American boxer Day dies following brutal knockout

[bannork]

13 hours ago, jany123 said:

???? What amazes me, when reading the thread, is that posters seem to follow the same groupings as when discussing the trump.

 

the thugs who support boxing, support the trump. Perhaps off topic, but a curious observation none the less.... and I’m sure there’s a logical explanation 

The rational explanation is both the boxing supporters and Trump are brain damaged.

[JonnyF]

15 hours ago, stevenl said:

Very different to rugby. Many examples have already been given, sorry to see you don't understand.

 

I am convinced that the present climate will change professional boxing, and in the present form it will sooner or later be outlawed.

Yeah let's ban it and send it underground where it's much less regulated and hence much riskier. Great idea. 

[stevenl]

3 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Yeah let's ban it and send it underground where it's much less regulated and hence much riskier. Great idea. 

Who said that? 

I think e.g. head protection will become mandatory also at professional level.

[JonnyF]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

Who said that? 

I think e.g. head protection will become mandatory also at professional level.

Well you said "outlawed", I said "banned". Same thing is it not?

 

Head protection is not the craziest idea, but it would certainly make the sport less of a spectacle. You could also make them wear 20 ounce gloves but if there comes a point where a fighter can't break down his opponent over the course of 12 rounds then the sport will have fundamentally changed. These deaths are incredibly sad but also pretty rare when you consider the number of contests around the world each year.

 

An old school friend of mine has run a boxing gym for over 20 years and it's incredible to see the good that the sport does for people in terms of fitness, discipline, confidence etc. The sport does way more good than bad, but I'm all for reducing injuries if it can be done in a way that leaves the essence of the sport intact.

[kevin612]

This is a risky career, rip.

[stevenl]

26 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

Well you said "outlawed", I said "banned". Same thing is it not?

 

Head protection is not the craziest idea, but it would certainly make the sport less of a spectacle. You could also make them wear 20 ounce gloves but if there comes a point where a fighter can't break down his opponent over the course of 12 rounds then the sport will have fundamentally changed. These deaths are incredibly sad but also pretty rare when you consider the number of contests around the world each year.

 

An old school friend of mine has run a boxing gym for over 20 years and it's incredible to see the good that the sport does for people in terms of fitness, discipline, confidence etc. The sport does way more good than bad, but I'm all for reducing injuries if it can be done in a way that leaves the essence of the sport intact.

"Well you said "outlawed", I said "banned". Same thing is it not?" I said 'outlawed in its present form', you forgot those last words, and they make a big difference.

But I'm glad that later on you admit that changes are not out of the question.

[Matzzon]

2 hours ago, stevenl said:

Unfortunately it seems you can not comprehend the reasons for any criticism and don't understand the posts made.

So I have to understand the posts made, and change my opinion and my experience accordingly? Are you for real?

Instead tell me how much experience you have of martial arts that does not belong in the TV-sofa.

[stevenl]

10 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

So I have to understand the posts made, and change my opinion and my experience accordingly? Are you for real?

Instead tell me how much experience you have of martial arts that does not belong in the TV-sofa.

Again reading comprehension issues.

 

Of course you don't have to change your opinion based on posts made, but if you were to understand the reasoning of others that would be helpful in a discussion. But you don't have to agree with them.

[Matzzon]

3 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Again reading comprehension issues.

 

Of course you don't have to change your opinion based on posts made, but if you were to understand the reasoning of others that would be helpful in a discussion. But you don't have to agree with them.

No, I can not understand the reasoning, because there can not be anything to understand based on post made out of mostly sport channel watching and newspaper reading.

As I just tried to explain. Leave the sport to the ones that have more knowledge of it and have solid experience.

[stevenl]

5 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

No, I can not understand the reasoning, because there can not be anything to understand based on post made out of mostly sport channel watching and newspaper reading.

As I just tried to explain. Leave the sport to the ones that have more knowledge of it and have solid experience.

Disappointed that you don't understand 'it is a sport where the aim is to harm your opponent, in the long run that will not be accepted so things will have to change'.

Have a good day.

[JamesBlond]

19 hours ago, 55Jay said:

Surprised boxing and other combat "sports" haven't become a target for progressive crusaders and SJWs seeking to change or eradicate certain behaviors and social norms for, as they see it, the betterment and advancement of the human species. 

 

Save the trees, whales, end animal cruelty, domestic violence, drink driving, save the Earth from humans, etc.  (American) footballers have been pulled into the womb in recent years for the obvious risks involved there, but that concern and outrage hasn't found its way to blood sports for some reason.  Saving soi dogs gets more attention.  Funny old world, innit.

