Does hero worship offuscate logical reasoning?

Question

I am kind of new to this site (well not too new) but i have noticed that people have been making some really absurd statements on this forum, I mean, Jack Dempsey and Rocky Marciano were truly great in their time,but to say that Dempsey could KO Larry Holmes or that Marciano could beat Lennox Lewis is just a little too far fetched Marciano would not even be a heavy weight by today's standards and Dempsey fought in a time when good foot work and good combination boxing were rare, to compare these guys to the fighters of today and actually believe that they would win is simply irrational someone who truly loves the sport and its fighters would not be so biased in judgement and while I know that people are entitled to their opinions i also believe that people who claim to be boxing "experts" should know better than saying certain things. What are your thoughts on this?

Answer 1

Great question Rider,couldn't resist the temptation to answer,watch the thumbs down gang(blogbabba,and co)give loads of thumbs down,There are some absurd illogical and yes painful at times reasoning on here,they take it as a racial slur if I as a White fella say,in my opinion,that Mike Tyson as a 21 yr old champ would have probably KO'D  Rocky Marciano,unless people grow up and realise this statement is nothing more than common sense this section will deteriorate.

Answer 2

I'm going to 100% agree with you on the "hero" aspect.  That's just human nature.  I'm a Larry Holmes, Ray Leonard and Muhammad Ali fan, and as such, someone can make the case that I'm not thinking clearly when comparing those 3 to other greats.  I certainly see it in the Mike Tyson apologists that can't come to grips with their man never beating a top fighter, in shape and unafraid.

I'm only going to partially agree and partially disagree with you on the incompatibility factors in rating fighters from different eras.  I consider both Dempsey and Tunney to be the first fighters of the modern era we know today.  You mention footwork and combination punching, what I've noticed is that both Dempsey and Tunney do both better than a lot of today's fighter.  Watch those 2, and watch films of fights just 10 years earlier and you'll see a quantum leap in fighting skill.  You see a guy like Jack Johnson on film, there's no way that method would work today, but you can also divine from JJ's apparent natural athletic ability that he'd have no trouble adapting, and most likely would torment contemporary fighters as much as he did during his hey-day.

You can break down a hypothetical fight between Holmes and Dempsey, Marciano and Lewis.  I don't think you can break down a fight between Sullivan and Klitzhko.  Holmes beats Dempsey the same way Tunney did.  Lewis Marciano?  I find it hard to believe RM could even reach LL's chin with a powershot, but if he could, it would only take one shot for RM to cold-c**k LL.

But Dempsey's combinations were terrific, and from time to time we can see him doing what's known as "6 inch punch" and "3 inch punch", gaining great power with very little range. That skill has been lost on today's heavyweight.

Watch Dempsey use his feet to gain leverage for hitting power.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFxcNfXMA...

Answer 3

Word

Blogbabble

Answer 4

Sorry to tell you man but this boxing fourm is a JOKE!!!

Most people here dont even know the first thing about boxing they just come here to find out if they can be the next champion of the world.

Or when Apollo creed will make a comeback.

You sound like a true educated fan of the sport so i would suggest you go to another site if you want to have real boxing discussions.

Answer 5

There was an old man named Michael Finnegan,

He grew whiskers on his chin-egan,

The wind came out and blew them in again,

Poor old Michael Finnegan, begin again.

There was an old man named Michael Finnegan

He went fishing with a pin-egan,

Caught a fish and dropped it in-egan,

Poor old Michael Finnegan, begin again.

There was an old man named Michael Finnegan,

Climbed a tree and barked his shin-egan,

Took off several yards of skin-egan,

Poor old Michael Finnegan, begin again.

There was an old man named Michael Finnegan,

He kicked up an awful din-egan,

Because they said he could not sing-egan,

Poor old Michael Finnegan, begin again.

There was an old man named Michael Finnegan,

He got fat and then got thin again,

Then he died and had to begin again,

Poor old Michael Finnegan—STOP!

