Warrior or not?

All fighters have a personality trait that enables them to go one on one in a pugilistic battle. They know they can hurt badly or be hurt badly.......in some cases fatally.

IMO respect should be afforded to all fighters who risk themselves for this sport (albeit THEIR choosing).

So, when a fighter quits in the ring, is it right to uestion their true heart and worthiness of being a warrior. Should we be understanding of a boxer (who is just a sportsperson after all) to self-preserve if they feel they can not continue.

I believe that if a fighter honestly can not recover from an onslaught I.e feels they will be irreparably damaged OR genuinely can not make a count then they should not lose respect for quitting.

I disagree

I am a student of the warrior code like the Eubanks
and the warrior code teaches me that there are levels to being a true warrior. I presume we are talking about Kell Brook and yes Kell is brave but he simply reached a level he could not accomplish.

Wether that is down to his own pain fresh hold or his lack of detetmination to win whatever the reason Kell reached a level in a fight and quit because he could not extend himself.

But he was physically able to continue although he was taking a beating he was still physically able to fight so what is left is pure heart which he lacked in in the Spence fight.

He did not lack heart for stepping in thr ring he did not lose heart for making a good fist of it he lacked the heart to continue when he hit a wall.

You might think i am being arrogant but i cant be blamed for the examples that boxing has set of fighters hitting a wall and punching through it

Tommy Morrison v Joe Hipp

Real heavyweight slugfest. Tough as nails Joe Hipp went toe to toe with the Duke in a fight where Tommy broke his hand and his JAW but prevailed to win by ko. This is just one example a lot worse then an injured eye you still got 2 arms 2 legs and you are not horizental on the canvas so fight on.

So did Kell quit? Yes sadly yes.

If your sight is under threat

You stop to fight another day

Unless you are an idiot of course

That is NOT quitting

BoxingFan88 wrote:If your sight is under threat

You stop to fight another day

Unless you are an idiot of course

That is NOT quitting

Then dont enter a boxing ring.

That attitude is fine in a street fight but not in the ring so if you do as Brook did then you surley must except that you quit.

There are available to a fighter 2 options to end a fight either your corner throws in the towel or the ref waves off the fight if neither are enacted then it is left to the fighters heart to decide wether you fight on or quit.

If we do not except that Brook quit then we are neutering the sport of its warrior origins and giving any fighter cart blache to stop a fight for any reason although they are physically able to continue.

That is cheating the fans and the warrior code.

Brooks decision was based on his previous injury and being told that sustained trauma to that eye could have led to loss of vision. The true warrior code you refer to applies to the Samurai or underground "enter the dragon" style fights where people fight to the death. Boxing however is a sweet science where you showcase defensive and offensive skills accumulating points for doing so. It is hardly the duel of the samurai field.

Ortiz just sat in his stool, julius Francis conveniently fell over against Tyson......yep I get these. But permanent loss of vision, a family with youngs kids etc......nope not worth it.

It is a sport. Skill, strength, endurance, bravery are all essential. Stupidity - not so much. If you can't see, you can't fight.

Besides - I was under the impression that the ref actually stopped the fight (after Kell took a knee).

I'm guessing Onetwo is talking tongue in cheek as his comments are so far beyond stupid they can't be serious.

Boxers that are prepared to go through the wall are the ones that are likely to come away from the sport with lasting damage.

It is sport, it is entertainment. I can live with being a fan of it but only on the basis it is as safe as possible for the boxers involved. They are risking death for my entertainment.

All boxers have heart. They all take huge risks every time the fight and even in sparring.

Some are braver than others in the same way some aren't as clever as others, whether the brave ones are also the not so clever ones is probably more of a debate.

Does a F1 driver lack heart every time he breaks for corners?

No tongue in cheek on my part huw

You contradict yourself when you say boxing is a sport and entertainment yet you go on to confirm that boxers risk their life in the ring???