 

I do appreciate the training, fitness and tactical skill of boxers, as well as the technical aspects of MMA - moreso with the ground fighting.   But IMO, MMA is a far more grotesque spectacle, in particular when 1 fighter succeeds in knocking the other down to the deck...... and then jumps on and pins them down, and starts Hammer Fisting the fk out of them.  Things break, blood squirts, delicate, irreplaceable eyes are at huge risk yet this is totally accepted and we cheer them on until the poor schmuck either passes out or the Ref intervenes. 

 

It adds ZERO to the value of our species and "civilised" society and, in fact, we should be collectively embarrassed that we allow and cheer this kind of krap on.  If all contact/blood sports ended tomorrow, apart from the obvious, intertwined financial/employment aspects, our world would carry on just fine and, in fact, it would be an overall improvement.

Put a band-aid on that bleeding heart. We should be thankful there is still some machismo left in the world. Tough guys serve a social purpose, though in times of peace people will find their existence puzzling and we have to keep many of them in prison for their own good.

The Meekists are taking over. It's the new Marxism. And like Marxism, Meekism will only work if everyone in the world is equally meek. That will never be the case and if we're not careful, a tougher society will trample all over us (as is currently happening in Europe, by the way).

Don't watch this stuff if you don't like it. It is brutal - that's the whole point of it.

[Chomper Higgot]

2 minutes ago, JamesBlond said:

Put a band-aid on that bleeding heart. We should be thankful there is still some machismo left in the world. Tough guys serve a social purpose, though in times of peace people will find their existence puzzling and we have to keep many of them in prison for their own good.

The Meekists are taking over. It's the new Marxism. And like Marxism, Meekism will only work if everyone in the world is equally meek. That will never be the case and if we're not careful, a tougher society will trample all over us (as is currently happening in Europe, by the way).

Don't watch this stuff if you don't like it. It is brutal - that's the whole point of it.

A young man getting beaten to death is something we should all be thankful for!

 

There’s very many more ways than violence to be tough.

[JamesBlond]

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

A young man getting beaten to death is something we should all be thankful for!

 

There’s very many more ways than violence to be tough.

Boxing is already a sublimation of the urge to violence that is written by evolution in a portion of the population's genes. Boxing is a controlled outlet, but to remove every element of risk is to defeat the point.

The really tough guys want to risk their lives and if they don't do it in the boxing ring they will do it on the streets.

You can't emasculate society completely, and shouldn't try.

 

[Matzzon]

1 hour ago, stevenl said:

Disappointed that you don't understand 'it is a sport where the aim is to harm your opponent, in the long run that will not be accepted so things will have to change'.

Have a good day.

As history will tell you. The first things that they called sports and also started the betting circus was old Rome and the gladiators. That is as long fighting sports with a potential dangerous outcome has existed. Now, suddenly, you believe that will come to an end. Not a chance.

However, nice little virtual talk today. Let´s have it again some time. Have a great day! ???? 

[stevenl]

17 minutes ago, Matzzon said:

As history will tell you. The first things that they called sports and also started the betting circus was old Rome and the gladiators. That is as long fighting sports with a potential dangerous outcome has existed. Now, suddenly, you believe that will come to an end. Not a chance.

However, nice little virtual talk today. Let´s have it again some time. Have a great day! ???? 

At those times they were fighting without gloves. That has changed, and now gloves are used for protection, and for amateur boxing head protection is required. Why do you think the same head protection will not be required for professionals as well in the not so distant future.

[Matzzon]

23 minutes ago, stevenl said:

At those times they were fighting without gloves. That has changed, and now gloves are used for protection, and for amateur boxing head protection is required. Why do you think the same head protection will not be required for professionals as well in the not so distant future.

I actually do not know. It can happen, and I would not be against it. Although, I do not share your belief.

[Isaanbiker]

22 hours ago, transam said:

It can be a nice earner for some...

And very dangerous to the opponent's ears...????

[Isaanbiker]

29 minutes ago, rhyddid said:

What sport is that involve killing the opponent ?
A sport that shall be banned !

Muay Thai is way more dangerous, especially the knee kick. The use of legs has a lot more force than ordinary boxing

 

Should a sport that was invented 2,000 years ago be banned?

 

      If you believe that all should be banned, then include bungee jumping, skydiving and a lot more were death could be the result of it. 

 

Boxers know what they are doing and most of them are not planning to kill their opponents.

 

Shi_e happens and it happens to people who do not do any extreme sport.

 

   

[stevenl]

14 minutes ago, Isaanbiker said:

Muay Thai is way more dangerous, especially the knee kick. The use of legs has a lot more force than ordinary boxing

 

Should a sport that was invented 2,000 years ago be banned?