Answer 6

Boxing is an unpredictable sport. The big guys do have an advantage over the small guys but there are many times where the small guy won. Chris Byrd defeated Jameel McKline, Roy Jones Jr. over John Ruiz, Evander Holyfield one win over Riddick Bowe, Mike Spinks over Larry Holmes, Sultan Ibragimov over Shannon Briggs...the list goes on...Jack Dempsey, Rocky Marciano were cruiser weight by today standard but Evander Holyfield was also a cruiser weight moving up to heavyweight and did quite well. Chris Byrd, Roy Jones Jr. James Toney were middle weights who all did well in the heavyweight division. Mike Spinks was light heavyweight when he moved up to heavyweight without a tuneup fight and beat Larry Holmes. Ruslan Chagaev defeated Nicolay Valuev, huge size difference. I am not saying that the smaller guys always win but the possibilities are there.

Answer 7

I agree its pathetic how many times this is brought up and how many questions are asked like that. where you know half the people or more who ask these questions never even seen these guys fight.

Answer 8

I agree. I absolutely agree with you on this. In fact, I'm not sure what I could even add to your statement other then the fact that all the hero worshiping on this forum, and especially when it comes to Jack Dempsey and Rocky Marciano, is not only bias and irrational, but also very disrespectful and nothing more then a real slap in the face to modern boxers.

What makes it even worse, as you perceptively pointed out, is that this kind of thinking is mostly coming from people who are supposed to be historians and experts and set an example to others on this forum.

I'm not sure exactly, who made the remark that Jack Dempsey would KO Larry Holmes, but I remember all too well the Lennox Lewis vs Rocky Marciano question, which was asked by gannoway just a few days ago. While I found it incredibly interesting, once I've read the opinions of other members and forum experts on this subject, I was, in all honesty, simply too disgusted to give any sort of response.

Jack Dempsey and Rocky Marciano were great fighters for their time and they should be taken as such, but in comparison to Larry Holmes and Lennox Lewis, as far as pure boxing talent, skill level and ability is concerned, they were nothing.

Compared to Holmes, Jack Dempsey looked like a thug who just stumbled of the street into a boxing ring. No technique, all most no defense, complete predictability in the ring and total miss match in physique to begin with. And this is a man that would knock out Larry Holmes, a true master of this sport and one of the most complete boxers ever.

Same goes for Lewis vs Marciano, except for the fact that there is an even bigger difference in physique and most likely skill level and boxing talent between them. Lennox Lewis was completely superior to Rocky Marciano in every aspect of boxing and everyone who knows anything about this sport knows this very well, but yet, most of us are absolutely convinced that he would get knocked out in this match.

I don't know, I really don't. As you said, we are all entitled to our own opinions, regardless of how delusional, disrespectful or inconsiderate they may be and most people on this forum, when it comes to their heroes, seem to exercise that right to the fullest, I guess. That's all I can say.

Answer 9

I have noticed it too especially on this forum, but it is not uncommon for people to rally around the fighters they identify themselves with the most, as a matter of fact up until the 1960's there were still people who would have sworn that Jim Jeffries could beat Jack Johnson and that their fight was fixed and back in the 1980's many people rallied behind Gerry Cooney and actually believed he could beat a much more experienced and prime Larry Holmes even though many experts already knew the outcome of that fight, heck there are still Hatton fans who believe that hatton beat Mayweather in their last fight (don't ask me how....) so i guess people will always have a little bias for their favorite boxer,however i do not think it is fair to claim to be an  "expert" and be biased in opinon or to belittle the opinions of those who might be a lot less biased when it comes to certain fighters (for example all those thumbs down for guys who dare say that Marciano would loose against Lewis or that Dempsey could not possibly slug it out with Foreman)...... people need to understand that these guys were truly great boxers in their time but that does not make them supermen or undefeatable, boxing has changed a lot since then and so have a lot of the fighters people need to realize this simple fact before claiming to be "experts" in boxing and then giving an opinion that might be biased.