Well which one is it because it cant be both. The ring can be an unforgiving place it will ask all the important questions

Have you trained hard enough?
Can you take a solid punch?
Do you have the engine to go the distance?
Do you have the heart of a warrior?

There is a saying you dont play boxing you want to be entertained i suggest britains got talent.

Brook quit simple as that no need to mske excuses for the man because he can always come back and prove himself again i dont believe in once a quitter always a quitter but he did quit against spence

I don't see the contradiction. You get a lot of sports where they risk their life. From motorsports / horse riding/ rugby. What makes it sport is limiting the risk.

Don't get your nonsense macho attitude. I guess we watch the sport differently. For me to watch it and see someone hurting and think they should push beyond to be a warrior is akin to bullfighting or man sausage fighting. I just don't get it.

Some fighters border on stupidity the way they take a pasting and I find fights like that difficult to watch. I want to see skills in there, fighters slipping shots hitting and making the other miss.

For me one of the saddest fights was the thriller in Manila. Watching two greats that only had chins and punches left beating the crap out of each other just didn't do it for me. Both were 'warriors' that night but it was damaging long term for them.

I guess it's these differences of opinion that make life interesting.

Then i suggest huw that you watch another sport because boxing/combat sports originate from the ancient gladitorial games where men warriors fight till the death for money wealth fame honor.

Boxing is a very watererd down version of this but certain important aspects remain and apart from dedication to the craft heart and a never quit attitude are essential.

It may be hard for you to watch a man take a beating in a fight but the opportunity to rally back and gain pride or victory is always available

Have you ever seen fighters who are devestated with a premature decision to end a fight?

I am sad to see fighters die or suffer long term effects of thier injuries but this is why they do what thay do and the majority of us dont.

Quitting is the polor oppisite of the nature of combat which is to win by testing your very being with your opponents.

Nick Blackwell was too brave for his own good and his career ended at 25 years old

Margarito should've been taken out against Pacquiao now he has a glass eye

There are obvious exceptions obviously, Brook was pulled out by his corner against GGG and AFTER BEING KNOCKED DOWN WITH A BROKEN ORBITAL BONE he threw the kitchen sink at Spence

Fans can say you should fight on with a broken jaw/wrist etc (many do carry on) but have no idea whats it like being in there with a professional boxer who can genuinely ruin your life if you can't defend yourself

They are professional athletes, but shouldn't put their health at a long term risk if they don't need to

Onetwo, you can suggest I don't watch the sport. Just as I could suggest you are a bit of a sadist.

Whilst there is a fine line between the beauty and barbarity of this sport and we obviously see different things when we watch it. Nothing wrong with that.

Interesting that you bring the gladiator history of the sport into it. Whilst some did fight for honour and money most were slaves who had no other choice. Fight or be killed for refusing. It also wasn't that often that they were killed in the arena - they were expensive toys for the elite that owned them so most of the time they were saved from serious injury so they could fight again.

I don't think Brook should risk his sight for a stadium full of people who probably will forget who he is after a few months

My personal opinion on this is that I like to see fighters fight until they literally can't raise their hands anymore. For me, it's fight to the bell or get knocked out. HOWEVER, i certainly don't think any less of fighters that call it a day if they feel they can't continue for whatever reason.

IFL interviewed Eubank Sr the other day and he put it quite well I thought, albeit in a thousand words more than is necessary. Basically it comes down to how you want to be remembered as a fighter, the guys that keep going no matter what certainly win the hearts of the public more than those that don't.

So it depends what you REALLY want out of being a fighter I suppose. If it's mainly about securing your families future with any success such as World titles being the icing on the cake, that's absolutely fair enough I can still respect that, what's the point in all the riches boxing can bring you if you end up like a vegetable?

