feel THIS fight has a good possibility of that happening come fight night.

Never said it wasn't possible. I feel it is possible that the world can end before you read this post... Maybe tomorrow... How about the day after that? Well that is the kind of thinking that makes sense these days, huh? Feelings and possibilities and little else is needed.

Now if i was forced to bet this fight i'd pick Manny for obvious reasons..for ME that would be shane has fell off some where as Manny has gotten even Better.

 

[will_right]

it's like this agree that on this fight we disagree agreed? good!

 

[Alaskanredman]

it's like this agree that on this fight we disagree agreed? good!

All that typing... you provided little substance

We can at least agree that you have very little to back up your statements.

Next time you have a debate with anyone about any topic, you should put more into the main thrust of your argument than "you could be wrong".

I HOPE you are at least as lucky as a lottery winner so that both Shane/Manny does something out of their recent characters, and we get a great fight.

 

[Zeferino]

it's like this agree that on this fight we disagree agreed? good!

That's the most intelligent thing to do. In a sport full of intangibles like boxing, I don't get how anyone can get on a high horse and try and put other people down because of their opinion.

Once you truly understand the intangibilities of boxing, you become more open minded to the many different viewpoints.

Boxing's intangibilities set it apart from other sports. This can be seen in the whole PED debate. In baseball, we see direct proof of the benefit in PED use by simply analyzing the statistical data of the player. When a baseball player uses PEDs, the results are clear as day. You can't do this with boxing.

In boxing, people assume that PEDs provide an edge but the actual available information indicates otherwise. In boxing, PED's won't make you hit harder or give you a harder chin. Paulie Malignaggi could take PEDs and he would never become a puncher. Richard Hall had literally 10 times as much steroids in him than Roy Jones did yet he didn't win 5 seconds of a single round with Jones in like 10 rounds and got beaten from pillar to post. Powerpunching and speed are innate gifts. Some guys have it and some guys don't. It's not about how many muscles you have, it's about having the natural ability to make the most with what you have. This is why proving a fighter actually benefitted from some PED use is a very difficult task.

Therefore, to compare boxing to baseball and then think they must be the same because they are both sports is just ridiculous and very shortsighted. Apples and oranges are the same because they're both fruit? You argue with someone with a limited reasoning process like that and you're bound to run into ignorance. But hey, it's a porn board, right? So fuck it. Go to a real boxing forum if you want to discuss boxing with people of a more varied opinion.

 

[Alaskanredman]

That's the most intelligent thing to do. In a sport full of intangibles like boxing, I don't get how anyone can get on a high horse and try and put other people down because of their opinion.

Once you truly understand the intangibilities of boxing, you become more open minded to the many different viewpoints.

Boxing's intangibilities set it apart from other sports. This can be seen in the whole PED debate. In baseball, we see direct proof of the benefit in PED use by simply analyzing the statistical data of the player. When a baseball player uses PEDs, the results are clear as day. You can't do this with boxing.

In boxing, people assume that PEDs provide an edge but the actual available information indicates otherwise. In boxing, PED's won't make you hit harder or give you a harder chin. Paulie Malignaggi could take PEDs and he would never become a puncher. Richard Hall had literally 10 times as much steroids in him than Roy Jones did yet he didn't win 5 seconds of a single round with Jones in like 10 rounds and got beaten from pillar to post. Powerpunching and speed are innate gifts. Some guys have it and some guys don't. It's not about how many muscles you have, it's about having the natural ability to make the most with what you have. This is why proving a fighter actually benefitted from some PED use is a very difficult task.

Therefore, to compare boxing to baseball and then think they must be the same because they are both sports is just ridiculous and very shortsighted. Apples and oranges are the same because they're both fruit? You argue with someone with a limited reasoning process like that and you're bound to run into ignorance. But hey, it's a porn board, right? So fuck it. Go to a real boxing forum if you want to discuss boxing with people of a more varied opinion.

I agree with bold cause there are plenty of forums were Margarito beating Pacman was seriously considered without any serious explanation. I guess when you can't put together a logical argument you go there.

For the rest

Zef show your friend those forums. By the way, I'm glad you remembered what I taught you about intangibles because I remember when you were running around talking that dumb shit about bigger fighters are always supposed to beat smaller fighters. Will_Right I had an argument a few years ago when I told this dude that there are too many intangibles to make a sweeping statement like that cause that is only one factor when many factors can effect a fights outcome. Now the student wants to be the master but he can't do it right.

Have fun.

 

[Upgrade Dave]

That's the most intelligent thing to do. In a sport full of intangibles like boxing, I don't get how anyone can get on a high horse and try and put other people down because of their opinion.

