Fights that would have had a different outcome if both fighters were in their prime.
I’ll go Hagler v Leonard and Tyson v Hollyfield.
Who you got?
Re: Boxing
Posted: 17 Oct 2025, 09:01
by Council Scum
Massive Attack" wrote: ↑17 Oct 2025, 05:07
Tragic loss losing him so soon. Was one of the good ones in the world. That Mayweather fight in Vegas still pisses me off as I don't think Cortez was being fair and showing bias to Mayweather.
An experienced official showing bias? It doesn't happen. You've told me that.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 17 Oct 2025, 08:57
by Council Scum
Massive Attack" wrote: ↑16 Oct 2025, 16:00
"Clearly lost" "Absolutely robbed" who knows better than 2 experienced Judges with identical cards on the night for Calzaghe winning.
Did you agree with the "experienced" judges on the Jack Catterall Josh Taylor fight? Don't tell me, you need to watch it.
Stick to your arm chair.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 17 Oct 2025, 05:07
by Massive Attack
Tragic loss losing him so soon. Was one of the good ones in the world. That Mayweather fight in Vegas still pisses me off as I don't think Cortez was being fair and showing bias to Mayweather.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 17 Oct 2025, 03:45
by Monsieur merde de cheval
RIP Richard son
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 21:15
by zebthecat
Wardley is a pretty limited boxer but an really punch..He was absolutely schooled by Justis Huni until that KO punch.
Parker can really box and hits hard as well and should win unless Wardley gets lucky again.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 20:51
by Massive Attack
MaryMillingtonsGhost wrote: ↑16 Oct 2025, 20:42
Think it has the potential to be a decent bout fella. Although not too sure Usyk will lose any sleep whoever wins.
Same. He could have called it quits by now and they'd be no qualms. He loves it though and can't seem to give it up just yet.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 20:42
by MaryMillingtonsGhost
Think it has the potential to be a decent bout fella. Although not too sure Usyk will lose any sleep whoever wins. Also not entirely sure he wants too many more fights. His legacy is sealed, and the longer he goes on for he runs risk the risk of coming up short eventually. Just my opinion, natch.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 20:23
by Massive Attack
MaryMillingtonsGhost wrote: ↑16 Oct 2025, 20:14
I like Wardley. Decent, honest pro.
Have to say though that I fancy Parker. Think he'll have too much for him.
Been in with the best (of the current crop), and hasn't dissapointed.
Been in 2 minds with it but I think Parkers gonna do it an all on points. He's 1 tough cսnt who is prepared to take the pain for it. Wardley has that devastating knock out but something tells me it won't stop Parker. I think it's got the potential to be a special fight whoever does come out on top. Hopefully Wardley being the Englishman but can't see it.
And whoever does I think then sets it up nicely for Usyk who seems to want more.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 20:14
by MaryMillingtonsGhost
I like Wardley. Decent, honest pro.
Have to say though that I fancy Parker. Think he'll have too much for him.
Been in with the best (of the current crop), and hasn't dissapointed.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 19:50
by Massive Attack
Parker vs Wardley coming up on the 25th Oct, who's winning that? Open to the floor..
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 18:10
by southbankbornnbred
Swiss. wrote: ↑16 Oct 2025, 16:35
Leonard won the Hagler. Watching SRL counter attacking off the ropes was pure brilliance. He lost to Duran not at his peak. The next 'no mas"' fight he took the piss out of Duran.
Argument over.
Well, against the indisputable logic of simply repeating the words "argument over", Swiss, I bow out!
Massive Attack" wrote: ↑16 Oct 2025, 16:12
Here's another good vid of Calzaghe for you Council Scum..
In the words of Enzo "you pissed it!"
Why did he avoid Carl Froch ?
You'd have to ask them why it didn't happen. That would have been a great fight. Do like Cobra a lot but I think an ageing Calzaghe still wins that on points. Calzaghe probably regrets not coming out of retirement though as it would have been a special fight having decided the Jones one would be his last at the Mecca of Boxing Madison Square. He probably wanted to go out on that high that couldn't be topped.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 16:45
by Swiss.
