What makes a "Tony"?

There is no other way to investigate it but to ask for official papers and if Chinese govermengt writes them, there is nothing you can do.

However, unlike using steroids, this didn't harm the other competitors, so I guess it is fine

 

because they can't prove their innocence, they must be guilty? nah man, that doesn't work. i can tell you right now: i've seen plenty of chinese university students who look about 12 years old. first time i turned up for work at the university that was employing me, i thought they'd brought me to a school instead.

honestly, you've got me pegged wrong nobes. i spend all day criticising china for the inefficiency and unfairness of their social systems. but this olympic thing is one area where the usual western prejudice is a bit too strong. it is not conclusive that those girls were under-age.

anyway sorry to detract from outlander's provocative thread.

 

on worrying about cotto's record being unfairly deflowered: prime roy jones lost that 0 on his record from getting disqualified against griffin - but still roy retained the mystique overall, and it didn't really diminish the respect that people have for prime roy. floyd has his 0, but the first castillo decision is controversial.

being defeated actually seems to add something to a boxer's character - ali, srr, srl, duran, ... they all lost and came back stronger. cotto's managed to lose, but actually in some sense will now have his 0 nominally restored to him. it's not great, and it's not fair, but boxing and life are so variable and multi-faceted, that unevenness is central. a simple matching up of records is never enough to decide who's better. we know that one always needs to look deeper and know a fighter on a fight-by-fight basis, not just on numbers and results. really this kind of ad hoc, nitty-gritty detail is something that adds to the drama, for me anyway. floyd has his 0, and yeah there won't be a floyd-cotto undefeated vs undefeated match now - but floyd's got that first controversial castillo decision, so his 0's got a question mark over it.

one sad thing is that tony-cotto was seen as a good fight, one with good rewatch value. but now it can't really be enjoyed again, because it all feels fabricated, like some snuff movie - even though there's a chance that tony wasn't even using the adamantium wraps.

 

Losing your "0" by DQ - after a knockdown - is a bit different than losing it in a Chavez-Taylor-like beating Cotto got.

If Cotto fully comes back from that, he's special.

 

yeah, i havent seen cotto since the fight. if he's damaged goods, that really is a tragedy.

 

As far as the Chinese gymnast thing goes - I can readily accept that the IOC basically gave up when everything the Chinese government produced showed the gymnasts were over 14 (of course). However, at least one Chinese publication cited the ages of some of the gymnasts as underage before the Olympics began, and perhaps most damning of all, the girl who won a few bronzes for China admitted on state-run TV that she was 14 at the time of the 2008 Olympics. That is tough to refute, although I suppose you could argue this girl was a gymnastics prodigy but too damn thick to know her own age. Like an idiot savant or something.

On the rest, I think it is interesting to point out that losses in boxing can result in improved devotion & drive, even mystique in the losing fighter. But I would again submit that that is only true when a fighter loses by something like a controversial DQ, or by controversial or very close decision. Because this only affects the wins/losses on a boxer's resume. It doesn't really hammer in the psychological nail of getting your ass kicked. You point out Roy Jones, and you are right that after his DQ loss to Griffin he came back with more fire than ever. But let's take the same Roy Jones after the first loss to Tarver - he was never the same. That fullout face-smashing KO did what the DQ could never do, and so I argue my case with Cotto.

I also agree that one of the saddest parts of this all is that it is rough to watch the fight again without that sinking feeling of it being tainted. And as you rightly point out, we may never know if Margarito actually beat Cotto fair and square. But that is the problem with lying cheats like him - you never know what to believe. Since his credibility and that of his close people is ruined, barring some sort of deathbed admission we may never truly know if the gloves were loaded against Cotto.

 

if we're thinking of the same report, the TV admission was from a different athlete, about her performance at sydney 2000. the inconsistent chinese media accounts about the 2008 athletes are par for the course; chinese journalists have shoddy standards, and there's usually no particular method to the madness. i'm editing a book compilation of chinese newspaper articles about the country's economic reform at the moment, and i have to fact-check all of it, because often statistics or quotes have been misrecorded, purely through unprofessionalism, not deliberate deception.

i certainly wouldn't be too surprised if He Kexin and the others were illegally under-age. but it's still up in the air, imo.

funny you mention chinese athletes being idiots - china's physically gifted are often brought up pretty much like that. from a very young age those who show athletic promise are taken out of normal education and do pretty much nothing but sport (with the parents' and child's assent of course). their basic language and mathematical skills are sorely lacking - if they don't make it as an athlete, they usually have no choice but to become a security guard or equally undemanding job. antithesis of the american system where you give college scholarships to athletes.

 

maybe he had the "special" wraps for Cotto...maybe not...most that likely he did...

 

I agree with evrything you've said, and the point you're making. But what's worse is the disregard that Margarito showed for Cotto's health and his career, and probably every fighter he's fought before.

I'm in the camp that believes that Trinidad was a "Tony" as well. And look what he did to Vargas physically, let alone psychologically. Vargas had granite chin prior to his fight with Trinidad. Subsequently, we see him knocked down by Rivera of all people and seriously hurt by Flores, hardly a hard puncher.

