Messages posted by: Tyrant

Well VET and RISING STAR are a bit vague...maybe I need different words?

In the "vet" category, you'd have guys who have been playing for a couple + years AND guys that are of elite status..these guys are those who have been playing for a few years and/or have reached elite status

Larry
Unstoppable
HTF
M.A.Barrera
Tyrant
Red Viper
Nigel Benn

vs guys who are not necessarily "new", but who have made a great name for themselves and are showing great promise...these guys could be rising stars who have played for 1-2 years

Reaper
Oscar Dela Hoya
Ray Johnson
Chrille
ye man
Yacoob
Boxa
Jigsaw
Eddie

^That is no final list, but just trying to clarify myself...not sure if Veteran and Rising Star are the best terms...but it is not about 1+ years experience vs 2 months experience...

it is more so "recognized" elite/vet (few years)/HOFers VS top players of today/1-2years exp/etc

My thought would be to try to match evenly...so whoever is considered the best of the Rising Stars group would face one who is considered the best of the Vet group...etc...

Feel free to respond. Trying to sort this out.

Ray Johnson wrote:

monkeytail wrote:Tyrant you powder puff even Sugar Ray Leonard in contender knows the TKO or KO is worth more than a dec... If u lose by knockout be it 1 or 3 you were not man enough to finish the fight on your feet in the ring. Do u want a tourney of runners or fighters?? Not being able to finish the fight is worth more than being able to run for 12 rds and get a decision.

Does the average boxing fan want a JT fight like he had Spinks or do they want to watch a fight like the one with Pavlik.

JT could make PPV in a rematch with Pavlik. Do u think people would pay for a replay of the Spinks fight?

True, but boxing is different to OB. In OB you can come back from 4-0 in knockdowns on the last round. In real life there is a small chance you'll get a knockout on your opponent. So yes, a KO is worth more then a decision but only in real life.

It means something both ways...but it is harder to win a tough decision, to win via dominant decision, or knock your opponent down 5 more times than yourself than to suddenly land two big left hooks...

I am not saying a KO isn't meaningful..I just think it deserves the least points Monk

monkeytail wrote:Tyrant you powder puff even Sugar Ray Leonard in contender knows the TKO or KO is worth more than a dec... If u lose by knockout be it 1 or 3 you were not man enough to finish the fight on your feet in the ring. Do u want a tourney of runners or fighters?? Not being able to finish the fight is worth more than being able to run for 12 rds and get a decision.

Does the average boxing fan want a JT fight like he had Spinks or do they want to watch a fight like the one with Pavlik.

JT could make PPV in a rematch with Pavlik. Do u think people would pay for a replay of the Spinks fight?

Just as you run into a problem with guys just boxing to a decision to get the 2 points...you run the risk of guys just surviving after getting beat up in order to not get KOed...

so there is give and take either way...

I just choose KO to be less points because ANYBODY can land a shot out of no where if they are behind..

at least a decision is either more definitive or shows a competitive full length fight on paper...meaning both men actually tried

a KO yes is exciting, but a fighter well ahead can get caught with one punch vs a fighter who is getting beat up and ONLY going for a cheap KO win....the fighter who was losing badly may not deserve a lot of points just for landing a well timed left hook or throwing it and hoping it lands

you say people will just run...no they won't...because the MOST points you can get is through TKO...meaning guys WILL go for technical knockouts...it won't all be runners...

punchers can go for TKOs for the most points...boxers/counter punchers can go for TKOs through breaking down their opponents..

Welcome back kid.

yeah Larry...Fatny is something else...

I completely agree Ray...thanks

Winning a decision shows more than a KO does...it means that either you were dominant, or "pulled through" in a tough and close fight...

I put TKO as the most because that REALLY says you "went for it" and earned it..

a KO can happen anytime regardless of whether you are doing well or not...

so

TKO - 3
DEC - 2
KO - 1

Another interesting dynamic is that a fighter who just wants to try to win by left hook KOs....they MAY win...but it won't do as much for their team if they go for what some deem to be the "lucky" KO

I am thinking of a tourney, but am more partial to a war. During the last tourney I held, I mentioned a possible...

Vets vs Rising Stars war. Kind of like a world cup.

I see this as maybe 8 or more fights total....maybe 8-12 fights.

1. Vet vs Rising Star
2. Vet vs Rising Star
3. Vet vs Rising Star
4. Vet vs Rising Star
5. Vet vs Rising Star
6. Vet vs Rising Star
7. Vet vs Rising Star
8. Vet vs Rising Star

Each side would gain points for their wins.

I could take it a step further where you get points based on HOW YOU WIN.

A TKO gains you 3 points, a KO gains you 2 points, a decision gains you 1 (regardless of whether it is close or dominant)

EXAMPLE - First Round - 8 Fights

1. Vet vs Rising Star - VET WINS via DEC - 1
2. Vet vs Rising Star - VET WINS via DEC - 1
3. Vet vs Rising Star - RISING STAR WINS via TKO - 3
4. Vet vs Rising Star - RISING STAR WINS via KO - 2
5. Vet vs Rising Star - VET WINS via DEC - 1
6. Vet vs Rising Star - VET WINS via KO - 2
7. Vet vs Rising Star - RISING STAR WINS via DEC - 1
8. Vet vs Rising Star - RISING STAR WINS via KO - 2

RISING STARS - 8
VETS - 5

(so even with an even Win/Loss record, HOW you win can change everything)

So RISING STARS have the advantage...