But on the flip side, for some fighters the glory and the adulation of the fans is more important in a way than the money. They will take it to the death because they have too much pride and they don't know how to quit. People love to see that because it is raw human emotion right there in a small ring. In a sense, a mans soul is almost on display. How can you not be facinated watching a man lay everything on the line? And what about the great comebacks when all seems lost and victory impossible? Withoutt he guys that give it absolutely evrerything we would never see fights like that.

I respect any man that has ever stepped into a ring to face another, but I admire any man that keeps going until he has absolutely nothing left to give.

Warrior means to keep going no matter what happens.

That's not to look down on people that feel that carrying on could harm them, but that isn't being a warrior. The corner should make that decision for them.

Thats right scot like i said before the fighter has 2 opportunities for his fight to end either the corner throw the towel or the ref steps in if not in both cases then its down to the fighter to quit or fight on.

Carl Froch wouldn't have quit. Was Kell smart? Perhaps! But it is a sport of Gladiators. If he was that bad, his corner should of pulled him out again.

AdamT wrote:Carl Froch wouldn't have quit. Was Kell smart? Perhaps! But it is a sport of Gladiators. If he was that bad, his corner should of pulled him out again.

Stick Carl '80k' Froch in the ring with the Ultimate Warrior, you'll see him quit.
A few vicious clotheslines followed by a gorilla press and Carl will give his
corner the signal.

I don't think boxing should stick to its gladiatorial roots. Gone are the Dempsey days when hardship led to blood, sweat and tears in a spartan gym to earn some dough....just enough to feed a family of 5 in a cold bedsit. Nowadays there is more money, there is more emphasis on family and entertainment rather than gladiatorial battles to please fans. Sports people have become refined and to that end there is no need to fight until ones eye is popping out of its socket. Like a previous poster said, the boxer will soon be forgotten and then what? It's easy to take the hardline battle stance to get a bit of attention but ultimately health comes first. If a ref could foresee a devastating KO punch they would stop the fight before it lands. The sport has been designed to showcase offensive and defensive skills as I have alluded to before and it's not a crude scrap anymore...if you want that then MMA may take your fancy. It's a gentlemans sport with maximal respect afforded for the skills and the bravery for stepping into the ring in the first place. If all you want to see is stupidity and some sort of crude scrap where mortality or serious morbidity could ensue then perhaps you may want to distance yourself from the gentleman status.

Footballer breaks his ankle can't continue, batsman breaks his wrist can't continue boxer breaks not one but two eye sockets..

Brook can have a pass from me

Good thread though and some interesting comments

TheSquaredCircle wrote:I don't think boxing should stick to its gladiatorial roots.  Gone are the Dempsey days when hardship led to blood, sweat and tears in a spartan gym to earn some dough....just enough to feed a family of 5 in a cold bedsit. Nowadays there is more money, there is more emphasis on family and entertainment rather than gladiatorial battles to please fans. Sports people have become refined and to that end there is no need to fight until ones eye is popping out of its socket. Like a previous poster said, the boxer will soon be forgotten and then what?  It's easy to take the hardline battle stance to get a bit of attention but ultimately health comes first. If a ref could foresee a devastating KO punch they would stop the fight before it lands. The sport has been designed to showcase offensive and defensive skills as I have alluded to before and it's not a crude scrap anymore...if you want that then MMA may take your fancy. It's a gentlemans sport with maximal respect afforded for the skills and the bravery for stepping into the ring in the first place. If all you want to see is stupidity and some sort of crude scrap where mortality or serious morbidity could ensue then perhaps you may want to distance yourself from the gentleman status.

Nothing else to say here. Well put.

There's a huge difference between losing your sight and having a broken jaw. One is able to be fixed. The other is not. There's a huge difference between breaking your hand and losing your sight. One is able to be fixed. The other is not.

