Bad Left Hook: FanPostsThe Best in Global Boxing News and Commentaryhttp://cdn3.sbnation.com/community_logos/47131/backingthepack-fave.png2013-05-25T05:22:42Zhttp://www.badlefthook.com/rss/fanposts.xml2013-05-25T05:22:42Z2013-05-25T05:22:42ZFloyd's Next Credible Opponent...
<p>Hey guys,</p>
<p><br>So I've been thinking about Floyd's next possible matchups... and they don't amount to many possible opponents, but here's a short list. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>1.) Canelo - Big money, medium risk, some wear and tear, size/strength differential</p>
<p>2.) Martinez - Medium money, decent risk, less wear and tear, more difficult ring tactics/acrobatics, hard to market/sell due to not huge fan base and his speaking Spanish only</p>
<p>3.) Broner - Will sell like hot cakes, depending how he looks agst Malignaggi (who I do secretly hope outboxes him) and how his power holds (if he wins), exciting style, will make between medium to big money, Dr. vs. Mini Me</p>
<p>4.) Matthysse - Medium money, decent risk, some wear and tear, scary power, underrated ring tactics</p>
<p>People gonna keep bagging Matthysse, and most pple gonna ignore this article, but it's all good, the guy is that good:</p>
<p>http://www.thesweetscience.com/news/articles/16671-how-he-did-it-underrated-technician-matthysse-not-just-a-bomber</p>
<p>5.) Pacquiao - Huge money, one could only dream. I've long given up on this fight, but like a female bearing her endowments... I will not look away.</p>
<p>6.) Khan - Love him or leave him, he'll sell and bring in big numbers, he's a great self promoter, he's fast and tall, he's chinny so there's that, but he could present some fun stylistic issues, and if Floyd gets tagged more than he'd like than that in itself will shorten his career that much more at age 36 even if he wins... this seems to be the safest and most profitable bet... but it does involve risk... and Floyd would rather take less and fight Alexander who might be a safer bet stylistically than Khan.</p>
<p>Other dishonorable mentions (he won't touch with a 10 ft. pole that would be more interesting and challenging than Guerrero): </p>
<p>Angulo, Lara, Carlos molina (the jr. middle), Austin Trout, GGG (I'm sure he'd cut down to 154lbs for Floyd),</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Just a fun fight with no victory in sight:</p>
<p><br>Josesito Lopez, Maidana (upon thought, I'm terrified that winner of this would be Floyd's next fight.. :D ), Danny Garcia</p>
<p><br>A guy that would sell, lose in interesting fashion again, but would promote another great buildup:</p>
<p>Victor Ortiz</p>
<p><br>Fights that semi-intrigue me and semi-make me want to cringe:</p>
<p>Bradley, Peterson</p>
<p>Fights I don't want to see:</p>
<p>Alexander, Berto, Maidana (Lopez has a more intelligent attack), some low grade welterweight titleholder that we've barely heard of</p>
<p>Hey guys,</p>
<p><br>So I've been thinking about Floyd's next possible matchups... and they don't amount to many possible opponents, but here's a short list. </p>
<p> </p>
<p>1.) Canelo - Big money, medium risk, some wear and tear, size/strength differential</p>
<p>2.) Martinez - Medium money, decent risk, less wear and tear, more difficult ring tactics/acrobatics, hard to market/sell due to not huge fan base and his speaking Spanish only</p>
<p>3.) Broner - Will sell like hot cakes, depending how he looks agst Malignaggi (who I do secretly hope outboxes him) and how his power holds (if he wins), exciting style, will make between medium to big money, Dr. vs. Mini Me</p>
<p>4.) Matthysse - Medium money, decent risk, some wear and tear, scary power, underrated ring tactics</p>
<p>People gonna keep bagging Matthysse, and most pple gonna ignore this article, but it's all good, the guy is that good:</p>
<p>http://www.thesweetscience.com/news/articles/16671-how-he-did-it-underrated-technician-matthysse-not-just-a-bomber</p>
<p>5.) Pacquiao - Huge money, one could only dream. I've long given up on this fight, but like a female bearing her endowments... I will not look away.</p>
<p>6.) Khan - Love him or leave him, he'll sell and bring in big numbers, he's a great self promoter, he's fast and tall, he's chinny so there's that, but he could present some fun stylistic issues, and if Floyd gets tagged more than he'd like than that in itself will shorten his career that much more at age 36 even if he wins... this seems to be the safest and most profitable bet... but it does involve risk... and Floyd would rather take less and fight Alexander who might be a safer bet stylistically than Khan.</p>
<p>Other dishonorable mentions (he won't touch with a 10 ft. pole that would be more interesting and challenging than Guerrero): </p>
<p>Angulo, Lara, Carlos molina (the jr. middle), Austin Trout, GGG (I'm sure he'd cut down to 154lbs for Floyd),</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Just a fun fight with no victory in sight:</p>
<p><br>Josesito Lopez, Maidana (upon thought, I'm terrified that winner of this would be Floyd's next fight.. :D ), Danny Garcia</p>
<p><br>A guy that would sell, lose in interesting fashion again, but would promote another great buildup:</p>
<p>Victor Ortiz</p>
<p><br>Fights that semi-intrigue me and semi-make me want to cringe:</p>
<p>Bradley, Peterson</p>
<p>Fights I don't want to see:</p>
<p>Alexander, Berto, Maidana (Lopez has a more intelligent attack), some low grade welterweight titleholder that we've barely heard of</p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/25/4364614/floyds-next-credible-opponentcylee11802013-05-24T10:54:37Z2013-05-24T10:54:37ZInterview with Matthysse for Argentinian radio, some translations included
<p> For the Spanish speakers out there, here´s the link: </p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2__3OqmBnjw">https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2__3OqmBnjw</a></p>
<p> They interviewed him right upon arriving back to his country. I have translated some parts that I found interesting.</p>
<p> He´s first asked about the Americans calling him The Argentinian Machine and claiming he´s got bricks in place of his fists, he then replies with the typical stuff, it was going to be a really tough fight, he is a very good fighter, we trained hard, we are very happy, etc. He sounds quite humble.</p>
<p> Then another interviewer says Sergio Martínez has told him Matthysse will be fighting Mayweather in a year. He answers going back to how hard he trained and maybe that was the reason Maravilla spoke so nicely about what he saw in the ring.</p>
<p> After that, the interviewer asks about his next step, and talks about García, and how he was there at the end of the fight looking quite worried. Matthysse then gives praise to Peterson, saying he was top level in the division, having beaten some of the best before. He doesn´t say anything about García at all.</p>
<p> Interviewer asks again about Danny García. Matthysse: "He is good, it´s going to be a very good fight. I saw him a bit slow in his fight against Zab Judah. Truth is that´s a fight I´ve been looking for and now it seems the United States (yeah he actually says this, like the U.S. as a whole decide on these matters, quite funny) wants to make it, so I really wish it can be made, since I want it and I see myself really well prepared for it. </p>
<p> Next, they ask him about the possibilty that García wanted, and was expecting Peterson to win because was afraid of fighting Matthysse. </p>
<p> Answer: "For sure, they were pretty confident Peterson was going to win, the thought he was going to be superior and I was just putting up a good fight. But well, we overcame him. It wasn´t easy at all, we trained hard and now we´ll see. In September, I think, they say it´s the García fight, so let´s train hard for it."</p>
<p> Question: Does it bother you that there´s rumours about you using forbidden substances? </p>
<p> Answer: "No, not really! Yes, it´s that there was a lot of talking about that because Dallas´ manager watched me taking my vitamins, the ones I always take. I took controls before, after, and everything is fine. I just take that because my conditioning trainer told me so, it´s the only thing I take because I don´t like that stuff. I train a lot, let them come and watch the trainings. It´s in that, not in any forbidden substance."</p>
<p> Then they ask him about other fighters and fights, friends, family, how he´s resting for some days, relaxing his eating habits, and other stuff.</p>
<p> Next, they got back to it and ask him what would be after the potential García fight.</p>
<p> He says: "first there´s García, then they talk about Khan maybe by the end of the year, then they talk about Mayweather (he chuckles a bit), I don´t know, they are talking a lot! I wish they could make all those fight and well, getting to Mayweather, the truth is that would be a dream!"</p>
<p> Then they ask him about the comparisons with Manny Pacquiao. He says thay they were all very happy, and with the adrenaline of the moment the yanks got all excited and said all kinds of things.</p>
<p> Asked about the future for him in and outside the rings after he retires: "Well yes, I´d like to fight Mayweather, I aspire to it, it would be my dream and I would like to get to it now that it´s been proposed to me. Then I expect to fight some more years, and after that I´ll retire and I´d like to own a gym, and then teach the young kids. I´d want to teach kids from 6 to 10 years because that´s something beatiful. It´s something that they do in the U.S. and it´s something beautiful. I lived it when I was in the bootcamps with Maravilla and all the little kids were there, and they taught them and what I saw, the little kids learing, I would like to do that when I retire."</p>
<p> Interviewer asks about how that Mayweather fight would be a great leap forward not only in his career, but also in the economic side of it.</p>
<p> Answer: "Yes, for sure, I was just speaking to my friends and they are all freaked out, they are dreaming even more than me about it. They have a lot of faith in me and to me, that would just be a dream, so if I have to fight him I´m going to train, I´ll give all my life at it and I´ll leave all of it up there, because he´s the best, and to get the undefeated out from him would be something very good. So if it happens, I´m gonna dream with that, take his undefeated, make a good fight and stay in history."</p>
<p> Interviewer says that in the last fight, Mayweather looked a bit slow, and watching Lucas fight, seems to him that Matthysse is faster nowadays (¿?).</p>
<p> Answer: "No, no, Mayweather has this style... he didn´t look any slow to me! He´s an excellent fighter, constant counter-puncher, the truth is he´s a difficult fighter, a strange one. But I have faith in myself, so if I get to the fight I´ll kill myself training and I´ll put up a good fight."</p>
<p> Keeping with Floyd, interviewer asks what do you have to do to beat Mayweather, because of his speed and defense.</p>
<p> Answer: "Yes, of course, you have to have a very good plan. But you also have to hit him in the arms, in the elbows... if you leave him alone, he hits you from everywhere. You have to stick close to him and throw to wherever you can. If you stay close to his body and you hit him in the shoulders, in the arms, in the elbows, you "loosen" him. And I think that´s where the secret is, pressuring him and hitting him in any place you can all the time."</p>
