10/19/2008 3:00pm, #11
- Join Date
- Mar 2008
I dunno, i've often seen someone grab someones wrist, put it behind their back, and push them forward like that, or push the arm upwards...but (to my knowledge) that's never happened in an MMA fight either.
Even though it's fairly commonplace on "the streets". I hate to argue the case, but there are some things that work outside of the octogon, that don't work inside it (mostly because you're dealing with a skilled, trainer, fighter, who is expecting your attack. That element changes certain things).
10/19/2008 3:39pm, #12Originally Posted by Siniq
10/19/2008 3:47pm, #13Originally Posted by v1y
10/19/2008 3:59pm, #14
Boxing suffers from the myth of being undefeated. Every manager tries to build their guy by using the undefeated status. No wonder idiot fans think someone who has lost is "spoiled goods", so to speak.Curiosity killed the cat. But damn it had a blast.
10/20/2008 10:19am, #15Originally Posted by hpr
In Britain during the 1970s, we got this quite often. The boxing group of Jarvis Astaire, Mike Barrett, Harry Levene and Terry Whatsisname (it'll come to me after I post) had a sweetheart deal with the BBC and would take good amateurs and build a Record suggesting we had a world titlist in the making. He would then get taken apart by an "unknown" American and the comment would be "Well, they've got fighters in gyms who could be World Champions"...that was actually said when Buster Drayton stopped Mark Kaylor.
What made this so disingenuous was that the clique divvied up the Monies amongst themselves so it looked like they'd fooled the public: not sure how much money actually got to the boxer BUT the contracts of this clique are alledged to have stipulated that out of Ring earnings were included cf Frank Bruno.
The emergence of Frank Warren changed all this and eventually the sweetheart deal with the BBC and the conjoined Promoted, Manager, Faciltator was revealed. Barry Hearn drove a further nail in that coffin.
Managers and Promoters are afraid of a loss on a fighter's Record because of the perceived threat to his marketability.
B-HOP v Pavlik. Well, the latter never really got going and was unable to adjust his march forward strategy. He could have tried to draw Hopkins by adopting the role of Counterpuncher and make B-HOP come forward but didn't think to apply it. Hopkins was very shrewd not least in getting close and turning away so when Pavlik threw the obligatory Right, it connected with the back of Hopkins Head. Of course. Still, Hopkins cried Wolf far too often - but, then again, I suppose it's a mark of his shrewdness.
The ref verbally threatened to take a point from Hopkins but left it woefully late. Bernard's behaviour immediately after the bell rang was unseemly and unwarranted. That apart, he fashioned some excellent rallies and that helped underline the paucity of idea's on Pavlik's part. Back to the drawing board for him.
Last edited by Eddie Hardon; 10/20/2008 10:21am at . Reason: typos
10/20/2008 11:54am, #16Originally Posted by Lebell
"Learn its secrets..."
10/20/2008 12:28pm, #17
Because boxing still has the holy grail record of Marciano's 49-0 and numerous more Sanctioning Orgs to award champions which rewards padded records in exchange for an undefeated champion.
If MMA continues on the same course, they may also suffer the same fate.
10/20/2008 1:05pm, #18Originally Posted by Vieux Normand
10/20/2008 1:06pm, #19
I think that the nail has been hit on the head a few times in this thread. The general individual buys into the romance and enigma of that of the un-defeated boxer. Once that boxer loses then the living legend status all goes out of the window, per say. Itís akin to being told that Santa Claus doesnít exist! That's he's a mere mortal after all. This is the point when the novelty is lost so to speak.
10/20/2008 1:09pm, #20
That's because boxing fans may act like they LOVE the mystique of the undefeated champ but they really LOVE the come-down-ance and even more: LOVE making mention of the loss instead of the win.