Anyone who claims that Kell was not a "warrior" for actually putting his eyesight before staying in the ring is an idiot of the highest order. Where would that end? So during a fight, if a fighter has a bleed on the brain and decides to carry on to protect this "warrior" status you so casually bestow and he dies, you're ok with that? if you want to see animals kill each other and do permanent damage, I'm sure you could go find some underground boxing or even dog fighting. Boxing is not about how much damage you can take or give. It is about winning in a sport. Yes, it's a combat sport and yes it has its dangers, but you cannot go around questioning a man who has put himself through the mill for years for our entertainment for taking the conscious decision not to risk being blinded so that you get your kicks.

Not the first time you've sickened me with your idiocy ONETWO and I reckon it won't be the last.

No surprise you would stick up for Brook jabby

Let me clear a few things up.

I never said kell was not a warrior i said he quit which he did a better warrior would continue please read before you type you clearly have not stepped in a ring and laced them up i have please show respect for those who know.

You dont play boxing

Playing at boxing would involve you staying in that ring long after you know you should have stopped. Anyone that encourages that or thinks it's okay is an idiot of the highest order and doesn't actually know the damage that can happen to you, be you a 10 year old kid starting out or a 40 fight 38 yeard old veteran of the sport.
You need a strong corner to tell those that can't make the sensible decision and a boxer that can make it by himself and make the right decision is a rare kind indeed. Massive kudos to Brook and just hope he hangs them up now

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:No surprise you would stick up for Brook jabby

Let me clear a few things up.

I never said kell was not a warrior i said he quit which he did a better warrior would continue please read before you type you clearly have not stepped in a ring and laced them up i have please show respect for those who know.

You dont play boxing

You utter clown. Just because I lied about sparring with brook doesn't mean I never boxed. I did, as have many on here. I was just never good enough to actually take it on properly.

"Better Warrior" read instead "stupid moron with no care for their family".

Imagine Brook goes blind because he follows the ethos of the great ONETWOWARRIOR. Imagine he goes the distance, loses as he would have and his career ends that night with permanent blindness.

Imagine he gets into financial difficulty and only survives for 2 years on his current boxing money.

Imagine he then doesn't get a job with Sky because he is dull as dishwater.

So, he has diminishing money, no career because he didn't study at school (he was on the path to be a boxer) and is blind in one eye.

Imagine not being able to provide for your family in the same way because of a stupid decision you made following the path of ONETWOPURESAMURAIWARRIOR

Or, imagine taking a knee, realising you can quit and fight another day, at another weight, for another title and retain your sight.

One choice is manly, providing for your loved ones, making a wise decision. The other is pure stupidity, made by children.

You've really outdone yourself with that point of view you tit.

I know we don't see eye to eye, but great post

AdamT wrote:I know we don't see eye to eye, but great post

Onetwo once again demonstrating that whilst it might be the mark of a warrior to regularly pound your head as hard as you can off the nearest wall, it will leave you retarded.

I think you're mistaking nature and nurture there super.

It's the mark of being retarded to regularly pound your head against the wall.


Whichever, people need to show respect for onetwo and others like him who've laced them up and 'know' what being a warrior is all about

He's a proper warrior and no mistake. Not many people have the guts to pretend to be a 14 year old girl on an internet forum, but onetwo fearlessly threw himself into it without any concern for his safety. #Hero

With regard to Kell Brook fighting on - that could have led to blindness.  If the ring side doctor knew Kell Brook had a fractured eye socket he would have had to stop the fight.  Short of having an x-ray after each round or a brain scan - there is a responsibility of all involved, including the boxer himself, to ensure he is not pushed beyond a certain limit where long-term damage can ensue.

ps Warriors are for wars not boxing.  They are two separate things.  When people say they are a warrior they are being melodramatic - like playing cowboys and Indians as kids.

Outrageous. You're calling Carl Froch melodramatic. The guy has trench foot for god sake. You could chop his arms and legs off and he'd call it a scratch...

Jabby super milky

You are all hypocrites i have read you all comment on how heroic some fighters are in wars and they suffered more then brook and his eye irritation.

