Your opinion on boxing (the sport)

Not really. Crimes don’t have to be violent either. Even if 1 in 100 people were involved in a violent crime that’s only 1% of people participating in life. I will garuntee that 100% of people who participate in boxing will be involved in violence.

I would consider just about all violence to be savage as it is uncivil. Even if it takes a lot of mental understanding on how to beat someone up it’s still very unrefined.

I think the best way to deal with aggression is through mental discipline not punching another human and calling it a humane career. I can get into a mood of aggression but instead of punching a wall I suppress it. I’ve never seen a humble athlete.[quote=“Jcton, post:21, topic:50603”]
Chess and Boxing, Chess is a hugely complex game that uses the mind and a lot of self control, same with boxing. Just the fact they combined a supposedly “savage” sport with a sport considered to be the least “savage” is quite honestly cool.
[/quote]
I don’t see how this relates to our discussion.[quote=“Jcton, post:21, topic:50603”]
Hence there’s a heck of a lot of preconceptions to a sport like boxing, and if no one enjoyed it then it really wouldn’t be around.
[/quote]

The fact that someone enjoys something means nothing for it. I also don’t know why this is relevant.

Boxing requires some level of violence, so yes, 100% of people who partake in boxing, are partaking in violence. Thank you for this wonderful insight.

Listen man, it’s a free country. If people want to beat up each other for sport, then by jove, let them beat each other up for sport. If it makes them happy, and they understand and are fine with the risks, then they can do whatever the heck they want. Why do you get to tell people how to run their lives? Besides, it’s pretty narrow minded to claim that all athletes are filled with hubris.

4 Likes

I’m glad that my good description could help you understand a simple truth.

This is one of the worst arguments and one of the worst quotes I have ever heard. It sounds like something that could come from the mouth of a man talking about the legality of slavery.

Why does anyone get to tell people how to run their lives?

I will confidently say that the vast majority of athletes are cocky.

One thing I will note is that being cocky in a sport like Boxing is a huge detriment and would most likely lead to that boxer being floored. It’s not that all boxers aren’t cocky, but with this specific sport a lot of them learn how detrimental it is to be cocky and do what they can to humble themselves and learn what they can to improve.

3 Likes

That is the basis of america. You can do whatever makes you happy, as long as it doesn’t affect someone else’s happiness.

By the accepted definition of the word “Savage” I will need to disagree. Savage is used to describe uncontrolled and animalistic behavior.

Boxing is basically the exact opposite of what savage is.

If you’re going to be adding meaning to an already existing word it is best to preface that before any confusion.

1 Like

Well then all crimes would be savage because they are uncivil, even if they aren’t violent.

Just cutting of the quote there because you also mention punching a wall.

If that works for you, great. It doesn’t work for everyone, so don’t expect it to. It works for me, but my sister has to take her training sword at hit a tree to get her aggression out.

Have you watched Rocky?

Also, I missed one,

Wow, really? Who would have thought that people involved in a sport where you punch each other would be involved in violence? /s

You might as well say 100% of football players are involved in violence, or rugby players.

That’s a good use of the straw-man fallacy. We all know he wasn’t defending slavery, so there was no need to bring that up.

Because people have rights that should be protected. Nobody’s rights are being violated with boxing. Nobody has the authority to enforce their opinions on everyone else.

2 Likes

Ah, fallacies the savagery of logic/s :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

1 Like

Well, seems like we’ve got a heated debate in here.

For convenience’s sake I’ll only go back about ten hours or so.[quote=“Krelikan, post:23, topic:50603”]
I would consider just about all violence to be savage as it is uncivil. Even if it takes a lot of mental understanding on how to beat someone up it’s still very unrefined.
[/quote]

It’s not always on the boxer’s part, but there is a fair amount of actual strategy put into this that cannot be denied as simply nonexistent. Jack Dempsey utilized a ducking maneuver he would play repeatedly to get under his much bulkier opponents, and Mike Tyson implemented this “Dempsey Roll” to very quickly get under people’s guard. In this sport if you are quick and resilient you get very far, and whether you’re short or tall really depends on how you fight. Or vice versa.[quote=“Krelikan, post:23, topic:50603”]
I’ve never seen a humble athlete.
[/quote]

Then I suggest you learn your history. There have been scores of humble athletes in the world, and while they’re not always easy to find, they do exist.[quote=“Traykar, post:24, topic:50603”]
Listen man, it’s a free country.
[/quote]

That’s a poor argument.

If your defense for boxing existing is that people can do what they want, why not even more violent and possibly morally bankrupt sports?[quote=“Krelikan, post:25, topic:50603”]
This is one of the worst arguments and one of the worst quotes I have ever heard.
[/quote]

Laying it on thick tonight, are we?

As blunt as Krelikan was with this, he has a legitimate point. Logic like this only leads to anarchy.[quote=“Krelikan, post:25, topic:50603”]

Why does anyone get to tell people how to run their lives?
[/quote]

Neither statement relates to the conversation at all. The first one is just a jab and the second is a red herring.[quote=“Jcton, post:27, topic:50603, full:true”]
One thing I will note is that being cocky in a sport like Boxing is a huge detriment and would most likely lead to that boxer being floored. It’s not that all boxers aren’t cocky, but with this specific sport a lot of them learn how detrimental it is to be cocky and do what they can to humble themselves and learn what they can to improve.
[/quote]

Nice defense, but… That almost never happens. Mike Tyson is a really good example of that, with a nearly flawless record against hundreds of opponents and his arrogance and pride only grew until his world began falling apart, and he resorted to nibbling on the ear of some random guy, I think he was heavyweight champion at one point idk.