Once you truly understand the intangibilities of boxing, you become more open minded to the many different viewpoints.

Boxing's intangibilities set it apart from other sports. This can be seen in the whole PED debate. In baseball, we see direct proof of the benefit in PED use by simply analyzing the statistical data of the player. When a baseball player uses PEDs, the results are clear as day. You can't do this with boxing.

In boxing, people assume that PEDs provide an edge but the actual available information indicates otherwise. In boxing, PED's won't make you hit harder or give you a harder chin. Paulie Malignaggi could take PEDs and he would never become a puncher. Richard Hall had literally 10 times as much steroids in him than Roy Jones did yet he didn't win 5 seconds of a single round with Jones in like 10 rounds and got beaten from pillar to post. Powerpunching and speed are innate gifts. Some guys have it and some guys don't. It's not about how many muscles you have, it's about having the natural ability to make the most with what you have. This is why proving a fighter actually benefitted from some PED use is a very difficult task.
Therefore, to compare boxing to baseball and then think they must be the same because they are both sports is just ridiculous and very shortsighted. Apples and oranges are the same because they're both fruit? You argue with someone with a limited reasoning process like that and you're bound to run into ignorance. But hey, it's a porn board, right? So fuck it. Go to a real boxing forum if you want to discuss boxing with people of a more varied opinion.

I don't want to get into the PED discussion again but it should be noted that while there is some truth to Zef's point that it's not as cut and dry as in baseball the list of names of guys either caught or admitted taking them: Vitaly Klitschko, James Toney, Roy Jones Jr., Fernando Vargas, Shane Mosley, Evander Holyfield. All at one time or another championship fighters and some of the Hall of Fame fighters. PEDs might not make a chump a champ but there seems to be proof that they can make a champ a superman. Even in baseball, Barry Bonds was already a HoF guy but adding PEDs made him a member of the Justice League.

More variety does not equal quality. If you're goal is to find people that agree with you on shit, then you're not really about conversation and discourse but about finding a flock to run with.

 

[Alaskanredman]

I don't want to get into the PED discussion again but it should be noted that while there is some truth to Zef's point that it's not as cut and dry as in baseball the list of names of guys either caught or admitted taking them: Vitaly Klitschko, James Toney, Roy Jones Jr., Fernando Vargas, Shane Mosley, Evander Holyfield. All at one time or another championship fighters and some of the Hall of Fame fighters. PEDs might not make a chump a champ but there seems to be proof that they can make a champ a superman. Even in baseball, Barry Bonds was already a HoF guy but adding PEDs made him a member of the Justice League.

I keep asking this question from people who make Zef's argument. If there is no value in taking the PED... Why are some of the best fighters taking them? Why would boxing organizations ban them?

More variety does not equal quality. If you're goal is to find people that agree with you on shit, then you're not really about conversation and discourse but about finding a flock to run with.

Some sense being added. It seems to be a mental defect with these guys. I don't mind being wrong, but give me some concrete reasons why I'm wrong. If I counter your point... counter back with another point. If you are unable to then maybe you should rethink your position or at least admit that you have a bias that is playing a part in the discussion....

 

[Upgrade Dave]

I keep asking this question from people who make Zef's argument. If there is no value in taking the PED... Why are some of the best fighters taking them? Why would boxing organizations ban them?



Some sense being added. It seems to be a mental defect with these guys. I don't mind being wrong, but give me some concrete reasons why I'm wrong. If I counter your point... counter back with another point. If you are unable to then maybe you should rethink your position or at least admit that you have a bias that is playing a part in the discussion....

 

[Zeferino]

I don't want to get into the PED discussion again but it should be noted that while there is some truth to Zef's point that it's not as cut and dry as in baseball the list of names of guys either caught or admitted taking them: Vitaly Klitschko, James Toney, Roy Jones Jr., Fernando Vargas, Shane Mosley, Evander Holyfield. All at one time or another championship fighters and some of the Hall of Fame fighters. PEDs might not make a chump a champ but there seems to be proof that they can make a champ a superman. Even in baseball, Barry Bonds was already a HoF guy but adding PEDs made him a member of the Justice League.

More variety does not equal quality. If you're goal is to find people that agree with you on shit, then you're not really about conversation and discourse but about finding a flock to run with.

Klitschko is effective mostly because of his boxing technique, mainly because of his ability to control guys with his jab and angles. I don't see how his success could be linked to PEDs. Fact: he has not tested positive as a pro either.

James Toney's game is technique and pure fighting ability as opposed to power. Fact: Toney looked like a fat pig and didn't look special at all when he fought Ruiz, the first fight he tested positive for.