Swiss. wrote: ↑16 Oct 2025, 16:35
Leonard won the Hagler. Watching SRL counter attacking off the ropes was pure brilliance. He lost to Duran not at his peak. The next 'no mas"' fight he took the piss out of Duran.
Argument over.
Now Andre Ward was a great middleweight . Undefeated . Froch gave him a good fight though.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 16:42
by Swiss.
Massive Attack" wrote: ↑16 Oct 2025, 16:12
Here's another good vid of Calzaghe for you Council Scum..
In the words of Enzo "you pissed it!"
Why did he avoid Carl Froch ?
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 16:35
by Swiss.
Leonard won the Hagler. Watching SRL counter attacking off the ropes was pure brilliance. He lost to Duran not at his peak. The next 'no mas"' fight he took the piss out of Duran.
Argument over.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 16:12
by Massive Attack
Here's another good vid of Calzaghe for you Council Scum..
In the words of Enzo "you pissed it!"
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 16:00
by Massive Attack
"Clearly lost" "Absolutely robbed" who knows better than 2 experienced Judges with identical cards on the night for Calzaghe winning.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 15:58
by Council Scum
Massive Attack" wrote: ↑16 Oct 2025, 15:53
Biggest ever fan... what the fuck are you on about? All I've claimed is Calzaghe is the better Boxer with a record that stands up and had fuck all left to prove. And even going back over the war of the world's bout (funny how I remembered that along with Reids djing on the side..) as it's been over a quarter of a century it's not easy to recall every bit of the fight and re-watched it with fuck all robbery in sight. I'm English and would have loved to have seen Reid win but sorry, he never won that fight and glad you posted up the vid for us all to see.
That you think Jones is a step down from Joe proves you're an idiot. that you couldn't recall Joe v Robin ,tells me you know shit about boxing and just look at records.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 15:53
by Massive Attack
Biggest ever fan... what the fuck are you on about? All I've claimed is Calzaghe is the better Boxer with a record that stands up and had fuck all left to prove. And even going back over the war of the world's bout (funny how I remembered that along with Reids djing on the side..) as it's been over a quarter of a century it's not easy to recall every bit of the fight and re-watched it with fuck all robbery in sight. I'm English and would have loved to have seen Reid win but sorry, he never won that fight and glad you posted up the vid for us all to see.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 15:52
by Council Scum
Massive Attack" wrote: ↑16 Oct 2025, 15:43
Council Scum seems to think he knows better about judging than 2 experienced Judges on the night in favour of Calzaghe winning. The English Judge was the only Judge who had Reid up by 5 points even with a docked point! So out of the 3 scorecards, his was the most questionable. Not a chance in hell was Reid up by 6. Whereas the other 2 were identical and more likely if you re-watch the match again..
Why would you think I don't know about judging?
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 15:47
by Council Scum
Massive Attack" wrote: ↑16 Oct 2025, 15:18
"Clearly lost" "Absolutely robbed" from the forum Boxing expert.
Well one judge gave it to him with him losing a point ... so one judge had him wining convincingly, most (not all) experts had him winning, it's well known both were Frank Warren fighters and Frank (rightly) saw Joe as his next meal ticket, all though Warren ended up screwing him over years later as well for money.
You had never even seen the fight, despite being Joes biggest ever fan. Yet claim Roy Jones Jnr, one of the greatest ever, is a step down from Joe. You're an armchair idiot.
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 15:43
by Massive Attack
Council Scum seems to think he knows better about judging than 2 experienced Judges on the night in favour of Calzaghe winning. The English Judge was the only Judge who had Reid up by 5 points even with a docked point! So out of the 3 scorecards, his was the most questionable. Not a chance in hell was Reid up by 6. Whereas the other 2 were identical and more likely if you re-watch the match again..