<p> Interviewer says how Murray wasn´t favoured in his fight and then goes back to the Judah and Alexander losses in which they robbed him. So he asks what does a boxer think in those moments.</p>
<p> Answer: "Well the Judah fight helped me a lot, it opened my mind up, because I realized that if I could beat Judah, who is a very good fighter, and then the same happened with Alexander, I gained a lot of confidence and that made me think I can win a fight against any of the best fighters out there."</p>
<p> About Mayweather, he´s in welterweight, LM is in lightweight, so how would that go, seeing that they are negotiating a fight with Canelo and they´ve asked him to come down to welterweight.</p>
<p> Answer: "Yes, of course, I would have to go up to welterweight, but I would do it if I got offered the fight, no doubt. There´s no problem, yes, I would have to work a lot, I would have to put those 3 kilos in my body, but with a good training I don´t think there´s a problem with that."</p>
<p> The he tells the young boys that they just go to the gym, start learning, try hard and if you want it and work on it, you can get there.</p>
<p> Then they ask him about a possible fight against Maidana. He says maybe, he doesn´t really know, they fought in the amateurs, he´s a different category now but if they end up in the same one and both want to fight, he´s fine with that.</p>
<p> Then he says he supports Boca Juniors but he´s not much into football, says he doesn´t watch a lot of boxing either, but he watches the good fights, the ones that he likes.</p>
<p> Asked about his idol, his favourite fighter. Answer: "Yeah I admire Oscar de la Hoya, Chávez, I liked those boxers."</p>
<p> Then he asks him about Broner, another one that comes strong: "Yes, he´s very talented, just moving up in weight and I think he´ll give a lot to talk about. He´s a very good fighter, a big guy, and the truth is he boxes very well."</p>
<p> Then they speak about Hopkins. He says Hopkins got to him after the fight and they talked a bit. He says Hopkins spoke really nice words to him and gave him some advice too. They had to use a translator since he doesn´t understand anything at all when spoken at in English.</p>
<p> To close it up, they ask him and he says he´s not much into any other sport, he just watches movies from time to time.</p>
<p> Then he says after the fight, when does the strong training starts for the next one, what he does, etc... He says after the fight he takes bath, surfs the internet, watches the fight, and then rests. Now he has 15 days off and then they´ll see what fight comes up, he wishes it´s the García one.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> That´s it folks, forgive any grammar, spelling, translation or whatever mistakes, I hope it interests some people!</p>
<p> For the Spanish speakers out there, here´s the link: </p>
<p><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2__3OqmBnjw">https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=2__3OqmBnjw</a></p>
<p> They interviewed him right upon arriving back to his country. I have translated some parts that I found interesting.</p>
<p> He´s first asked about the Americans calling him The Argentinian Machine and claiming he´s got bricks in place of his fists, he then replies with the typical stuff, it was going to be a really tough fight, he is a very good fighter, we trained hard, we are very happy, etc. He sounds quite humble.</p>
<p> Then another interviewer says Sergio Martínez has told him Matthysse will be fighting Mayweather in a year. He answers going back to how hard he trained and maybe that was the reason Maravilla spoke so nicely about what he saw in the ring.</p>
<p> After that, the interviewer asks about his next step, and talks about García, and how he was there at the end of the fight looking quite worried. Matthysse then gives praise to Peterson, saying he was top level in the division, having beaten some of the best before. He doesn´t say anything about García at all.</p>
<p> Interviewer asks again about Danny García. Matthysse: "He is good, it´s going to be a very good fight. I saw him a bit slow in his fight against Zab Judah. Truth is that´s a fight I´ve been looking for and now it seems the United States (yeah he actually says this, like the U.S. as a whole decide on these matters, quite funny) wants to make it, so I really wish it can be made, since I want it and I see myself really well prepared for it. </p>
<p> Next, they ask him about the possibilty that García wanted, and was expecting Peterson to win because was afraid of fighting Matthysse. </p>
<p> Answer: "For sure, they were pretty confident Peterson was going to win, the thought he was going to be superior and I was just putting up a good fight. But well, we overcame him. It wasn´t easy at all, we trained hard and now we´ll see. In September, I think, they say it´s the García fight, so let´s train hard for it."</p>
<p> Question: Does it bother you that there´s rumours about you using forbidden substances? </p>
<p> Answer: "No, not really! Yes, it´s that there was a lot of talking about that because Dallas´ manager watched me taking my vitamins, the ones I always take. I took controls before, after, and everything is fine. I just take that because my conditioning trainer told me so, it´s the only thing I take because I don´t like that stuff. I train a lot, let them come and watch the trainings. It´s in that, not in any forbidden substance."</p>
<p> Then they ask him about other fighters and fights, friends, family, how he´s resting for some days, relaxing his eating habits, and other stuff.</p>
<p> Next, they got back to it and ask him what would be after the potential García fight.</p>
<p> He says: "first there´s García, then they talk about Khan maybe by the end of the year, then they talk about Mayweather (he chuckles a bit), I don´t know, they are talking a lot! I wish they could make all those fight and well, getting to Mayweather, the truth is that would be a dream!"</p>
<p> Then they ask him about the comparisons with Manny Pacquiao. He says thay they were all very happy, and with the adrenaline of the moment the yanks got all excited and said all kinds of things.</p>
<p> Asked about the future for him in and outside the rings after he retires: "Well yes, I´d like to fight Mayweather, I aspire to it, it would be my dream and I would like to get to it now that it´s been proposed to me. Then I expect to fight some more years, and after that I´ll retire and I´d like to own a gym, and then teach the young kids. I´d want to teach kids from 6 to 10 years because that´s something beatiful. It´s something that they do in the U.S. and it´s something beautiful. I lived it when I was in the bootcamps with Maravilla and all the little kids were there, and they taught them and what I saw, the little kids learing, I would like to do that when I retire."</p>
<p> Interviewer asks about how that Mayweather fight would be a great leap forward not only in his career, but also in the economic side of it.</p>
<p> Answer: "Yes, for sure, I was just speaking to my friends and they are all freaked out, they are dreaming even more than me about it. They have a lot of faith in me and to me, that would just be a dream, so if I have to fight him I´m going to train, I´ll give all my life at it and I´ll leave all of it up there, because he´s the best, and to get the undefeated out from him would be something very good. So if it happens, I´m gonna dream with that, take his undefeated, make a good fight and stay in history."</p>
<p> Interviewer says that in the last fight, Mayweather looked a bit slow, and watching Lucas fight, seems to him that Matthysse is faster nowadays (¿?).</p>
<p> Answer: "No, no, Mayweather has this style... he didn´t look any slow to me! He´s an excellent fighter, constant counter-puncher, the truth is he´s a difficult fighter, a strange one. But I have faith in myself, so if I get to the fight I´ll kill myself training and I´ll put up a good fight."</p>
<p> Keeping with Floyd, interviewer asks what do you have to do to beat Mayweather, because of his speed and defense.</p>
<p> Answer: "Yes, of course, you have to have a very good plan. But you also have to hit him in the arms, in the elbows... if you leave him alone, he hits you from everywhere. You have to stick close to him and throw to wherever you can. If you stay close to his body and you hit him in the shoulders, in the arms, in the elbows, you "loosen" him. And I think that´s where the secret is, pressuring him and hitting him in any place you can all the time."</p>
<p> Interviewer says how Murray wasn´t favoured in his fight and then goes back to the Judah and Alexander losses in which they robbed him. So he asks what does a boxer think in those moments.</p>
<p> Answer: "Well the Judah fight helped me a lot, it opened my mind up, because I realized that if I could beat Judah, who is a very good fighter, and then the same happened with Alexander, I gained a lot of confidence and that made me think I can win a fight against any of the best fighters out there."</p>
<p> About Mayweather, he´s in welterweight, LM is in lightweight, so how would that go, seeing that they are negotiating a fight with Canelo and they´ve asked him to come down to welterweight.</p>
<p> Answer: "Yes, of course, I would have to go up to welterweight, but I would do it if I got offered the fight, no doubt. There´s no problem, yes, I would have to work a lot, I would have to put those 3 kilos in my body, but with a good training I don´t think there´s a problem with that."</p>
<p> The he tells the young boys that they just go to the gym, start learning, try hard and if you want it and work on it, you can get there.</p>
<p> Then they ask him about a possible fight against Maidana. He says maybe, he doesn´t really know, they fought in the amateurs, he´s a different category now but if they end up in the same one and both want to fight, he´s fine with that.</p>
<p> Then he says he supports Boca Juniors but he´s not much into football, says he doesn´t watch a lot of boxing either, but he watches the good fights, the ones that he likes.</p>
<p> Asked about his idol, his favourite fighter. Answer: "Yeah I admire Oscar de la Hoya, Chávez, I liked those boxers."</p>
<p> Then he asks him about Broner, another one that comes strong: "Yes, he´s very talented, just moving up in weight and I think he´ll give a lot to talk about. He´s a very good fighter, a big guy, and the truth is he boxes very well."</p>
<p> Then they speak about Hopkins. He says Hopkins got to him after the fight and they talked a bit. He says Hopkins spoke really nice words to him and gave him some advice too. They had to use a translator since he doesn´t understand anything at all when spoken at in English.</p>
<p> To close it up, they ask him and he says he´s not much into any other sport, he just watches movies from time to time.</p>
<p> Then he says after the fight, when does the strong training starts for the next one, what he does, etc... He says after the fight he takes bath, surfs the internet, watches the fight, and then rests. Now he has 15 days off and then they´ll see what fight comes up, he wishes it´s the García one.</p>
<p> </p>
<p> </p>
<p> That´s it folks, forgive any grammar, spelling, translation or whatever mistakes, I hope it interests some people!</p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/24/4361790/interview-with-matthysse-for-argentinian-radio-some-translationsh0lydiver2013-05-23T22:54:45Z2013-05-23T22:54:45ZInterested in helping with an "existentialist" play about Richard III and Queen Margaret (and maybe others)?