Roy Jones: No amount of steroids or Peds in the world could give anyone the abilities of Roy Jones. He was just a born talent and is a product of how he was raised. Jones was speedy and powerful even as an amateur. He went to the Olympics where they do the infamous Olympic style drug testing and never came up positive.

Fernando Vargas: This is a great example. The one fight he tested positive for, it was very visible in his body as he was cut up like never before. He looked like a monster, physically. He still got his ass knocked out and when you compare his fluidity and speed in that PED fight to when he fought Trinidad without PED, you would think he was on the PEDs for the Trinidad fight and not the DLH fight. Ironically those performance "enhancers" stiffened Vargas up and had him fighting like a robot.

Shane Mosley: Shane Mosley never looked good during the time in which he was using steroids. That time was during Mosley's slump and he looked like crap and very sluggish. He also seemed like he couldn't let his hands go and stiff. When he got off of the stuff and well after it was known that he did something, he fought Fernando Vargas and seemed less muscular and fluid again throwing multiple punch combinations. Again, his performance seemed to be enhanced without the juice.

Evander Holyfield: We should at least know the time period during which he was taking the stuff so that we can make a better analysis. He hasn't been caught officially but yeah that whole Evans Fields thing is funny.

Finally, as far as the comment about having a flock to run with, I don't know if it was for me. If it is, I don't see why it would be for me because I think it's plain to see that I don't mind rolling solo.

 

[Zeferino]

I agree with bold cause there are plenty of forums were Margarito beating Pacman was seriously considered without any serious explanation. I guess when you can't put together a logical argument you go there.

For the rest

Zef show your friend those forums. By the way, I'm glad you remembered what I taught you about intangibles because I remember when you were running around talking that dumb shit about bigger fighters are always supposed to beat smaller fighters. Will_Right I had an argument a few years ago when I told this dude that there are too many intangibles to make a sweeping statement like that cause that is only one factor when many factors can effect a fights outcome. Now the student wants to be the master but he can't do it right.

Have fun.

Intangibles and probability are two different things. Maybe you don't know the meaning of probability because it seems like you have difficulty processing more than one concept at a time.

When a talented bigger fighter fights a talented smaller fighter, there is a higher probability that the bigger guy is going to win, example: Conn vs Louis

Are there intangibles that could cause a smaller fighter to somehow beat a bigger fighter?: Yes

The intangibles create the "you never know what will happen" part about the fight game but statistics and probability can give you an idea of how things usually turn out.

This argument I made has never changed and I don't see why you see this as such an impossible concept to grasp. In short, this is why they made the age old saying: "A good big man usually beats a good little man" Have you honestly never heard of this? You've got a lot to learn.

Will Right, read the argument he's talking about for yourself and figure out who's making more sense and being more consistent with their statements.

 

[Zeferino]

I keep asking this question from people who make Zef's argument. If there is no value in taking the PED... Why are some of the best fighters taking them? Why would boxing organizations ban them?

To answer your questions:

1. Fighters take them because they feel they might perform better with them.

2. Boxing organizations ban them because they claim they don't want fighters to have unfair advantages over others.

Opinion:

1. Just because fighters feel they might perform better with them doesn't mean it is true. Some fighter drink piss and sperm. (Marquez-piss, Alex Reid-sperm)

Fact: Even though some of the best fighters have been caught on PEDs, they've never been caught after a particularly extraordinary performance.

2. Whether boxing organizations ban PEDs or not really has no bearing on the true performance enhancing potential of PEDs in boxing.

 

[Alaskanredman]

Intangibles and probability are two different things. Maybe you don't know the meaning of probability because it seems like you have difficulty processing more than one concept at a time.

Show me were I confused them.

When a talented bigger fighter fights a talented smaller fighter, there is a higher probability that the bigger guy is going to win, example: Conn vs Louis

Are there intangibles that could cause a smaller fighter to somehow beat a bigger fighter?: Yes


The intangibles create the "you never know what will happen" part about the fight game but statistics and probability can give you an idea of how things usually turn out.

This argument I made has never changed and I don't see why you see this as such an impossible concept to grasp. In short, this is why they made the age old saying: "A good big man usually beats a good little man" Have you honestly never heard of this? You've got a lot to learn.

Will Right, read the argument he's talking about for yourself and figure out who's making more sense and being more consistent with their statements.

I suggest that you go back and read the argument because this wasn't your argument... I already described that bullshit argument that you had and consistency isn't your strong suit.

 

[Zeferino]

Show me were I confused them.



I suggest that you go back and read the argument because this wasn't your argument... I already described that bullshit argument that you had and consistency isn't your strong suit.

Show me where this wasn't my argument. If you can't, you're full of shit as usual.