Re: Boxing
Posted: 16 Oct 2025, 15:18
by Massive Attack
"Clearly lost" "Absolutely robbed" from the forum Boxing expert.
Massive Attack" wrote: ↑16 Oct 2025, 12:39
On my lunch break and finally been able to get round to watching it..
At least 3 of the first 4 rounds to Calzaghe. Even from the very 1st round Calzaghe had marked Reid on his left cheek needing work on it.
Reid holding on to Calzaghe a lot, even to the point at one stage of grabbing his leg ffs! Also kept twisting his arm up in holds. 5th Round - Reid arguably could have been deducted a point for persistent holding that was followed up by a muggy sucker punch right in front of the Ref who was trying to split them apart giving Reid a right bollocking for it. Reid then bangs him hard on the back of the head in a hold like a dirty cսnt who is showing signs of a frustrated Boxer. Calzaghe smashes him clean at another point then winks at his corner clearly enjoying himself that much in control of the fight as Reid holds on yet again for dear life. 6th Round Calzaghe manages to open up a cut on Reids other cheek now.
By comparison Calzaghe at this stage is unmarked, whilst Reids got marked up on both sides of his face with Calzaghe clearly on top with Reid fortunate to not get deducted a point with how he's acted in there using dirty tactics trying to unsettle Calzaghe but to no effect.
Every judge gave Reid the first round and two gave him 2 of the first 4, you don't have a clue about judging a fight.
Oh right, so when it suits you, the Judges scores do count with 2 Judges scoring it in favour of Calzaghe winning it. Which is it..
I'm pointing out, you are trying to judge a fight, when you aren't in a position too. You claim to be a Joe fan (I'd wager I've been to more of his fights than you) yet know fuck all about the Reid controversy and had never seen the fight, you're an armchair fan at best.
It's obvious you didn't even know bout the second fight between Leonard and Hearns, which is surprising seeing as you are such as self proclaimed expert.
I said Hearns won the fight but don't take my word for it, Here's a clip of Sugar Ray Leonard saying it himself, unless of course you know more about the fight than Sugar Ray?
As for a fighter losing weight s opposed to gaining weight for a fight here is what AI says.
AI Overview
It is generally easier for a boxer to gain weight for a fight than it is to lose it, especially in the short term. Gaining weight is a matter of eating more calories and protein, and can be done through a strategic diet and weightlifting program. Losing weight is a more complex and often dangerous process involving extreme methods like dehydration to shed water weight quickly, which can negatively impact a fighter's strength and performance if not managed properly.
Sounds like you're the one who doesn't have a clue of what he is talking about.
As you were.
The second bout between Hearns and Leonard was in 1989 and was at Supermiddleweight, it was a draw, how the hell is that Hearn beating a prime Leonard. Have a day off, that's embarrassing.
The first fight was for the undisputed Welterweight title, not light middle like you claim, you don't have the first clue what you are talking about.
All fighters lose weight in a training camp to fight at their naturally weight, but that;'s not what you are talking about, you claim it's easier to put muscle on and fight a naturally bigger guy at his own weight, you are talking complete and utter bollocks (I've done both) and if AI is the best you can come up with, you really can't claim to know shit about boxing.
Hearns was ahead of Leonard on points when they first fought, even Angelo Dundee told Leonard he was "blowing it " in his corner. Yeah he caught Hearns at the end but the fact remains Hearns was out boxing him for most of the fight, I'll refer you to the Judges scorecards for verification.
Read the thread you will see I corrected the weight they fought at in the first fight to welterweight.
I brought AI in to it because I don't want to argue with some twat who thinks he's the oracle of boxing.
Not gonna go round and around with you on losing weight "for a fight" as has been said It's common knowledge, not gonna let you twist my words so you can save face, it's obvious you are wrong.
Now go take a lie down ffs!
You have got yourself in a real mess, you claimed Hearns beat Leonard in his prime, he didn't, he got beat up, it's like saying Lewis was behind to Klitchko so he lost. It's a bollocks argument. You fucked up and have dug holes ever since.