I think Vargas suffered nerve damage as a result of Trinidad's shenanigans. Cotto may have eluded such injury, but notheless, it shows a lack of character when an athlete is willing to put his opponent's health and career on the line, by cheating. Not to mention, the lack of faith it shows that Tony has in himmself.

Anyways, I agree with your generalization - just thought that in particular to boxing it's perhaps even more reprehensible when you consider that the opponent's or victim's livelihood is at stake.

 

i think he would've. for sure. consider the multitude of advantages gained from having artificially weighted gloves.

he can hit harder.

he can retain stamina.

he can intimidate his opponent with such power.

he can back his opponent up all night and control the pace of the fight with punching power his opponent has never experienced.

as he did to cotto, he can shut mosley's offense down.

 

Trinidad also ruined Mayorga another fighter with an IRON CHIN...that had never been drop/ko before.....Trinidad and Margarito are two different things...if anything was REALLY WRONG w/ Trinidad in the Hopkins fight he would been suspended.....or at least a hearing been schedule.

 

I agree. It is possible that if Margarito had loaded gloves he may have beat Mosley. It all depends how much more power that gives you. If it's that much of a difference he may have backed Mosley off and made him stay on his back foot. That would have played right into that cheaters hands. Who the fuck knows. I'm just glad the fucker not around anymore.

 

You're a joke, your mancrush idol has been linked to Balco and prior to that he had been caught with a banned substance in his urine sample, fucker is a cheat so fuck him along with the rest of the cheaters. I definitely see where your coming from though, it must hurt to know your boy got slapped over 12 rounds in his last fight, I don't try to rub it in but you honestly try to get my attention a lot for this particular reason using whatever you can.

 

He sure was. I remember that hook that Vargas took and you could clearly see that he saw the punch coming, it didnt catch him by suprise and it didnt even land on the chin, or snap his neck sidewards, it just landed on his cheek,.. but he started to hop like 'WTF, why have I been dettached from my senses?', it was a very unusual reaction, there was simply no compromise in Tito's hands, it wasnt just a ball of human fingers,.. the sick thing is,.. his groupies who take delight in hating the Mexican cheater, praise Trinidad with 'AWESOME POWER FROM THE GODS' and we'll regularly have a thread about 'who's career did Tito ruin the worst?'..

 

Could you please tell what of these things steroids can NOT do? They are meant for the very same purposes, which is to increase punching power, which means to hurt your opponent more.

The main difference might be that steroids also give you more stamina directly, which also means that you can hurt your opponent more

 

I'll post some links for you: I typed 'Roy Jones Balco' into google.

http://www.boxingscene.com/?m=show&id=2888
Long article. I personally thought it came across quite biased.

http://blogcritics.org/archives/2005/12/01/144006.php
Mentions Jones in passing along with Mosley and DLH. Writer shows no respect for boxers. Mentions them as an afterthought.

http://www.braggingrightscorner.com/freemanjones092704.html
This one appears to be written by a fan of boxing (Didn't read it all. It's long).

It should be noted that I would treat all of these links as personal opinion pieces. Not one is from a mainstream source. Almost everything else that came up was about Shane Mosley and Marion Jones.

Type in Shane Mosley Balco and you get links from ESPN, La Times and NY
Daily News.

:dunno:

 

firstly, i don't know that i said steroids weren't just as bad, or made any apologies at all for fighters who use them.

but the "kind" of steroids fighters use don't generally result in the body building figure we generally associate with steroid users. rather, they're used to energize the fighter, especially during training, so that he may achieve super human condition and be able to fight "hard" for all 12 rounds. i think we saw that in the ODH/Mosley II fight and also in many of Hopkins' fights, in which his opponent seemed to be of a different species than he.

so i don't disagree with you that it shows a disregard for the offender's opponent's health and his career, and as is the case with Margarito, it also shows a lack of faith the offender has in his own ability.

so i'd say we're on the same page. i guess steroid usage by a boxer doesn't seem as primitive or savage as loading his gloves with a foreign substance, but your point is still valid.

 

Ok, got you. I just wanted to hear some reasoning for the hypocrisy going on in here and since Xplosive and reed are unable to produce it I asked if you see the same way. Luckily you understand better

 

I definitely agree with you that it's a distinction without a difference. I'd chalk it up to an intellectual deficit rather than hypocrisy for those who can't understand that the two are equally criminal when it comes to the sport of boxing.

 

It's funny how when a legacy is on the line and a guy is well known and signed to a high profile contract people will discredit evidence even hide it, and be in denial, but when a guy is not so well known the book is thrown at him by the mainstream. You have guys who have had fights turned to No Contests because of doping, yet others get preferrential treatment.

 

Yeah, well if indeed Trinidad had some sort of loaded gloves against Vargas, it pretty much should put an exclamation point and an "I rest my case" on this thread. I mean, that fight not only ruined Vargas's undefeated record, it completely ruined him as a fighter. Completely.