It is not over there though...

Then we have the FINISH THEM OFF round in a series of three fights.

The team with the highest points then gets the opportunity to pick and choose any 3 from their team vs any 3 from the other team.

Based on the example above where the Rising Stars ended up with the most points...the Rising Stars have the advantage and can choose the 3 strongest from their Rising Star team to face who they think are the 3 weakest on the Vet team.

This will be 3 fights. In this round, HOW you win means nothing. Just WIN or LOSE.

1. Vet vs Rising Star - VET WINS
2. Vet vs Rising Star - RISING STAR WINS
3. Vet vs Rising Star - VET WINS

VETS - 2
RISING STARS - 1

With this example, the Rising Stars got first advantage, but the Vets prevailed.

What do you guys think? This whole TKO/KO/DEC points system is just to add a little dynamic as opposed to another tourney or a regular "get a point for your team if you win"

mike watson wrote:

Tyrant wrote:I would go with Pernell...

half the people who say Willie Pep, say it because that is what they read...I've barely seen any video of him...so based on what I have seen...Sweet Pea, prime Ali and Mayweather

they all are great defensively in close and with their own moves...

Ali was great with leaning from punches.
Floyd is great in the pocket with his shoulder roll.
Pernell was great with movement, ducking and slipping.

oh pep was a genius he didnt have the natural movement ...he was clinically flat footed so to defend himself he would jab in and move out and duck very low using his lower centre of gravity to use for him.

he was almost impossible to hit cleanly and the only person to do that was sandy saddler who was a scary mutherfucka.

5'9 very lanky had a short reach but a big punch and a brutal attitude. he basicly (and im not jokingpicked pep up and threw him into a corner and threw lowblows ,headbutts ,elbows everything to make this a horrible fight for pep...he crushed him and basicly ripped willie apart.

in the 2nd fight saddler i have been told only hit pep 32 times to peps (around) 250 punches landed

pep was beutiful to watch he would sit on the ropes and just block and dodge everything but he was just in an era when the biggerwieght divisions were taking over and the lower wieghts were getting less and less airtime.

a shame becuase the footage would of been unbeilvable.

again, like I said...it would be nice to see all of that...so I just speak based on what I've seen...and too bad he doesn't really have footage

I call you any other internet fan who's "prediction" or guess happened to come to fruition

great fight though

mike watson wrote:

Tyrant wrote:This is a very tough pick...but I am picking Taylor...Pavlik is a good and hungry fighter, but we know more of what Taylor has than Pavlik....

his destruction of Miranda was impressive...but as flawed as Taylor is, he has fought Hopkins (future HOFer, undisputed mw champ and #1 p4p at the time) x2, Winky (future HOFer, top 3 P4P, undisputed jr mw champ), tough chinned southpaw Kassim Ouma, and slick IBF jr MW champ Spinks.

Some say he has been protected, I disagree...

will be competitive, but I pick Taylor in a close/good fight

well pavlik is an undercard fighter one of the guys who have a name to knock out a journeyman for viewing time for fans.

he can hit very hard and has great technique for a slugger...well better than miranda i say.luckly for kelley. miranda fought sombody he didnt know about and stepped on a land mine when he noticed his opponant hits just as hard as him.

but taylors chin is rock solid he can take a big punch and isnt a small man for the wieght either. like other fighters pavlik has fought.

a tough fight but taylors power jab and more schooled approach will win him a figh...either way taylor isnt staying at middlewieght and is going to go to super middlewieght...so joe calzaghe should really show his mantel

Well as much as I like Taylor...it is a stretch to say his chin is rock solid and can take a big punch....he hasn't been hit by a big puncher.. Hopkins and Winky are great fighters, but not big punchers

I would go with Pernell...

half the people who say Willie Pep, say it because that is what they read...I've barely seen any video of him...so based on what I have seen...Sweet Pea, prime Ali and Mayweather

they all are great defensively in close and with their own moves...

Ali was great with leaning from punches.
Floyd is great in the pocket with his shoulder roll.
Pernell was great with movement, ducking and slipping.

I see no harm in people trying to add some more dimension to the social aspect of the game...

shouldn't discourage these guys for trying to do something different

Julian Jackson
Bob Foster
Joe Louis
Shavers
Hearns
A. Moore

are some of the best for sure...to me P4P does not exclude Heavyweights...

This is a very tough pick...but I am picking Taylor...Pavlik is a good and hungry fighter, but we know more of what Taylor has than Pavlik....

his destruction of Miranda was impressive...but as flawed as Taylor is, he has fought Hopkins (future HOFer, undisputed mw champ and #1 p4p at the time) x2, Winky (future HOFer, top 3 P4P, undisputed jr mw champ), tough chinned southpaw Kassim Ouma, and slick IBF jr MW champ Spinks.

Some say he has been protected, I disagree...

will be competitive, but I pick Taylor in a close/good fight

Man I wish I had some old fights. I have some nice combination knockouts. Accurate combination knockouts too.

as HTF said...P2P has worke d out without issue in the past