Fighters who got f'd up in victory.

[Warlord]

My post "didn't make sense" to you. I know that. That's why I clarified it for you. But in your mind clarification is just me "twisting" things around, so you can fuck right off because we've got nothing left to say at this point.

In intelligent discourse, debate and conversation is moved forward by the exchange of ideas. When those ideas aren't expressed clearly, or not clearly understood, it is right and in fact expected that the participants rephrase them in a way that makes sense.

You're like a fucking infant, though, dismissing anything and everything that runs contrary to what you wished I'd said, because what you wished I'd said is infinitely easier to debate than what I actually said.

Your intellectual dishonesty reaks of weakness. Why don't you just debate what I've said in its entirety, instead of just cherry picking a solitary portion of it? Seriously?

I said it DAYS ago. Find a fighter who LOST (not won) on the scorecards, fucked his opponent up (my definition of beating pillar to post, not yours, which just means cut), and took no damage in return. Because that's what I was arguing FROM THE BEGINNING, i.e. BG's retarded notion that Lennox Lewis somehow magically "fucked up" Vitali despite the fact that he was down on the cards and taking damage himself.

You've conveniently chosen to ignore that argument, and focused on the completely imaginary argument where you've painted me as someone who said a fighter can't both win and get hurt in the process. Which, of course, I NEVER said.

What I said was, find a fighter who LOST a legitimately scored fight, fucked his opponent up, yet took no damage in return.

[BrutalBodyShots]

Right, so first you said:

(05-10-2015 01:26 PM)Warlord Wrote:  ...how can you you "fuck someone up" and also be behind on the judges' scorecards?

And then clarified it to mean:

(05-14-2015 10:39 PM)Warlord Wrote:  What I said was, find a fighter who LOST a legitimately scored fight, fucked his opponent up, yet took no damage in return.

Two very different things. That's where the confusion came from way back on Page 2 of the original thread.

[Warlord]

The confusion came in on page 2 and was clarified in my very next post. Yet you continued and continue to argue semantics instead of my actual point. Are you going to address what I've clarified and have been saying since page 2 (your own words) or are you going to continue to argue the one post you admittedly referenced as confusing to you.

I mean, seriously dude, what do you want? I clarified my stance because it was obvious you missed the point. If you don't want to address it, fine. Just say so and shut the fuck up.

[ViperSniper]

(05-14-2015 09:17 PM)TheFonz Wrote:  To get some perspective Meldrick Taylor was in route to winning the fight with Chavez while getting fucked up.

It was a very odd fight the way it unfolded (not just because of the ending). I felt that Taylor put a beating on Chavez for 12 rounds where as Chavez only started putting his beating on in the last 4 rounds (still losing them, bar the last of course).

It's easy to say Taylor got f'd up because he did, but it was Chavez who won the fight. I think Chavez copped an ass beating in that fight to a point of being f'd up, but won the fight.

I guess alot of wars and comeback wins would qualify for this, but im sure there are many other examples that don't fall there either.

For me the big standouts for me are Bradley against Provodnikov and Abraham against Miranda.

[Romulus9]

I think both Bowe-Golota fights, ESPECIALLY the first one, qualify. But it's sort of a technicality because it was a DQ in both fights.

Bowe got beaten half to death for 15 out of 16 rounds, had what was left of his career, physical well-being, and sanity ruined, and has two wins to show for it because Andrew Golota is an absolute moron.

[ViperSniper]

A wins, a win i guess Rom.

[blackbelt2003]

Yeah, Bradley-Provodnikov is a perfect example of a fighter being fucked up but winning, because Bradley got well and truly beat up in that fight.

Although, and at the risk of getting involved in the Warlord/BBB argument here...this fight only qualifies to answer Warlord's FIRST statement, because neither man came out unscathed and both put out some hurt in there. Therefore this fight wouldn't qualify to Warlord's SECOND statement.



Black

[BrutalBodyShots]

I already did address it Warlord. Your two statements are so dramatically different that they both yield completely different discussions. The second statement is just as bogus as the first, because obviously if a fighter LOSES a fight on the cards, order to do so, he must have taken damage. How much damage is arguable, and whether or not you mean visible damage, (cuts, bruises, swelling etc) or not isn't clear. Whether or not he "fucked up" his opponent in the process is a completely different, separate argument. Regardless, any fighter that loses a fight had to take damage in order to lose it; fights don't exist where no one throws a punch and is scored purely on posturing.

So, I guess looking back to page 2 of the original thread since I found your second "clarified" statement dramatically different yet equally as humorous as the first I continued the debate with you.