<p><br><br>I didn't know where else to put this on BLH, so it's a fanpost, or shouldn't be here at all.<br><br>BLHers are among the most diverse, and well-educated, of all the groups of people with whom I've had contact. That's the set-up, and the bait.<br><br>I'm sure many of you have read Shakespeare's Richard III, and have been following, as I have, the discovery last year of Richard's penultimate resting place in Leicester. Under a parking lot, no less, and was nearly destroyed by a 19th century plumber building a latrine.Perfect! Those of you who do, certainly also know of the on-going effort to rectify Richard's reputation as allegedly besmirched by Shakespeare, due to Thomas Moore's influence. That's the sweetener, and appeal to vanity and ego.<br><br>Many of you also know of some of those dramatic confrontations, in Richard III, between Margaret and Richard, and others; here are some of my favorite lines by Margaret: "Long die they happy days before thy death (Margaret)", "If you live lament. If die, be brief" (Elizabeth, to the Duchess of York);"Nor more can you distinguish of a man/Than of his outward show, which, God He knows,/Seldom or never jumpeth with the heart" (Richard, and much like some lines by Donne); "From forth the kennel of thy womb hath crept/A hellhound that doth hunt us all to death ... Thy womb let loose to chase us tom our graves" (Margaret, to the Duchess, Richard's mother); "Farewell, York's wife, and queen of sad mischance" (Margaret, to the Duchess); "Thou elvish-marked, abortive, rooting hog,/Thou that wast sealed in thy nativity/The slave of nature and the son of hell,/Thou slander of thy heavy mother's womb,/Thou loathed issue of thy father's loins,/Thou rag of honor ..." (Margaret, to Richard). <br><br>And so on. I haven't even gotten to Anne's line when she calls Richard a "defused infection of a man." Or Richard as a "bottled spider." He was quite a guy, at least according to Will.<br><br>So what is this all about? A proposal, and request for your collective help. I think that now, in the heat of discovery regarding Richard, and the ongoing revision of his historical reputation, a short, 1 - 3 act play would be fun to write.<br><br>It would feature (as I see it at the moment) Richard and Margaret, in a different light, talking about how his actions are being misread, misinterpreted, and will historically be distorted and blown out of proportion. Richard, in other words (and I am beginning to hate this term) will be in the midst of an "existential crisis," as he sees his life and legacy veering out of control. Margaret will in fact be sympathetic, though not a "friend" or comforter. This will develop and change<br><br>Much of this will be implied, and the play would be very "minimalist" a la "Waiting for Godot."<br><br>This is just an impulse, and may come to nothing, but I was wondering if anyone here is interested in developing this with me?</p>
<p>It would be relevant to boxing, because, well ... never mind.</p>
<p><br><br>I didn't know where else to put this on BLH, so it's a fanpost, or shouldn't be here at all.<br><br>BLHers are among the most diverse, and well-educated, of all the groups of people with whom I've had contact. That's the set-up, and the bait.<br><br>I'm sure many of you have read Shakespeare's Richard III, and have been following, as I have, the discovery last year of Richard's penultimate resting place in Leicester. Under a parking lot, no less, and was nearly destroyed by a 19th century plumber building a latrine.Perfect! Those of you who do, certainly also know of the on-going effort to rectify Richard's reputation as allegedly besmirched by Shakespeare, due to Thomas Moore's influence. That's the sweetener, and appeal to vanity and ego.<br><br>Many of you also know of some of those dramatic confrontations, in Richard III, between Margaret and Richard, and others; here are some of my favorite lines by Margaret: "Long die they happy days before thy death (Margaret)", "If you live lament. If die, be brief" (Elizabeth, to the Duchess of York);"Nor more can you distinguish of a man/Than of his outward show, which, God He knows,/Seldom or never jumpeth with the heart" (Richard, and much like some lines by Donne); "From forth the kennel of thy womb hath crept/A hellhound that doth hunt us all to death ... Thy womb let loose to chase us tom our graves" (Margaret, to the Duchess, Richard's mother); "Farewell, York's wife, and queen of sad mischance" (Margaret, to the Duchess); "Thou elvish-marked, abortive, rooting hog,/Thou that wast sealed in thy nativity/The slave of nature and the son of hell,/Thou slander of thy heavy mother's womb,/Thou loathed issue of thy father's loins,/Thou rag of honor ..." (Margaret, to Richard). <br><br>And so on. I haven't even gotten to Anne's line when she calls Richard a "defused infection of a man." Or Richard as a "bottled spider." He was quite a guy, at least according to Will.<br><br>So what is this all about? A proposal, and request for your collective help. I think that now, in the heat of discovery regarding Richard, and the ongoing revision of his historical reputation, a short, 1 - 3 act play would be fun to write.<br><br>It would feature (as I see it at the moment) Richard and Margaret, in a different light, talking about how his actions are being misread, misinterpreted, and will historically be distorted and blown out of proportion. Richard, in other words (and I am beginning to hate this term) will be in the midst of an "existential crisis," as he sees his life and legacy veering out of control. Margaret will in fact be sympathetic, though not a "friend" or comforter. This will develop and change<br><br>Much of this will be implied, and the play would be very "minimalist" a la "Waiting for Godot."<br><br>This is just an impulse, and may come to nothing, but I was wondering if anyone here is interested in developing this with me?</p>
<p>It would be relevant to boxing, because, well ... never mind.</p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/23/4360644/interested-in-helping-with-an-existentialist-play-about-richard-iiiDrRck2013-05-23T16:58:12Z2013-05-23T16:58:12ZFroch-Kessler II Highlights The Greatness and Conundrum That Is Andre Ward
<p>The rematch between Carl Froch and Mikkel Kessler this Saturday at the 02 Arena will essentially decide who is the second fiddle to Andre Ward at 168 pounds. Both men were soundly defeated by Ward and since that time Andre has gone on to thoroughly dismantle undisputed light heavyweight champion Chad Dawson back in September of last year.</p>
<p>The truth hurts my friend, to echo Angel Garcia because the truth is Andre Ward is the best fighter between 168 and 175 in a moment frozen in which there are only two worthy equals currently operating within the same realm. He's already beaten Chad Dawson but Dawson has openly expressed his desire to rematch Ward at 175 pounds later on in the year for the light heavyweight crown; and Bernard Hopkins refuses to fight a man in Ward he considers his apprentice of sorts.</p>
<p>There are other options, a rerun of the same episode against the winner of Froch-Kessler, although you might want to save yourself the time; Ward will never lose to either man.</p>
<p><b>Ward-Pascal:</b></p>
<p>In theory it can be made providing Pascal prevails against Lucian Bute when the two meet up next winter. I like this fight because Pascal though lacking in the foundation department when it comes to boxing skills, has the athleticism, power, and raw aggression to give Ward at least something intriguing in terms of a viable opponent.</p>
<p>Ward would beat him but the pressure of Pascal would at least play an interesting role in the fight.</p>
<p><b>Ward-Chavez Jr.:</b></p>
<p>This is one of two likely options for Andre Ward. Bob Arum has come out and said he wants the fight and Ward wants the fight as well. Chavez Jr. is a light heavyweight masquerading as a middleweight because his handlers felt he's got more of an advantage because of his size, minus the skills to bully smaller opponents whereas at 168 and 175 he would have to deal with bigger opponents who would no doubt school him. I think Junior Chavez needs a big fight just as much as Ward because the kid didn't do himself any favors by not throwing a single important punch until the 12 round against Sergio Martinez. The Martinez fight was his chance to prove he was worthy, he didn't, beating Ward would do just that; prove Chavez Jr. worthy.</p>
<p><b> Ward-Dawson II (175):</b></p>
<p>This is the fight I want to see more so than a rematch between Carl Froch and Andre Ward. Although, to shut Eddie Hearn and Carl Froch up once and for all would be the greatest moment in boxing history because those two are the biggest tool bags walking the Earth. Hearn especially, the dude just rubs me the wrong way and I think he's more arrogant than he's worth.</p>
<p>The first Ward-Dawson clash took place at 168 pounds for Ward's WBC/WBA/Ring titles. Dawson for his part was allowed to keep his 175 pound belts.</p>
<p>Blame fatigue, Dawson being gun shy, the fact is Ward took him apart in a fight that was more one sided tutorial than the balanced highly technical close points affair most fans initially anticipated when the fight was first announce last August.</p>
<p>I was disappointed as a Dawson fan because I felt had it been at light heavyweight or at least catch weight of 172 the fight would have been more competitive. I also hate when two of my favorite fighters go against each other and one dominates so clearly. I felt the same way about Donaire-Rigondeaux. I know it happens in the sport but I hate when two fighters I think highly of go at it because I become torn and have to choose.</p>
<p><b>Ward-Froch II:</b></p>
<p>At the end of the day we're probably headed toward a rematch in the UK between Andre Ward and Carl Froch. If Froch destroys Mikkel Kessler the call for a rematch against Andre Ward will almost be too loud to dismiss. The momentum for Froch and the history of personal animosity on Carl's part toward Ward makes for a pretty solid rivalry albeit pretty one sided.</p>
<p>Let me set the record straight for all you "non-believers" (See Bart Scott), Andre Ward made Carl Froch look like he was 55 instead of 35. Ward out gunned him, outsmarted him, out boxed him, had the faster hands, superior footwork, bullied Froch, and at moments in the fight intimidated him with masterful inside fighting.</p>
<p>The clown shoes judge who gave Froch more rounds than he actually won made people think the fight was closer than it actually was. That fight was never close at any point no matter how many times you watch it from as many angles as you like. Ward took Froch, who is a limited boxer to begin with and he totally nullified Carl's best weapon which is powerful offensive boxing. Carl Froch couldn't hit Andre Ward with two hands full of rice if Andre's feet were glued to the canvas.</p>
