Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Strange Famous
Chuck Liddell is known to people who follow this sport.
Bernard Hopkins is The Champ
The fact you dont know the difference is kinda the point.
And when I said that the heavyweight champion of the world was the Emporer of Masculinity... it means a chain of the greatest men that runs back to John L Sullivan, to Jem Mace... to Tom Cribb and further (I mention him cos I was drinking in a pub named after him last weekend).
Chuck Liddell simply one a few brawls and was declared the best brawler of one brand of ultimate cage fighting. He is known by people who have grown out of WWF. Muhammad Ali is known by the entire globe.
WWF is exciting and good fun, even if it isnt a real sport. UFC/MMA carries the same excitement to a degree, without the results being fixed... but it is merely an empty spectacle... to be a Champion Boxer is to inherit and embody the history of masculinity.
|
Chuck Liddell makes it onto shows all around the world. His name is out there.
Personally, I think he is a tad bit over rated.
Boxing has history sir. That is why people hold a championship boxer in such a high regard. People who don't follow boxing at all know of Ali not because of his amazing boxing skills, but because of his charisma. let us not forget that he has been the running scapegoat for the brutality of the sport. Expect the first punch drunk mixed martial artist in the world to be the same.
What it all boils down to is this. You can sit there championing boxing, assuming that we know nothing of the sport, and being ignorant. Fact of the matter is that for the most part we are fans of the sport to. You are damning a sport that you have no knowledge of in it's young age. The same was done to boxing when it first became an accepted sport.
As for the social standards of masculinity. I find that you claim that to be a legitimate argument foolish.
Boxing has a history. MMA is still growing. Bottom Line.