Nonito Donaire v. Carlos Zarate (118)

How does Nonito match up against not just one of the best banties of all time, but someone who'd own a rare size advantage over him?

 

NICE MATCHUP!!!!!!




.....if you're into diaper weight fellas, which I'm not..... :Hanzkiller:

 

Donaire.

 

I haven't watched midgets enough to care nor to make a proper pick.

The reason I responded to this thread was to get Jake excited and then disappoint him so that he would refrain from making more midget threads

 

That's pretty mean.

 

Great. Four responses (excluding my own) and the only one to make a prediction is a one-word post with no rhyme or reason to it.

THIS is why I don't create threads. :Wah:

 

And I have to ask, how does 5'6" and 5'8" qualify as midgets?

 

Funny you mention that... because next to Montiel, who has small midget like arms, I was thinking Donaire looks like a healthy man.

 

Because you can count their ribs and defeat them via punt

 

Nonito Donaire KO 1 UGTBK

 

That's the funny thing. That "midget" would literally knock Ugo out cold with 1 punch.

 

Correct. That doesn't make the midget worth watching though

 

So whats the criteria making somebody worth watching?

This seems much more like a 'sexy body obsession' than my preference for heavyweights not being leaden footed, obese sloths who demonstrably don't care enough to train properly for title shots.

*Breath Hut*Hut, breath, don't let the fatties take you to the bad place*

 

I really don't understand your viewpoint.

I prefer the lighter weights to heavyweights by a mile (my ideal weights are featherweight to welterweight).

The lighter weights are faster, more agile, have better stamina, throw more punches, are generally more skilled than heavyweights, and are generally involved in far more action packed fights.

Not only that but you have guys like Donaire and Pacquiao scoring brutal 1 punch KO's.

Why do you prefer heavyweights?

 

The criteria to me is whether or not the athlete is good enough.

This is the same reason I'd never watch women's football or basketball: yes, they are much better than me but they are not good enough to be worth watching. They train, they try their best, still, I am not interested.

When I see midgets fighting, I just know that any fat heavyweight would trample them and that takes away the element that you were watching something special. Fat heavyweights can be slow, clumsy or whatever but still you know that there is nobody on the planet who could beat them up at this sport. To me, that's the difference.

 

See above. All the aesthetic dimensions are on lighter weight's side, it is just the knowledge about the real world that does it for me. I like pretty much everything from super featherweight onwards, lower than that I just don't find it interesting

 

To be fair, I can't really bring myself to care about anything below junior bantamweight, either.

 

You didn't find Erik Morales at super bantam/feather interesting? Naseem Hamed, JMM, Barrera? The Vasquez/Marquez fights?

 

Time after time, I challenge you to explore this - the fact that the fighters' size matters to you (even though in every weight class except heavyweight, fighters are more or less the same size as thier opponents).

I'm going to go ahead and hypothesize that the point of view you have signals a dgree of shallowness among so many fans (including yourself) that it should be no surprise that the sport has degenerated into spurt-fighting, no inside-fighting, hold your way to win, impress with hand-speed, frankly shit-fighting, that the likes of you seem to be impressed with.

Basically, your lack of interest in lower weight classes is irrefutable evidence that you're not a boxing fan - you're a pro wrestling fan who cannot abide predetermined outcomes and scripted action.

You (and many millions other) masquerade as a boxing fan, spew superficial responses to what you see, and have managed to find someting all together unintended in the sport of boxing - something more resembling a novelty show than an actual sport.

You need to know that you are not a boxing fan. At least not one who is poised to improve its status or even to motivate its endurance.

Your boxing fandom comes from the same place that Pro Wrestling fandom comes from. Consequently, I can no longer give any weight to any input you may have on the sport of boxing.

 

This has zero ground. Not only is your theory very stretched, it is based on a thought that there is one correct way of boxing and one correct way and reason to like boxing. That is not how it works.

 

But at that point, you're no longer talking about a sport. You're now delving into barroom brawls and toughman contests.

I'm not gonna sit here and plead a case for the lower weight classes. If you're not a fan that's fine. But what I can't wrap my head around is the fact that someone would willingly ignore HOF talent just because they're not 100 lb. heavier.

My point being, there has to be an exception to every rule. Cruiserweight is forever a division destined to go nowhere, but it doesn't mean that certain fighters aren't worth watching.

 

I just love watching good boxing.

 

My point being, if we had NBA for guys under 5'7, we would see in many senses much better games and better athletes than now. These smaller guys would be quicker, they would probably handle the ball as well if not better, their passing game could be much faster and so on. And yet, few would watch them.

It is not that you are talking about the sport and I am talking about brawling. We both talk about sport, we just emphasize different aspects of it. You stress speed, body coordination etc. while I admire effectiveness. Different tastes and neither is more logical nor correct compared to the other

 

So then what's the difference between a bantamweight and a welterweight, since neither could beat a heavyweight?

 

There is no real logic behind it, as I said, it is the feeling you (I) get. Watching welterweights it feels that there is plenty of power and explosiveness included, watching bantams it just doesn't feel that way. Many others claim they don't follow flyweights or bantams and I suppose it is for the same type of reasons

 

I understand your point, I really do. I don't blame people for ignoring the strawweight division for the most part. And I'm not trying to preach as if there's a correct answer.

I'd actually put a lot of stock in your argument if this were a P4P debate and the point was how silly such lists really are.

Not sure I agree with your assessment of my style preference. I don't see an argument against Nonito Donaire being one of the most effective fighters in the sport. He doesn't just win, he wins big and does it in a crowd-pleasing manner. I've grown to admire the Klitschkos' ability to shut down an opponent at any given moment of a fight, even if their styles aren't aesthetically pleasing. But if you ask me who I'd rather see if inviting over a bunch of friends, Donaire is the much easier sell.

What I'm not a fan of are fighters who coast, who only fight portions of a round and are safety-first. I respect their ability to win, and what they do is effective in its own right. But I don't find it entertaining, which in the end is what matters to me when taking in a fight.

 

No way.

Basketball by design is a tall man's sport. Boxing is not.

 

It wouldn't be if there were height classes.

 

Fair enough Ugo. It's not something I can fully understand, because that train of thought hasn't even occured to me, but I appreciate the point of view.

Personally, I pretty much ignore the flyweight division. Pacquiao and Nonito are pretty much the only flyweights I've enjoyed watching.

Flyweight and below generally just seem a bit TOO small, almost like kids fighting.

Just curious though Ugo, with your POV regarding heavyweights etc, why do you watch anything below heavyweight? Have you always watched non heavyweights but just enjoy them less or?

 

But that's completely changing the game, whereas boxing has always been limited to weight classes - sure, far fewer back in the day, but still in place all the same.