---

(05-15-2015 04:21 AM)blackbelt2003 Wrote:  Although, and at the risk of getting involved in the Warlord/BBB argument here...this fight only qualifies to answer Warlord's FIRST statement, because neither man came out unscathed and both put out some hurt in there. Therefore this fight wouldn't qualify to Warlord's SECOND statement.
Black

Are we defining "unscathed" as having taken damage yet don't have any scratches/marks on you to show for it? That must be his definition of it, as every fighter that loses a fight by definition must have taken damage in the process as that's how fights are scored. Perhaps this is the part that confused me and kept the dead horse beaten for so long.

[damarvelous1]

Most of us understand how one can be physically fucked up yet win the fight on the scorecards. No need to continue with this debate. There's really only one person who disagrees and he's not changing his mind. Let's just move on!

[Warlord]

(05-15-2015 07:38 AM)damarvelous1 Wrote:  Most of us understand how one can be physically fucked up yet win the fight on the scorecards.

The argument wasn't about how one can be "physically fucked up", and never was. I stated, ad nauseam, that if you wanted to say his face was fucked up, I've got no problem with that.

The problem was with a select few of you shitting out the line "Lennox fucked Vitali up", which is a patently false turd of a statement shit out in some retard attempt to try and paint the fight in a different light.

(05-15-2015 07:38 AM)damarvelous1 Wrote:  No need to continue with this debate. There's really only one person who disagrees and he's not changing his mind. Let's just move on!

DMarv, come on man. You're welcome to your own opinions, but not your own facts. What exactly was it that led you to this felonious conclusion, poor reading comprehension or poor math skills? I for one blame upbringing.

(05-10-2015 09:26 PM)torvix2000 Wrote:  I think Warlord was referring to an emotional/psychological type of fuck up. It was true that Vitali was physically fucked up but Lewis saw him asking the ref for more rounds. Lewis knew then that in a rematch he would have the toughest time of his life. So, he retired.

(05-11-2015 05:30 AM)blackbelt2003 Wrote:  I think both men were putting hurt on each other. I'm pretty sure Vit would say he was fucking Lewis up by outboxing him and Lewis would say he was fucking Vit up by hurting him and busting up his face.

Black

(05-11-2015 05:55 AM)Fitz Wrote:  I don't really think Vitali got fucked up either, just his eye did from one shot. So I do kinda agree with Warlord on this one.

I just personally consider someone getting fucked up is taking a battering and busting someone up over a period of a fight, not really opening a huge cut with one shot.

(05-11-2015 06:49 AM)ViperSniper Wrote:  I wouldn't say Vitali himself got fucked up but his eye definitely was. It was one of the worst I've seen.

(05-14-2015 10:50 AM)ROLLDEEP Wrote:  My definition of being f'd up is a one sided beat down - not so much of a give and take fight like this one was.

(05-14-2015 12:25 PM)JONdaCON Wrote:  Geeze his face looks like a virgin's vagina after losing it to a group of rugby players.

But the picture is out of context. Seeing the aftermath its easy to say "damn he got fucced up"... but conversely, just cuz he got a damned good cut(s) doesnt mean he was fucced up.

Watching the fight in its entirety, Vitali was winning up until that point and looked in more control of the fight imo.

With that being said, Cuts dont constitute being 'fucced up'... Marquez looked more "fucced up" in the 4th Pac fight, bloodied, battered and beaten. Yet Pac was the one snoozing.

While i agree "you can get fucced up and still win"... i dont think JUST cuz Vitalis face looked like it went through a meat grinder he was fucced up. More of a freak accident. So i can see where WAR is coming from.

DMarv, who exactly is it agreeing with you? Brutal Buttlicker and BG? Really? You feel comfortable with that motley crew?

If I was in a dark alley and those two had my back, I'd give my wallet to the first semi-dangerous stranger I met.

I mean, Brutal might have your back literally, and I mean fucking literally, but I'm not sure how useful he'd be. I mean, if you got hit over the head, the only thing Brutal would do is start humping your unconscious corpse like Prince in a skins versus blouses pick-up B-Ball match while some young tough stole your wallet.



And BG? He may be more useful in the fight, but the worst thing about him is when you regain consciousness in the police station, you'll do so to find ol' BG Pedobear next to you in cuffs for possession of child pornography of some "14-year-old slut who was real hot."



So I mean, yeah, there you go bro. You're all synced up with Prince and Pedobear over there. Good one. I'd rethink my entire life if I were you.