<p>And you look at Carl's face going back to the corner after the rounds, the man looked bewildered.</p>
<p>The rematch could be on Mars and Ward would still win. I think Froch has a personal resentment toward Andre because I don't think he accepts the fact that Ward is so much better than him. I think leading up to their fight Carl Froch looked at Andre Ward as an unproven American hype job and didn't see him as much of a threat. The schooling he took and the adulation and praise of Ward after the fact really grates Carl you can tell whenever someone brings up Andre Ward during an interview. If class was in session on my tail like it was on Carl's then I wouldn't like Andre Ward either.</p>
<p>Other potential opponents for Andre Ward:</p>
<p><b>Gennedy Golovkin</b></p>
<p><b>Peter Quillin</b> (Quillin is the second biggest middleweight after Chavez Jr., he could easily make 168)</p>
<p><b>Tavoris Cloud</b></p>
<p>Nathan Cleverly (Vince Cleverly has said he wants his son to fight Andre Ward in two years)</p>
<p><b>George Groves</b></p>
<p><b>James DeGale</b></p>
<p><b>Andre Dirrell</b> (Won't ever happen because the two are friends and Dirrell is too busy at the moment not being busy)</p>
<p>The rematch between Carl Froch and Mikkel Kessler this Saturday at the 02 Arena will essentially decide who is the second fiddle to Andre Ward at 168 pounds. Both men were soundly defeated by Ward and since that time Andre has gone on to thoroughly dismantle undisputed light heavyweight champion Chad Dawson back in September of last year.</p>
<p>The truth hurts my friend, to echo Angel Garcia because the truth is Andre Ward is the best fighter between 168 and 175 in a moment frozen in which there are only two worthy equals currently operating within the same realm. He's already beaten Chad Dawson but Dawson has openly expressed his desire to rematch Ward at 175 pounds later on in the year for the light heavyweight crown; and Bernard Hopkins refuses to fight a man in Ward he considers his apprentice of sorts.</p>
<p>There are other options, a rerun of the same episode against the winner of Froch-Kessler, although you might want to save yourself the time; Ward will never lose to either man.</p>
<p><b>Ward-Pascal:</b></p>
<p>In theory it can be made providing Pascal prevails against Lucian Bute when the two meet up next winter. I like this fight because Pascal though lacking in the foundation department when it comes to boxing skills, has the athleticism, power, and raw aggression to give Ward at least something intriguing in terms of a viable opponent.</p>
<p>Ward would beat him but the pressure of Pascal would at least play an interesting role in the fight.</p>
<p><b>Ward-Chavez Jr.:</b></p>
<p>This is one of two likely options for Andre Ward. Bob Arum has come out and said he wants the fight and Ward wants the fight as well. Chavez Jr. is a light heavyweight masquerading as a middleweight because his handlers felt he's got more of an advantage because of his size, minus the skills to bully smaller opponents whereas at 168 and 175 he would have to deal with bigger opponents who would no doubt school him. I think Junior Chavez needs a big fight just as much as Ward because the kid didn't do himself any favors by not throwing a single important punch until the 12 round against Sergio Martinez. The Martinez fight was his chance to prove he was worthy, he didn't, beating Ward would do just that; prove Chavez Jr. worthy.</p>
<p><b> Ward-Dawson II (175):</b></p>
<p>This is the fight I want to see more so than a rematch between Carl Froch and Andre Ward. Although, to shut Eddie Hearn and Carl Froch up once and for all would be the greatest moment in boxing history because those two are the biggest tool bags walking the Earth. Hearn especially, the dude just rubs me the wrong way and I think he's more arrogant than he's worth.</p>
<p>The first Ward-Dawson clash took place at 168 pounds for Ward's WBC/WBA/Ring titles. Dawson for his part was allowed to keep his 175 pound belts.</p>
<p>Blame fatigue, Dawson being gun shy, the fact is Ward took him apart in a fight that was more one sided tutorial than the balanced highly technical close points affair most fans initially anticipated when the fight was first announce last August.</p>
<p>I was disappointed as a Dawson fan because I felt had it been at light heavyweight or at least catch weight of 172 the fight would have been more competitive. I also hate when two of my favorite fighters go against each other and one dominates so clearly. I felt the same way about Donaire-Rigondeaux. I know it happens in the sport but I hate when two fighters I think highly of go at it because I become torn and have to choose.</p>
<p><b>Ward-Froch II:</b></p>
<p>At the end of the day we're probably headed toward a rematch in the UK between Andre Ward and Carl Froch. If Froch destroys Mikkel Kessler the call for a rematch against Andre Ward will almost be too loud to dismiss. The momentum for Froch and the history of personal animosity on Carl's part toward Ward makes for a pretty solid rivalry albeit pretty one sided.</p>
<p>Let me set the record straight for all you "non-believers" (See Bart Scott), Andre Ward made Carl Froch look like he was 55 instead of 35. Ward out gunned him, outsmarted him, out boxed him, had the faster hands, superior footwork, bullied Froch, and at moments in the fight intimidated him with masterful inside fighting.</p>
<p>The clown shoes judge who gave Froch more rounds than he actually won made people think the fight was closer than it actually was. That fight was never close at any point no matter how many times you watch it from as many angles as you like. Ward took Froch, who is a limited boxer to begin with and he totally nullified Carl's best weapon which is powerful offensive boxing. Carl Froch couldn't hit Andre Ward with two hands full of rice if Andre's feet were glued to the canvas.</p>
<p>And you look at Carl's face going back to the corner after the rounds, the man looked bewildered.</p>
<p>The rematch could be on Mars and Ward would still win. I think Froch has a personal resentment toward Andre because I don't think he accepts the fact that Ward is so much better than him. I think leading up to their fight Carl Froch looked at Andre Ward as an unproven American hype job and didn't see him as much of a threat. The schooling he took and the adulation and praise of Ward after the fact really grates Carl you can tell whenever someone brings up Andre Ward during an interview. If class was in session on my tail like it was on Carl's then I wouldn't like Andre Ward either.</p>
<p>Other potential opponents for Andre Ward:</p>
<p><b>Gennedy Golovkin</b></p>
<p><b>Peter Quillin</b> (Quillin is the second biggest middleweight after Chavez Jr., he could easily make 168)</p>
<p><b>Tavoris Cloud</b></p>
<p>Nathan Cleverly (Vince Cleverly has said he wants his son to fight Andre Ward in two years)</p>
<p><b>George Groves</b></p>
<p><b>James DeGale</b></p>
<p><b>Andre Dirrell</b> (Won't ever happen because the two are friends and Dirrell is too busy at the moment not being busy)</p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/23/4359274/froch-kessler-ii-highlights-the-greatness-and-conundrum-that-is-andreSweetScientific2013-05-22T22:48:02Z2013-05-22T22:48:02ZThe Power of Matthysse Archive
<p><img src="http://25.media.tumblr.com/4333e95f0544cb5610a189a65da1fad0/tumblr_mn30usCs7y1srd2v7o1_400.jpg" alt="Poor Lamont Peterson. He thought Matthysse was a man… Only a machine could deliver that kind of “scary power”."><br><br>Witnessing Matthysse's brilliant power in his latest fight inspired me to create a scenario of how Matthysse must train. I started to play with photoshop and created one picture which to me really defined Matthysse's training in strength and power. However, a friend of a mine whom has amazing photoshop abilites (but definitely not limited to as his artistic creativity and talent seems to have no limit) recreated scenes of Matthysse demonstrating that power i was trying to display in a much much more incredible fashion, so we will not even waste time with what i made. <br><br>A story tied together in fictional hilarity (possibly non-fiction) can be seen here:<br><br><a href="http://matthysse-destroy.tumblr.com/">http://matthysse-destroy.tumblr.com/</a><br><br>Credit is due to man who is a devoted boxing fan named Jacob Elijah.<br><br>I hope we can all enjoy Matthysse the way Jacob and I do. <br><br></p>
<p><img src="http://25.media.tumblr.com/4333e95f0544cb5610a189a65da1fad0/tumblr_mn30usCs7y1srd2v7o1_400.jpg" alt="Poor Lamont Peterson. He thought Matthysse was a man… Only a machine could deliver that kind of “scary power”."><br><br>Witnessing Matthysse's brilliant power in his latest fight inspired me to create a scenario of how Matthysse must train. I started to play with photoshop and created one picture which to me really defined Matthysse's training in strength and power. However, a friend of a mine whom has amazing photoshop abilites (but definitely not limited to as his artistic creativity and talent seems to have no limit) recreated scenes of Matthysse demonstrating that power i was trying to display in a much much more incredible fashion, so we will not even waste time with what i made. <br><br>A story tied together in fictional hilarity (possibly non-fiction) can be seen here:<br><br><a href="http://matthysse-destroy.tumblr.com/">http://matthysse-destroy.tumblr.com/</a><br><br>Credit is due to man who is a devoted boxing fan named Jacob Elijah.<br><br>I hope we can all enjoy Matthysse the way Jacob and I do. <br><br></p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/22/4357148/the-power-of-matthysse-archiveluckyhit2013-05-22T20:26:53Z2013-05-22T20:26:53ZSoren Kierkegaard's 200th Birthday: Being Beaten Up by Life and Everything Else before You Understand What's Happening
<p><br><br> May 5th was the 200th of Kierkegaard. This is perhaps significant to a few people.</p>
<p>I mention it because I noticed the acknowledgement in one trendy, smarty-farty online news mag,and also because, of my four degrees, the first, in philosophy, was and remains the most important, because it taught me more than any other. But, I didn't even begin to understand existentialism until 10 years after I had finished that degree, but continued to read philosophy through the sheer love of it.</p>
<p>I found that Kierkegaard's philosophy, whether you think it's the foundation of existentialism or not (I happen to agree that it is), it's not something you "get" by studying. Classroom work helps, to be sure, but it really is more like Zen. I spent ten years studying Zen, and this sort of thing is relevant. I can tell you stories of my experience with this, but not now. The point is, both Zen and existentialism will both hit you smack between the eyes, when you least expect it.</p>