If indeed Trinidad was cheating (which I am unsure about), what he did is indefensible and disgusting. Before that fight, Vargas was considered to have an iron chin. Even he was saying in interviews before the fight how Trinidad had been shaken multiple times, but he himself had never even been wobbled. And then after the fight - literally everything went down the tubes for Vargas, most especially the chin.

Maybe Cotto is just lucky his corner gave a shit enough to stop the fight before the 12th, unlike Vargas's people who basically let him suffer permanent damage.

Vargas is potentially the poster boy for why this thing got me so pissed off in the first place. These young fighters have to work so damn hard and risk so much to ever get to an elite level, and maybe have a chance to become an all time great, it is literally nauseating to me to think about some psycho going in there with loaded gloves delivering brain damage to them. Fuck that makes me mad.

@rooster - I think you are right about the gymnast I was thinking of being from 2000 Olympics. Although I suppose I could just use her instead as an example of cheating. On the other hand, based on what you said, she may genuinely not have known her age.

 

What does Any of this have to Do w/You LYING, Saying Roy was LINKED to BALCO, while REPEATEDLY FAILING to PROVE it???....



REED:dunno:

 

You say I'm lying, I say you're in denial.

 

I'm in Australia, neither Jones or Mosley are well known here and I don't remember the boxing side of BALCO making much noise here. Marion Jones got a bit of airplay though.

Was Jones alot more popular than Shane in the states? I had assumed they were around the same level.

 

Mosley was never popular as a DLH or Trinidad or Roy Jones here in the states and never was as big a draw either.

 

I knew he wasn't at DLH level in terms of draw. No one but Tyson is/was. I seem to remember SM being ranked high on the p4p lists and assumed he drew OK. I don't remember Roy being a massive draw either.

 

, because some bitch ( and no surprise that she's an american or else you wouldn't give a fuck ) couldnt even beat a girl younger than her ( fucking lame excuse if I ever heard one, I had heard complaints about overaged kid changing their age to compete in a lower age class, but to complain that your opponent is too young, not in some geriatric competition but on a stage where the best athlete in the world are supposed to be crowned, is fucking embarassing, I would just shut the fuck up and pray that she is indeed about my age and not that I couldn't even compete with a kid ) it makes it worse than doping.:doh::doh:

 

He didn't draw that well, I still remember Roycott back some years ago due to Jones fighting guys who shouldn't be on PPV for $40-50. Jones was far more popular than Mosley, and had the contract to fight guys like Julio Gonzalez on HBO PPV and such.

 

Cotto never traded with Margarito either, the way Vargas did with Trinidad. Vargas' biggest concern was to stand and fight in light of the criticism ODH received for essentially running from Trinidad.

But given what we know now, it's possible that Cotto's perpetual retreat against Margarito may have saved his health and his career. Not to mention, like you said, the fact that his corner stopped him. What was interesting was that Cotto's final visit to the canvas wasn't even in response to getting hit. He just called it quits. In retrospect, it was the smart thing to do. Against a guy with bricks in his hands, what chance did he have.

What's disappointing is that even given that experience, Cotto fought his last fight with his gloves skinned as usual. He should think about that when and if he ever judges Margarito for his antics.

 

Oh god, tell me this is not a serious post? You're going to attack a marginally relevant example I gave and then criticize me for it? Are you a woman? Say, "Azazel", do you have anything to say about the POINT of this thread, you know, boxers who load their wraps and bash other boxer's skulls in? No?

Well since this is all you have to offer, I will address it.

First, do you think that just because you don't like a rule that it's not cheating to break it? You know, your whole shitpile about your opponent being too young? The last I checked, it's still CHEATING to have girls 14 or under on girls Olympic gymnastic teams. I'm sure there is another "Azazel"-type in here somewhere that thinks loading gloves shouldn't be against the rules either. So I repeat, who CARES what rules you like or don't like.

Next, since you are too damn stupid to understand an age rule, I'll hammer it into your head with a 1st grade level example. The last time I went to a children's birthday party at "Skate Heaven" they had rollerskate limbo contests for the kids. You know, skate under the bar? And guess what! They had AGE BRACKETS. But there was this little 4 year old that they let particpate in every age bracket just for fun, and you know what happened? She won every time! Is this registering? Because she was SMALLER you fucking dolt! We don't let the 4-year olds compete against the 10-year olds because they have a DISCTINCT advantage in roller-limbo.

So let's make a mental jump, don't worry I'll drag you along. If they have those rules in ROLLER-LIMBO at a KIDS BIRTHDAY party, then why the fuck would any NUMBSKULL complain about having the rule in the fucking OLYMPICS? Moron. So tell me, would you be "fucking embarrassed" the you "couldn't compete with a kid" in roller-limbo you fuckhead? In sports where being small gives you a distinct advantage, only the truly mentally challenged would "be embarrassed" by a young CHEAT beating you. Me, I'd be pissed.

So to recap:

(1) No one cares whether you like or don't like an IOC rule, it's still cheating to break it.
(2) No one cares if you are too stupid to understand an IOC rule, it's still cheating to break it.

Now please, go take your sports "insight" to another thread.