This is a joke I know who Evander Holyfield is

Also, it was both ears, at different points during the match, at which point the feds were brought into the ring and he began slugging cops in retaliation. Mike “Humbled” Tyson for ya.

The only notable example where that has occurred is George Foreman, and according to his own multiple testimonies that was a result of religion, not boxing.[quote=“ProfSrlojohn, post:28, topic:50603”]
That is the basis of america. You can do whatever makes you happy, as long as it doesn’t affect someone else’s happiness.
[/quote]

No, I think that was the basis of the hierarchy of Rome. They were certainly a civil bunch.

IS JOK, PLEASE LAF

Have you watched Rocky?
[/quote]

Rocky is a really cool movie, but from my understanding it has next to nothing to do with the actual Rocky Marciano. Also, Rocky was strong enough to get a reputation for breaking people’s bones, and he also never lost a fight, nor had a tie. Thirteen of his opponents retired after fighting him.[quote=“TBT_Emerald, post:30, topic:50603”]
You might as well say 100% of football players are involved in violence, or rugby players.
[/quote]

Well, they are. If you don’t think American Football is a violent sport, talk to anyone who’s retired from the profession. Same goes with Rugby; both sports are incredible rough-and-tumble sports which can have serious consequences.[quote=“TBT_Emerald, post:30, topic:50603”]
That’s a good use of the straw-man fallacy. We all know he wasn’t defending slavery, so there was no need to bring that up.
[/quote]

That’s actually not a straw man. Krelikan was pointing out that Traykar’s statement was so non-specific and held so many implications it could be seamlessly translated to a much more touchy subject, such as slavery, and hold the exact same application. He was addressing Traykar’s reasoning, if a bit earnestly.


There’s a lot of points that I didn’t cover in here, mostly because they were either correct or weren’t worth contesting. But the ultimate takeaway from this is that you’re all extremely defensive about your morals on the subject of boxing. Which is good! Nothing wrong with defending what you believe to be right or wrong. However, I feel like this topic is… A bit irrelevant. [quote=“Krelikan, post:1, topic:50603, full:true”]
I’m a little surprised that boxing is still around today. Probably one of the weakest sports. It’s just people beating each other up. Not sure how something like this is still legal. It feels like a game played by savages more then an organized sport.
[/quote]

Krelikan’s original point in the topic is that boxing is stupid and shouldn’t exist for being barbaric. Why he chose to target this instead of UFC or looking to history as to why barbaric, violent sports are uncivil and unjustifiable I’m not really sure.

This topic was never really to discuss boxing, but to argue about its existence. And if you’re really upset about boxing, is the right course of action to go on an internet forum and battle bitterly about the subject? I don’t think so. If you want boxing to stay, go away, change fundamentally, or any other number of things, do it by living the way you think should be exercised. Telling people what to do is not inherently wrong, but it’s far more important to be setting an example.

Now I’d actually like to discuss boxing, honestly. I don’t want to take the sport up anytime soon, but I like looking into the specifics and techniques behind it. It’s an interesting case study, if nothing else.

4 Likes

I personally love the technique pros have used to make themselves light on their feet. It keeps them moving and ready to dodge an incoming blow.

I also do realize there are people like Mike Tyson, hence why I stated not all boxers, implying there are cases like Mike.

2 Likes

If they know the risks and want to do it anyway, I’m not going to stop them.

So you wouldn’t try and stop a sport that allows orphans to fight to the death?

Are there sports that have orphans fighting to the death? Besides, if people do stuff that’s consider wrong or unlawful, one of the risks is that folks would try go stop them.

But you wouldn’t try and stop them. As long as they knew the risks you wouldn’t try to stop them at all

People can do anything they want, kill, steal, eat a hamburger, cross the street, pet a dog, do drugs, ride a bike, play hockey, ect. Every action has its risks and it’s rewards. It’s all just a matter of balancing the two. I could go rob a bank, but to me, the risk of going to jail outweighs the reward of quick cash. One of the risks might even be that the people in the bank decide to fight back. Both risks and rewards act as incentives for people to conform to societal norms. Most people don’t go murdering folks because the risk is higher than the satisfaction they would gain from committing the act. It’s the same with boxing: They want to box? And the risk is lower than the reward, they’ll box.

You didn’t answer his question. He wasn’t asking if you think people can do what they want. He’s asking you if you’re okay with corrupt sports.

You also didn’t respond to me.

Boxing =/= Orphan Bloodsports, one of the risks of having hypothetical Orphan bloodsports is that most people will generally not be okay with that. That, and the legal implications of having Orphan bloodsports. Besides, the rewards of helping to put a stop to hypothetical orphan bloodsports would be greater than the risks of me allowing hypothetical Orphan bloodsports to continue.

Response

That was kind of my point. You can’t be mad about boxing for being violent yet ignore most other sports. Also, what I quoted was just obvious, just like what I said about football and rugby.

2 Likes

What of everybody thinks like you though. What if everyone just thought that if they knew the risks then they wouldn’t oppose them.

I’m not sure what you’re saying