<p>Kierkegaard was probably more obscure than most other philosophers. Schopenhauer is loose but clear, and warm and fuzzy; I like him very much. Kant is so inconsistent, at least in the Critique of Pure Reason, that I'm pretty sure,after years of trying to understand what I used to think was something very important that Kant had discovered, that he probably never really understood what he was trying to say. I still like him like him a lot, but he really was confused. Spinoza is the clearest, and to me, the most important philosopher who has lived in any culture, because he has embodied the ideal of philosophy since at least from Aquinas to Leibnitz and Newton (actually, more Leibnitz than Newton). This ideal was to explain the world through pure reason. I think Spinoza did this.</p>
<p>So what's the point of this dreary and tedious essay? About one motive of philosophy, which is I imagine the primary motive of "philosophy" when people think of that term. That motive is to understand, not the mysterious inner workings of the Universe writ large, or to analyze how we think, and whether how we think is appropriate to comprehend how the Universe works.</p>
<p>The motive of philosophy that I have in mind here, and in fact have kept in mind because it's become rather urgent for me, is more along the lines of what we might expect from such an otherwise useless endeavor: It's the, some, any, answer to the question, "What the fuck is happening here?"</p>
<p>So I got to thinking about this, in my own life (which is uninteresting to everyone, including me), and also in boxing.</p>
<p>Harrison is "unretiring" after 20 days. Mosley has a win, his first since 2009, and is now, by Don King's standards a contender for something. Margarito is angling to return to the ring. Riddick Bowe, as I understand it. may attempt muay tai.</p>
<p>Someone said to me once that life will give you the test first, and the lesson later, and this is, of course true.This was a very drunk person, and I never saw them again. But they were right.</p>
<p>They were really only paraphrasing Kierkegaard, who said that "Life must be lived forwards, but it can be only be understood backwards."</p>
<p>We all know this, because I've had untold numbers of people (usually in bars, late at night, and cheap diners, early in the morning) tell me that "hindsight is 20/20." These people, none of whom I ever got to know, and are certainly all dead now, were mostly mourning over some screw-up that they knew, either in the dark hours of the night, or the terrible first light that would make this next day just another nightmare for them, that they had committed, and that the whole mess of their lives was really all their fault.</p>
<p>What's hard here is that every choice is, to the chooser, unknown in outcome, but full of hope. Choosing, especially against the odds, is to bet on the future. That's why the poor and the sick and the uneducated buy lottery tickets: this is in fact their most logical strategy for improving their condition, because however unlikely a win may be, they have absolutely no alternative hope.</p>
<p>We just don't know the outcomes of our decisions, until we've seen the result, and that's when we learn if our choice was the "right" one. We can also say, regardless of the immediate result, and at the time of whatever event may be at issue, that we have no regrets. I've done that, and I've learned that sometimes the gestation period of a choice can extend into decades.</p>
<p>Well, Harrison had made a choice, Mosley has made one, Margarito has made one.</p>
<p>Maybe I'm very, very stupid, which is entirely possible, but I really think that there are really no "lessons" in life. People suffer consequences from actions, and some may be happy, and some may be very sad. Extrapolating from the past into the future is not easy.</p>
<p>So, you only live your life forward, because it pushes and insists on your choices from day-to-day and in fact from hour-to-hour, but you really have no idea what the hell happened until you take account of the wreckage.</p>
<p>But, on a brighter note, I believe that, with Cicero, "Those who have done nothing ill, have never done anything."+</p>
<p>Take take your pick.</p>
<p><br><br> May 5th was the 200th of Kierkegaard. This is perhaps significant to a few people.</p>
<p>I mention it because I noticed the acknowledgement in one trendy, smarty-farty online news mag,and also because, of my four degrees, the first, in philosophy, was and remains the most important, because it taught me more than any other. But, I didn't even begin to understand existentialism until 10 years after I had finished that degree, but continued to read philosophy through the sheer love of it.</p>
<p>I found that Kierkegaard's philosophy, whether you think it's the foundation of existentialism or not (I happen to agree that it is), it's not something you "get" by studying. Classroom work helps, to be sure, but it really is more like Zen. I spent ten years studying Zen, and this sort of thing is relevant. I can tell you stories of my experience with this, but not now. The point is, both Zen and existentialism will both hit you smack between the eyes, when you least expect it.</p>
<p>Kierkegaard was probably more obscure than most other philosophers. Schopenhauer is loose but clear, and warm and fuzzy; I like him very much. Kant is so inconsistent, at least in the Critique of Pure Reason, that I'm pretty sure,after years of trying to understand what I used to think was something very important that Kant had discovered, that he probably never really understood what he was trying to say. I still like him like him a lot, but he really was confused. Spinoza is the clearest, and to me, the most important philosopher who has lived in any culture, because he has embodied the ideal of philosophy since at least from Aquinas to Leibnitz and Newton (actually, more Leibnitz than Newton). This ideal was to explain the world through pure reason. I think Spinoza did this.</p>
<p>So what's the point of this dreary and tedious essay? About one motive of philosophy, which is I imagine the primary motive of "philosophy" when people think of that term. That motive is to understand, not the mysterious inner workings of the Universe writ large, or to analyze how we think, and whether how we think is appropriate to comprehend how the Universe works.</p>
<p>The motive of philosophy that I have in mind here, and in fact have kept in mind because it's become rather urgent for me, is more along the lines of what we might expect from such an otherwise useless endeavor: It's the, some, any, answer to the question, "What the fuck is happening here?"</p>
<p>So I got to thinking about this, in my own life (which is uninteresting to everyone, including me), and also in boxing.</p>
<p>Harrison is "unretiring" after 20 days. Mosley has a win, his first since 2009, and is now, by Don King's standards a contender for something. Margarito is angling to return to the ring. Riddick Bowe, as I understand it. may attempt muay tai.</p>
<p>Someone said to me once that life will give you the test first, and the lesson later, and this is, of course true.This was a very drunk person, and I never saw them again. But they were right.</p>
<p>They were really only paraphrasing Kierkegaard, who said that "Life must be lived forwards, but it can be only be understood backwards."</p>
<p>We all know this, because I've had untold numbers of people (usually in bars, late at night, and cheap diners, early in the morning) tell me that "hindsight is 20/20." These people, none of whom I ever got to know, and are certainly all dead now, were mostly mourning over some screw-up that they knew, either in the dark hours of the night, or the terrible first light that would make this next day just another nightmare for them, that they had committed, and that the whole mess of their lives was really all their fault.</p>
<p>What's hard here is that every choice is, to the chooser, unknown in outcome, but full of hope. Choosing, especially against the odds, is to bet on the future. That's why the poor and the sick and the uneducated buy lottery tickets: this is in fact their most logical strategy for improving their condition, because however unlikely a win may be, they have absolutely no alternative hope.</p>
<p>We just don't know the outcomes of our decisions, until we've seen the result, and that's when we learn if our choice was the "right" one. We can also say, regardless of the immediate result, and at the time of whatever event may be at issue, that we have no regrets. I've done that, and I've learned that sometimes the gestation period of a choice can extend into decades.</p>
<p>Well, Harrison had made a choice, Mosley has made one, Margarito has made one.</p>
<p>Maybe I'm very, very stupid, which is entirely possible, but I really think that there are really no "lessons" in life. People suffer consequences from actions, and some may be happy, and some may be very sad. Extrapolating from the past into the future is not easy.</p>
<p>So, you only live your life forward, because it pushes and insists on your choices from day-to-day and in fact from hour-to-hour, but you really have no idea what the hell happened until you take account of the wreckage.</p>
<p>But, on a brighter note, I believe that, with Cicero, "Those who have done nothing ill, have never done anything."+</p>
<p>Take take your pick.</p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/22/4356288/soren-kierkegaards-200th-birthday-being-beaten-up-by-life-andDrRck2013-05-22T04:38:04Z2013-05-22T04:38:04ZThe shortest retirement in boxing?
<p>The legend that is Audley Harrison reversed his decision to retire after 28 days. This not an April fool or anything. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/boxing/22617997">http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/boxing/22617997</a></p>
<p>Its sort of sad but also kind of hilarious at the same time. Just thought I'd share the big news. I don't know if there have been any shorter, or any near as short, in the history of boxing, but my memory doesn't go back too far, so let us know if you do.</p>
<p>The legend that is Audley Harrison reversed his decision to retire after 28 days. This not an April fool or anything. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/boxing/22617997">http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/boxing/22617997</a></p>
<p>Its sort of sad but also kind of hilarious at the same time. Just thought I'd share the big news. I don't know if there have been any shorter, or any near as short, in the history of boxing, but my memory doesn't go back too far, so let us know if you do.</p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/22/4354448/the-shortest-retirement-in-boxingBrianBrock2013-05-21T21:00:50Z2013-05-21T21:00:50ZDid Matthysse's last two opponents take a dive?