 

      If you believe that all should be banned, then include bungee jumping, skydiving and a lot more were death could be the result of it. 

 

Boxers know what they are doing and most of them are not planning to kill their opponents.

 

Shi_e happens and it happens to people who do not do any extreme sport.

 

   

Why are you comparing sports where the aim is to hurt an opponent, boxing, Muay Thai, to sports where accidents happen like bungee jumping?

[Isaanbiker]

14 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Why are you comparing sports where the aim is to hurt an opponent, boxing, Muay Thai, to sports where accidents happen like bungee jumping?

Because one poster would like to see boxing banned. Isn't bungee jumping, etc also dangerous because a lot could happen?

 

If all would be banned, life would be so boring, don;t you think?

[55Jay]

2 hours ago, JamesBlond said:

Put a band-aid on that bleeding heart. We should be thankful there is still some machismo left in the world. Tough guys serve a social purpose, though in times of peace people will find their existence puzzling and we have to keep many of them in prison for their own good.

The Meekists are taking over. It's the new Marxism. And like Marxism, Meekism will only work if everyone in the world is equally meek. That will never be the case and if we're not careful, a tougher society will trample all over us (as is currently happening in Europe, by the way).

Don't watch this stuff if you don't like it. It is brutal - that's the whole point of it.

"It is brutal - that's the whole point of it."

 

Well yeah, that was the point being made. Thanks.

 

I get your point though, and agree, tough guys will always be necessary as long as there are other tough guys.  Be interesting to see what the world would be like without them.  One thing from your example, at least the prisons would be less crowded.

 

Fighters don't always turn out to be reliable, all 'round tough guys though.   Cassius was a tough fighter, a champion among them.  Turns out he was more butterfly than stinging bee when it came time to pick up a rifle and fight. 

 

Also fair to say that some conflicts in our species' history began with tough talking, tough guy types.  When the time comes to raise an Army to put them down, guess who the job falls to.   Not-necessarily-tough expendables.

 

Then there's that other kind of tough, found in great numbers on-line among the MMA fan base, and elsewhere. 

 

 

 

[bannork]

2 hours ago, 55Jay said:

"It is brutal - that's the whole point of it."

 

Well yeah, that was the point being made. Thanks.

 

I get your point though, and agree, tough guys will always be necessary as long as there are other tough guys.  Be interesting to see what the world would be like without them.  One thing from your example, at least the prisons would be less crowded.

 

Fighters don't always turn out to be reliable, all 'round tough guys though.   Cassius was a tough fighter, a champion among them.  Turns out he was more butterfly than stinging bee when it came time to pick up a rifle and fight. 

 

Also fair to say that some conflicts in our species' history began with tough talking, tough guy types.  When the time comes to raise an Army to put them down, guess who the job falls to.   Not-necessarily-tough expendables.

 

Then there's that other kind of tough, found in great numbers on-line among the MMA fan base, and elsewhere. 

 

 

 

Cassius Clay read the Vietnam war well. Why should the black man go and kill the yellow man with whom he had no quarrel? 

Let the white man like Donald Trump go instead....only he didn't.

[car720]

21 hours ago, Matzzon said:

Still related to the thread and of course means that you belong to a minority. You should now that a person can not be a minority but only belong to one.

 

A lot of guts behind the keybord. In that case you belong to a vast majority, that would suddenly become very quiet when saying that directly to a person. Forgive me if I laugh. ????????????

This proves my point precisely.  If one were to confront you vis a vis I am sure that there would be an interval of about one second before you started throwing your fists around.  Although I wonder if you would be so quick if you faced an adversary who was just as willing to inflict injury upon you.

[Matzzon]

1 hour ago, car720 said:

This proves my point precisely.  If one were to confront you vis a vis I am sure that there would be an interval of about one second before you started throwing your fists around.  Although I wonder if you would be so quick if you faced an adversary who was just as willing to inflict injury upon you.

Never said anything about using fists or hitting somebody. Would not do that, so your "I am sure" turn into nothing of value real quick. What I meant was on the psychological level, that it´s not same comfortable to deal with real persons in todays world due to the ease of Internet.

In other words, you assumed that your point was proven. In reality the only thing that happened was that you assumed and were wrong.

Regarding you last sentence, it might be true. Although I´ve already stated my base and knowledge that is the ground layer of my statements. If you have been taking time reading that part. Yeah, then you would know that I am probably more sufficient and able to protect and minimise the injury, from a person that wish to inflict that upon me than the average guy. In other words. Good that you wonder, but I guess that´s what you have to keep yourself occupied with regarding that statement. 

Have a nice day! ????