I think we all agree that Frasier showed the heart of a true warrior in his third fight with Ali almost going blind but apparently to you guys he was stupid foolish reterded NO he was true to his warrior nature which is the hunt for glory.

Every fighter has the right to stop fighting but please do not chastise those that decide to risk it all health family wealth and life to obtain glory this game we love would not be what it is today if the legends of past and present took your advice and take a knee.

Nobody is belittling warriors? The OP is about not belittling boxers who "retire" for the purpose of self-preservation, either because he is seeing double (Kell Brook fractured eye socket) or where he is shipping punishment to the head / being well beat. In both scenarios the referee should stop the fight.

Bertie

I dont know you but you seem like a decent intelligent poster i have been on these boards a very long time and been envolved in many many well informed debates for which my knowledge has been vitally important but the likes of super jabby and milky attack me for no reason and ignore my posts in order to ridicule me.

I cant begin to explain my credible contribution to hese boxing boards boxing flows through my vains but i must correct you. You have in your recent post confirmed all i have said throughout this article without acknowledging the fact. Wether it is out of ignorance or you just could not be bothered to read my earlier posts.

Because you seem new i will look away but please in the spirit of gentamanly debate i implore that you READ my work BEFORE posting.

Thank you

I presume your inference from your previous posts is that although brook could be considered a warrior, a more spirited warrior would have battled on regardless of what would happen to him. This imo embodies a warrior in a battle zone where death is seen as an outcome. In boxing, death or serious injury is wanted by nobody and is seen as a failing on the part of the ref to stop it at the right time. Most boxing fans like to see a massive tear up. It's a fine line between warrior and stupidity. You will find the most astute boxers have he best defense, self preserve where possible and ultimately make the most money.....just ask Floyd.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:
i have been on these boards a very long time and been envolved in many many well informed debates for which my knowledge has been vitally important

If you say so yourself

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:
I cant begin to explain my credible contribution to hese boxing boards

I think we can all agree on this one , I can't begin to explain it either

I'm just having a bit of gentle leg pulling onetwo, I value your contribution when you drop by.  Steadfastly sticking to your beliefs and providing moments of comedy gold.

That superfly is a nasty piece of work though

"Im a student of the warrior code" is the funniest thing I've ever read. Anywhere. Ever.

ONETWOFOREVER wrote:Bertie

I dont know you but you seem like a decent intelligent poster i have been on these boards a very long time and been envolved in many many well informed debates for which my knowledge has been vitally important but the likes of super jabby and milky attack me for no reason and ignore my posts in order to ridicule me.

I cant begin to explain my credible contribution to hese boxing boards boxing flows through my vains but i must correct you. You have in your recent post confirmed all i have said throughout this article without acknowledging the fact. Wether it is out of ignorance or you just could not be bothered to read my earlier posts.

Because you seem new i will look away but please in the spirit of gentamanly debate i implore that you READ my work BEFORE posting.

Thank you

Maybe you should look to publish your "work" in book format Onetwo.

We could make it a rule that nobody is allowed to post anything, anywhere until they have read your book.

Seriously though, I'm guessing you were joking above, or drunk, or judging by the spelling some monkeys are digressing from their attempt at Shakespeare and have signed in on here as you instead....

huw wrote:Onetwo, you can suggest I don't watch the sport. Just as I could suggest you are a bit of a sadist.

Whilst there is a fine line between the beauty and barbarity of this sport and we obviously see different things when we watch it. Nothing wrong with that.

Interesting that you bring the gladiator history of the sport into it. Whilst some did fight for honour and money most were slaves who had no other choice. Fight or be killed for refusing. It also wasn't that often that they were killed in the arena - they were expensive toys for the elite that owned them so most of the time they were saved from serious injury so they could fight again.

Huw, OT is a wum. Whilst I don't post on the boards a lot I have been aware of his presence for years. His silly posts are meant to create a reaction. However, to be fair, he can be very amusing. I have laughed at some of his ridiculous exchanges with other members.