<p>I've seen a lot of excitement on this site for Mathysse lately and typically this would be well deserved.</p>
<p>However, I believe that Matthysse's last two fights may have been rigged.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9MAtRiXSIQ" target="_blank">Matthysse's KO on Dallas</a>:</p>
<p>At the 1:16 mark we see what appears to be a brutal knockdown off a clean punch. At 1:47 we see the punch again at a different angle and there doesn't seem to be much of a clean punch. If the first shot that was landed was that big of a shot, wouldn't the head snap back? Let's keep in mind we're talking about a 1st round KO.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0_PsGJXXI8" target="_blank">Matthysse's KO on Peterson</a>:</p>
<p>At the 3:35 mark we see him "knock down" Peterson with a left hand. Once again, this punch doesn't even do so much as to move Lamont's head back. At 4:16 the second knockdown happens and it does so with few clean punches landed yet again.</p>
<p>I like getting behind a young up and coming fighter as much as the next guy, but I feel that we might be getting fooled.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9MAtRiXSIQ" target="_blank"> <br></a></p>
<p>I've seen a lot of excitement on this site for Mathysse lately and typically this would be well deserved.</p>
<p>However, I believe that Matthysse's last two fights may have been rigged.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9MAtRiXSIQ" target="_blank">Matthysse's KO on Dallas</a>:</p>
<p>At the 1:16 mark we see what appears to be a brutal knockdown off a clean punch. At 1:47 we see the punch again at a different angle and there doesn't seem to be much of a clean punch. If the first shot that was landed was that big of a shot, wouldn't the head snap back? Let's keep in mind we're talking about a 1st round KO.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h0_PsGJXXI8" target="_blank">Matthysse's KO on Peterson</a>:</p>
<p>At the 3:35 mark we see him "knock down" Peterson with a left hand. Once again, this punch doesn't even do so much as to move Lamont's head back. At 4:16 the second knockdown happens and it does so with few clean punches landed yet again.</p>
<p>I like getting behind a young up and coming fighter as much as the next guy, but I feel that we might be getting fooled.</p>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m9MAtRiXSIQ" target="_blank"> <br></a></p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/21/4353024/did-matthysses-last-two-opponents-take-a-diveKevin Love2013-05-18T17:05:30Z2013-05-18T17:05:30Zthe gloves are off super middleweight must watch
<p><br><a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/Boxing/comments/1efyso/the_gloves_are_off_the_super_middleweights_joe/">http://www.reddit.com/r/Boxing/comments/1efyso/the_gloves_are_off_the_super_middleweights_joe/</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq74Ftz5rQM">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq74Ftz5rQM</a></p>
<p>If you haven't seen this yet, then go and watch it because it is brilliant, the fighters involved hold nothing back at all.<br style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Also gives you *some* understanding of why Roy Jones and Collins want to fight each other, but I still think its a ridiculous idea.<br style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Loved every minute of the show, its a brilliant idea!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Joe Calzaghe, Roy Jones, Steve Collins, Richie Woodhall and Chris Eubank open up to Johnny Nelson about the great super-middleweight era.</p>
<p><br><a href="http://www.reddit.com/r/Boxing/comments/1efyso/the_gloves_are_off_the_super_middleweights_joe/">http://www.reddit.com/r/Boxing/comments/1efyso/the_gloves_are_off_the_super_middleweights_joe/</a></p>
<p> </p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq74Ftz5rQM">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wq74Ftz5rQM</a></p>
<p>If you haven't seen this yet, then go and watch it because it is brilliant, the fighters involved hold nothing back at all.<br style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Also gives you *some* understanding of why Roy Jones and Collins want to fight each other, but I still think its a ridiculous idea.<br style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;"><br style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px;">Loved every minute of the show, its a brilliant idea!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>Joe Calzaghe, Roy Jones, Steve Collins, Richie Woodhall and Chris Eubank open up to Johnny Nelson about the great super-middleweight era.</p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/18/4343406/the-gloves-are-off-super-middlleweighthurricane carter2013-05-18T16:18:00Z2013-05-18T16:18:00ZHow I scored it: Hagler v Leonard
<p><br><br>A couple weeks ago I thought it would be cool to start a new feature on here. I decided that I'd watch or re-watch famous contentious Boxing decisions and write a fanpost on BLH on how I scored the fight and allow others to discuss. If the review from the community is good, I'll keep doing it. I've decided the first fight I'm going to watch and score on here will be: Sugar Ray Leonard vs Marvin Hagler for the WBC & Ring Magazine Middleweight Championships. Hagler professes to this day he was robbed. Leonard says otherwise. How did I see it? We'll find out</p>
<p><b>Round 1 - 10-9 Leonard</b></p>
<p>This was easy. Leonard was quick, efficient, and landed punches. Hagler landed nothing of note and Leonard landed the cleaner, more effective shots. Clear round for Sugar Ray.</p>
<p><b>Round 2 - 10-9 Leonard, 20-18</b></p>
<p>Hagler landed slightly more but Leonard still was far more faster and easily landing the flush shots. Another clear round for Leonard.</p>
<p><b>Round 3 - 10-9 Leonard, 30-27.</b></p>
<p>Closest round of the fight up to that point. Hagler fought Southpaw and was able to easily cut off the ring from Leonard and won the exchanges. Second portion of the round though Leonard caught Hagler's thunder and again was quicker and landed more flush shots and just shaded the round.</p>
<p><b>Round 4 - 10-9 Leonard, 40-36</b></p>
<p>Another easy round for Leonard. To this point the fight was simple: Leonard moves, Hagler wildly misses, Leonard lands flush shots, moves, Hagler wildly misses. Easy for Sugar Ray.</p>
<p><b>Round 5 -</b> <b>10-9 Hagler, 49-46 Leonard</b></p>
<p>You could see Leonard start to tire. And Hagler pounced. He found his range, cut off the ring from Leonard, and made him pay. First round for Marvelous Marvin</p>
<p><b>Round 6 - 10-9 Hagler, 58-56 Leonard</b></p>
<p>Close round. Both men seemed to tire, but Leonard seemed to be dead on his feet. Hagler slightly landed the more effective punches and just squeaked the round.</p>
<p><b>Round 7 - 10-9 Hagler, 67-66 Leonard</b></p>
<p>Leonard was visibly tired. His punches lacked snap and Hagler really found his range. Landed a lot of nice combos to the body and upstairs. Hagler's jab though ruled the round.</p>
<p><b>Round 8 - 10-9 Hagler, 76-76</b></p>
<p>There was just nothing on Leonard's punches. Hagler just walked through them and kept pounding to the body and landing several stiff jabs. Everything was going Hagler's way in the middle rounds.</p>
<p><b>Round 9 - 10-9 Hagler, 86-85</b></p>
<p>What a round. What a round. Both men gave as good as they got. Furious rallies. Hagler though just had the more snap and power on his punches and got the better of the exchanges. Into Round 10, Hagler leads on my card.</p>
<p><b>Round 10 - 10-9 Leonard, 95-95</b></p>
<p>Weird round, tough round to score. Leonard didn't land anything that hurt Hagler but Hagler just wasn't able to get off and he landed more. Weird round, tight round but in favor of Ray Leonard.</p>
<p><b>Round 11 - 10-9 Hagler, 105-104</b></p>
<p>This is where I think Hagler had reason to be upset. Hagler was the aggressor, the controller of the fight. He came forward and landed more effectively. Leonard would land a 5 punch flurry in which nothing landed. But it caught the judges eye, it got the crowd excited. The judges warmed to Leonard's effort. But he didn't land effectively. Hagler did. Hagler's round</p>
<p><b>Round 12 - 10-9 Hagler, 115-113</b></p>
<p>Similar round. Hagler was the aggressor, he was controlling the fight, he was landing the cleaner shots but Leonard's rallies which looked nice but didn't land much managed to show up better to the judges. Another Hagler round for me.</p>
<p><b>Final Scorecard: 115-113 Marvelous Marvin Hagler</b></p>
<p>Hagler after Round 4 dominated. He was the aggressor, he landed more, he walked through Leonard's punches, and Leonard's ability to land furious comeback rallies which didn't land anything managed to help him steal rounds on the judges' scorecards he didn't deserve. It was a very close fight but one that was won not because of who deserved the fight but who managed to effectively impress the judges. Hagler deserved the fight, he won it, Leonard impressed the judges. Leonard won the decision. </p>
<p>There you have it. My scorecard on one of the most, if not the most, controversial decision in boxing history. Discuss and give feedback in the comments and most importantly: If you enjoyed this feature, write in the comments what you would like me too do next. I'll add them all up and I'll post it next week. Discuss!</p>
<p><br><br>A couple weeks ago I thought it would be cool to start a new feature on here. I decided that I'd watch or re-watch famous contentious Boxing decisions and write a fanpost on BLH on how I scored the fight and allow others to discuss. If the review from the community is good, I'll keep doing it. I've decided the first fight I'm going to watch and score on here will be: Sugar Ray Leonard vs Marvin Hagler for the WBC & Ring Magazine Middleweight Championships. Hagler professes to this day he was robbed. Leonard says otherwise. How did I see it? We'll find out</p>
<p><b>Round 1 - 10-9 Leonard</b></p>
<p>This was easy. Leonard was quick, efficient, and landed punches. Hagler landed nothing of note and Leonard landed the cleaner, more effective shots. Clear round for Sugar Ray.</p>
<p><b>Round 2 - 10-9 Leonard, 20-18</b></p>
<p>Hagler landed slightly more but Leonard still was far more faster and easily landing the flush shots. Another clear round for Leonard.</p>
<p><b>Round 3 - 10-9 Leonard, 30-27.</b></p>
<p>Closest round of the fight up to that point. Hagler fought Southpaw and was able to easily cut off the ring from Leonard and won the exchanges. Second portion of the round though Leonard caught Hagler's thunder and again was quicker and landed more flush shots and just shaded the round.</p>
<p><b>Round 4 - 10-9 Leonard, 40-36</b></p>
<p>Another easy round for Leonard. To this point the fight was simple: Leonard moves, Hagler wildly misses, Leonard lands flush shots, moves, Hagler wildly misses. Easy for Sugar Ray.</p>
<p><b>Round 5 -</b> <b>10-9 Hagler, 49-46 Leonard</b></p>
<p>You could see Leonard start to tire. And Hagler pounced. He found his range, cut off the ring from Leonard, and made him pay. First round for Marvelous Marvin</p>
<p><b>Round 6 - 10-9 Hagler, 58-56 Leonard</b></p>
<p>Close round. Both men seemed to tire, but Leonard seemed to be dead on his feet. Hagler slightly landed the more effective punches and just squeaked the round.</p>
<p><b>Round 7 - 10-9 Hagler, 67-66 Leonard</b></p>
<p>Leonard was visibly tired. His punches lacked snap and Hagler really found his range. Landed a lot of nice combos to the body and upstairs. Hagler's jab though ruled the round.</p>
<p><b>Round 8 - 10-9 Hagler, 76-76</b></p>
<p>There was just nothing on Leonard's punches. Hagler just walked through them and kept pounding to the body and landing several stiff jabs. Everything was going Hagler's way in the middle rounds.</p>
<p><b>Round 9 - 10-9 Hagler, 86-85</b></p>
<p>What a round. What a round. Both men gave as good as they got. Furious rallies. Hagler though just had the more snap and power on his punches and got the better of the exchanges. Into Round 10, Hagler leads on my card.</p>
<p><b>Round 10 - 10-9 Leonard, 95-95</b></p>
<p>Weird round, tough round to score. Leonard didn't land anything that hurt Hagler but Hagler just wasn't able to get off and he landed more. Weird round, tight round but in favor of Ray Leonard.</p>
<p><b>Round 11 - 10-9 Hagler, 105-104</b></p>
<p>This is where I think Hagler had reason to be upset. Hagler was the aggressor, the controller of the fight. He came forward and landed more effectively. Leonard would land a 5 punch flurry in which nothing landed. But it caught the judges eye, it got the crowd excited. The judges warmed to Leonard's effort. But he didn't land effectively. Hagler did. Hagler's round</p>
<p><b>Round 12 - 10-9 Hagler, 115-113</b></p>
<p>Similar round. Hagler was the aggressor, he was controlling the fight, he was landing the cleaner shots but Leonard's rallies which looked nice but didn't land much managed to show up better to the judges. Another Hagler round for me.</p>
<p><b>Final Scorecard: 115-113 Marvelous Marvin Hagler</b></p>
<p>Hagler after Round 4 dominated. He was the aggressor, he landed more, he walked through Leonard's punches, and Leonard's ability to land furious comeback rallies which didn't land anything managed to help him steal rounds on the judges' scorecards he didn't deserve. It was a very close fight but one that was won not because of who deserved the fight but who managed to effectively impress the judges. Hagler deserved the fight, he won it, Leonard impressed the judges. Leonard won the decision. </p>
<p>There you have it. My scorecard on one of the most, if not the most, controversial decision in boxing history. Discuss and give feedback in the comments and most importantly: If you enjoyed this feature, write in the comments what you would like me too do next. I'll add them all up and I'll post it next week. Discuss!</p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/18/4343272/how-i-scored-it-hagler-v-leonardJake Nazar2013-05-18T03:32:27Z2013-05-18T03:32:27ZAdrien Broner's outreach to my local boxing gym
<p>I thought it was a different view than what we usually see of "The Problem." He donated new floors and bags to Old School Boxing Gym in Colorado Springs, run by Terry Buterbaugh who pulled a decent upset on the undercard of Cotto-Foreman card over Tommy Rainone. They also put up a spot on their Wall of Fame for Adrien. Go to the link and scroll down a bit to read up on it. <br><br></p>
<p><a href="https://www.facebook.com/pages/Old-School-Boxing-Gym/164211413732418">https://www.facebook.com/pages/Old-School-Boxing-Gym/164211413732418</a></p>I thought it was a different view than what we usually see of "The Problem." He donated new floors and bags to Old School Boxing Gym in Colorado Springs, run by Terry Buterbaugh who pulled a decent upset on the undercard of Cotto-Foreman card over Tommy Rainone. They also put up a spot on their Wall of Fame for Adrien. Go to the link and scroll down a bit to read up on it. <br><br><a href="https://www.facebook.com/pages/Old-School-Boxing-Gym/164211413732418">https://www.facebook.com/pages/Old-School-Boxing-Gym/164211413732418</a>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/17/4342366/adrien-broners-outreach-to-my-local-boxing-gymJoe Landry2013-05-11T21:01:07Z2013-05-11T21:01:07ZRingTV has updated their P4P rankings and there are some surprises.
<p><br><b>There have been some major changes made to RingTV's P4P rankings this week.<br></b></p>
<p><b>I will place RingTV's rankings from 4/22/13 on the left and the current rankings from 5/11/13 on the right in parentheses.</b></p>
<ol>
<li><b>Floyd Mayweather (Floyd Mayweather)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Andre Ward (Andre Ward)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Juan Manuel Marquez (Juan Manuel Marquez)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Sergio Martinez (Wladimir Klitschko)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Adrien Broner (Abner Mares)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Manny Pacquiao (Adrien Broner)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Wladimir Klitschko (Sergio Martinez)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Robert Guerrero (Manny Pacquiao)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Timothy Bradley (Timothy Bradley)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Nonito Donaire (Saul 'Canelo' Alvarez)</b></li>
</ol>
<p><i>The top 3 are the same so I want to focus on 4 through 10.</i></p>
<p>#4 Wladimir has made a huge jump from #7 to now #4, but I must ask was his latest victory that impressive to bump him up to the #4 spot? Imo no, but I'm curious to find out if people believe that he deserves the #4 spot and if so why.</p>
<p>#5 Mares' victory over Daniel was impressive, but I don't know if it was impressive enough to bump he from not being on the list to suddenly get the #5 spot.</p>
<p>#6 Broner is good but I wouldn't put him over Manny on a P4P list, I'm not even comfortable with him having being ranked this high.</p>
<p>#7 Sergio Martinez, no complaints here.</p>
<p>#8 Having Guerrero on the list in the first place was just silly, and Manny should be ranked higher than this.</p>
<p>#9 Bradley is still holding on to lucky #9.</p>
<p>#10 I'm not crazy about having Canelo as #10 but my question is, so what was his opponents ranking on a top 20 p4p list?</p>
<p><i>This list makes me wonder why is Rigondeaux not on this list, why do they keep ranking Broner so high, how did Mares suddenly become #5 on the P4P list, and why is Manny ranked so low.</i></p>
<p><i>What are your thoughts on RingTV's updated P4P list?</i></p>
<p><br><b>There have been some major changes made to RingTV's P4P rankings this week.<br></b></p>
<p><b>I will place RingTV's rankings from 4/22/13 on the left and the current rankings from 5/11/13 on the right in parentheses.</b></p>
<ol>
<li><b>Floyd Mayweather (Floyd Mayweather)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Andre Ward (Andre Ward)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Juan Manuel Marquez (Juan Manuel Marquez)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Sergio Martinez (Wladimir Klitschko)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Adrien Broner (Abner Mares)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Manny Pacquiao (Adrien Broner)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Wladimir Klitschko (Sergio Martinez)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Robert Guerrero (Manny Pacquiao)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Timothy Bradley (Timothy Bradley)<br></b></li>
<li><b>Nonito Donaire (Saul 'Canelo' Alvarez)</b></li>
</ol>
<p><i>The top 3 are the same so I want to focus on 4 through 10.</i></p>
<p>#4 Wladimir has made a huge jump from #7 to now #4, but I must ask was his latest victory that impressive to bump him up to the #4 spot? Imo no, but I'm curious to find out if people believe that he deserves the #4 spot and if so why.</p>
<p>#5 Mares' victory over Daniel was impressive, but I don't know if it was impressive enough to bump he from not being on the list to suddenly get the #5 spot.</p>
<p>#6 Broner is good but I wouldn't put him over Manny on a P4P list, I'm not even comfortable with him having being ranked this high.</p>
<p>#7 Sergio Martinez, no complaints here.</p>
<p>#8 Having Guerrero on the list in the first place was just silly, and Manny should be ranked higher than this.</p>
<p>#9 Bradley is still holding on to lucky #9.</p>
<p>#10 I'm not crazy about having Canelo as #10 but my question is, so what was his opponents ranking on a top 20 p4p list?</p>
<p><i>This list makes me wonder why is Rigondeaux not on this list, why do they keep ranking Broner so high, how did Mares suddenly become #5 on the P4P list, and why is Manny ranked so low.</i></p>
<p><i>What are your thoughts on RingTV's updated P4P list?</i></p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/11/4322288/ringtv-has-updated-their-p4p-rankings-and-there-are-some-surprisesdddddddddddddddddd2013-05-11T20:39:46Z2013-05-11T20:39:46ZBehavior Modification in Striking
<p>Hello all!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
</p>
<p class="pgh-paragraph" style="">I made<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj4UpYPpNNU" target="_blank" style="color: #919191; font-weight: bold;"> this video</a> as part of an assignment in a psychology course, to demonstrate behavior modification as it applies to a boxing match. In this case, the bout between Andre Ward and Chad Dawson.</p>
<p style=""> </p>
<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Gj4UpYPpNNU?wmode=transparent" height="315" width="420" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; display: block; width: 691px; height: 388.6875px;"></iframe>
<br><p> </p>
<p class="pgh-paragraph" style="">I had a heck of a lot of fun making this, and I thought it turned out pretty good. So, I decided to share it, and I'm hoping for some feedback, including what improvements to make in case I ever get the chance and inspiration to make another one.</p>
<p>Hello all!</p>
<p> </p>
<p>
</p>
<p class="pgh-paragraph" style="">I made<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj4UpYPpNNU" target="_blank" style="color: #919191; font-weight: bold;"> this video</a> as part of an assignment in a psychology course, to demonstrate behavior modification as it applies to a boxing match. In this case, the bout between Andre Ward and Chad Dawson.</p>
<p style=""> </p>
<iframe src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Gj4UpYPpNNU?wmode=transparent" height="315" width="420" style="margin: 0px; padding: 0px; border-width: 0px; display: block; width: 691px; height: 388.6875px;"></iframe>
<br><p> </p>
<p class="pgh-paragraph" style="">I had a heck of a lot of fun making this, and I thought it turned out pretty good. So, I decided to share it, and I'm hoping for some feedback, including what improvements to make in case I ever get the chance and inspiration to make another one.</p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/11/4322296/behavior-modification-in-strikingThe Kids Aren't Alright2013-05-11T17:23:35Z2013-05-11T17:23:35ZWhy does Floyd Mayweather never wears sponsors advertising on his fight outfit??
<p><br><br><br>Well, know this is kind of funny but actually is just the question to anybody who knows, I mean, Almost all the fighters I´ve seen have propaganda on their robes, their trunks, even painted propaganda on their body.</p>
<p>For example Canelo when he was against Trout had the "Corona" advertise on the belt of his trunks, and had patchs of "telmex" and all that stuff, Trout too had some advertising on his trunks but didn´t really paid attention to what was.</p>
<p>But I really can´t recall Floyd having any advertising at all on his fight clothes, Does anybody know why?</p>
<p><br><br><br>Well, know this is kind of funny but actually is just the question to anybody who knows, I mean, Almost all the fighters I´ve seen have propaganda on their robes, their trunks, even painted propaganda on their body.</p>
<p>For example Canelo when he was against Trout had the "Corona" advertise on the belt of his trunks, and had patchs of "telmex" and all that stuff, Trout too had some advertising on his trunks but didn´t really paid attention to what was.</p>
<p>But I really can´t recall Floyd having any advertising at all on his fight clothes, Does anybody know why?</p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/11/4321890/why-does-floyd-mayweather-never-wears-sponsors-advertising-on-hisDavid Em D2013-05-10T20:33:43Z2013-05-10T20:33:43ZMMA VS. Boxing: Natural Instinct Vs. Multiple Disciplines Vs. Reality Vs. Fantasy
<p>I don't care what Jon Jones condescendingly says during a radio interview when asked about boxing and mma and whether or not one is closer to an actual real fight than the other. Reality might have something to say about Mr. Jones and his arrogant response to an otherwise run of the mill moronic answer that only a moron would ask. The truth is boxing and mma both resemble aspects of a "real fight" because in real fights I would imagine punches are thrown and take downs are a plenty. I have never seen a fight outside of maybe the light saber battles on Star Wars where punches weren't being thrown with bad intentions and the two quarreling parties didn't end up grabbing each other and going to the ground at some point.</p>
<p>I don't care how far in the tank you are when it comes to boxing or mixed martial arts, if you don't know how to throw a punch or aren't strong enough to keep someone from taking you to the ground, when it comes to a fight you're a screwed pooch. </p>
<p>You also have to take into account the natural instincts and responses that take place in a "real fight". In real fights it more resembles stages on Streets of Rage than the Octagon. What some mixed martial arts fans and fighters don't realize is that unlike the UFC, there are no unified rules in a back alley brawl or some parking lot dispute over a chick. If I see a trash can, beer bottle, a thick branch, something I can use to inflict as much pain as possible, if you as my opponent won't take that into consideration I deserve to whoop your butt based on that alone. In a "real fight" weapons are almost always expected to be at the ready whether its a convention weapon like a knife or a gun, or something improvised.</p>
<p>Reality allows me to ask such a question as this: Would you rather break into Mike Tyson's home or the home of Anderson Silva? A smart person would say neither. Even if Anderson Silva is a mixed martial artist and Mike Tyson is only a boxer, both know how to fight and could just as easily exercise the same level of damage to someone looking to rob their house. You can't measure those scenarios because if you know who Mike Tyson is then you know how he operates when it comes to throwing hands. Same goes for Silva, he's a very deadly individual.</p>
<p>You have just as slim a chance in beating Floyd Mayweather in a street fight as you do Jon Jones. It has nothing to do with what type of combat sport they're involved in and everything to do with the fact that both guys can fight period. </p>
<p>I'm sure over the history of the sport boxers have been involved in bar fights or wherever else you can fight outside the ring. And I'm sure said boxers were pretty confident in those situations. Like I said Jon Jones can take someone down but when that person grabs a bottle and smashes it across his head then what? Now reality kicks the door down.</p>
<p>We gotta stop thinking like we're in a movie or some video game. If you get into a bar fight you won't have this cleared space where you can perform clean mma techniques and just walk away unharmed. Odds are you're either going to get hurt real bad, get killed with a weapon, beaten to a bloody pulp by a large group of people, or all of the above will happen to the person you're beefing with.</p>
<p>This isn't a Steven Seagal movie where all the fight scenes are choreographed and the punches and kicks land exactly where the director wants them to land. Once someone grabs you and you end up on the concrete you don't know what's going to happen. You might have an idea what you want to have happen but those predetermined mental narratives you create before a fight very rarely if ever come to fruition.</p>
<p>A majority of street fights, aka "real fights" end in more people getting involved than first anticipated, death, or something both. You might know Judo and Muay Thai but I have yet to see a Judoka hip toss a bullet.</p>
<p>Jon Jones is wrong on this issue. If you're a professional fighter in general you have the inherit advantage.</p>
<p>Case closed.</p>
<p>I had to write this because for one I agree with Brent Brookhouse in what he wrote on Bloody Elbow. And two, people who follow mixed martial arts and most mixed martial artists themselves foolishly believe that if someone grabbed Floyd Mayweather or some other boxer by the shirt or tried to wrestle them down, said boxer wouldn't know how to fight back....but that's not reality now is it? Try grabbing Floyd Mayweather like there's something wrong with you and see if he won't respond in kind. You might walk away with some serious physical trauma. BECAUSE HE CAN FIGHT!!!!!!</p>
<p>Rant over, or a rant or debunking a stupid myth?</p>
<p>I don't care what Jon Jones condescendingly says during a radio interview when asked about boxing and mma and whether or not one is closer to an actual real fight than the other. Reality might have something to say about Mr. Jones and his arrogant response to an otherwise run of the mill moronic answer that only a moron would ask. The truth is boxing and mma both resemble aspects of a "real fight" because in real fights I would imagine punches are thrown and take downs are a plenty. I have never seen a fight outside of maybe the light saber battles on Star Wars where punches weren't being thrown with bad intentions and the two quarreling parties didn't end up grabbing each other and going to the ground at some point.</p>
<p>I don't care how far in the tank you are when it comes to boxing or mixed martial arts, if you don't know how to throw a punch or aren't strong enough to keep someone from taking you to the ground, when it comes to a fight you're a screwed pooch. </p>
<p>You also have to take into account the natural instincts and responses that take place in a "real fight". In real fights it more resembles stages on Streets of Rage than the Octagon. What some mixed martial arts fans and fighters don't realize is that unlike the UFC, there are no unified rules in a back alley brawl or some parking lot dispute over a chick. If I see a trash can, beer bottle, a thick branch, something I can use to inflict as much pain as possible, if you as my opponent won't take that into consideration I deserve to whoop your butt based on that alone. In a "real fight" weapons are almost always expected to be at the ready whether its a convention weapon like a knife or a gun, or something improvised.</p>
<p>Reality allows me to ask such a question as this: Would you rather break into Mike Tyson's home or the home of Anderson Silva? A smart person would say neither. Even if Anderson Silva is a mixed martial artist and Mike Tyson is only a boxer, both know how to fight and could just as easily exercise the same level of damage to someone looking to rob their house. You can't measure those scenarios because if you know who Mike Tyson is then you know how he operates when it comes to throwing hands. Same goes for Silva, he's a very deadly individual.</p>
<p>You have just as slim a chance in beating Floyd Mayweather in a street fight as you do Jon Jones. It has nothing to do with what type of combat sport they're involved in and everything to do with the fact that both guys can fight period. </p>
<p>I'm sure over the history of the sport boxers have been involved in bar fights or wherever else you can fight outside the ring. And I'm sure said boxers were pretty confident in those situations. Like I said Jon Jones can take someone down but when that person grabs a bottle and smashes it across his head then what? Now reality kicks the door down.</p>
<p>We gotta stop thinking like we're in a movie or some video game. If you get into a bar fight you won't have this cleared space where you can perform clean mma techniques and just walk away unharmed. Odds are you're either going to get hurt real bad, get killed with a weapon, beaten to a bloody pulp by a large group of people, or all of the above will happen to the person you're beefing with.</p>
<p>This isn't a Steven Seagal movie where all the fight scenes are choreographed and the punches and kicks land exactly where the director wants them to land. Once someone grabs you and you end up on the concrete you don't know what's going to happen. You might have an idea what you want to have happen but those predetermined mental narratives you create before a fight very rarely if ever come to fruition.</p>
<p>A majority of street fights, aka "real fights" end in more people getting involved than first anticipated, death, or something both. You might know Judo and Muay Thai but I have yet to see a Judoka hip toss a bullet.</p>
<p>Jon Jones is wrong on this issue. If you're a professional fighter in general you have the inherit advantage.</p>
<p>Case closed.</p>
<p>I had to write this because for one I agree with Brent Brookhouse in what he wrote on Bloody Elbow. And two, people who follow mixed martial arts and most mixed martial artists themselves foolishly believe that if someone grabbed Floyd Mayweather or some other boxer by the shirt or tried to wrestle them down, said boxer wouldn't know how to fight back....but that's not reality now is it? Try grabbing Floyd Mayweather like there's something wrong with you and see if he won't respond in kind. You might walk away with some serious physical trauma. BECAUSE HE CAN FIGHT!!!!!!</p>
<p>Rant over, or a rant or debunking a stupid myth?</p>
http://www.badlefthook.com/2013/5/10/4319656/mma-vs-boxing-natural-instinct-vs-multiple-disciplines-vs-reality-vsSweetScientific