“Who Do You Think You Are?” — A Boxing Writer’s Defense
In my short tenure as a self-proclaimed boxing writer, I’ve received dozens of comments over time to the effect of: “What do you know about boxing? You’re an idiot,” and, “You’ve got no right to criticize fighters because you don’t know what it’s like to be a fighter.” I got them a month ago from Vladimir Klitschko’s fans. More recently, I got them from Manny Pacquiao’s fans, who have turned out to like me OK in the end.
I’m not especially sensitive to such remarks. I rarely curl up into fetal position or cry and hug my legs or whatever when I hear them. But it happens often enough that I feel compelled to answer in-depth.
Let me start by stating my point of view on boxers in general and the respect I have for them, just so there can be no confusion on this point.
Boxing is rightly called “the hardest game.” I have nothing but admiration for someone who makes a living getting punched. I am the kind of boxing fan who actually admires savvy defense. It is, after all, the art of hitting without being hit. I rarely have criticized a fighter for quitting when, say, his nose or jaw is broken. (The only time I can think of where I’ve criticized a fighter for quitting was junior lightweight [130 lbs.] Acelino Freitas, who did it twice in a row, and the second time acted like it was something to be proud of, as his team lifted him up on his shoulders and he smiled broadly. I don’t think there’s much shame in quitting a fight when you’re getting beat up, but it’s not exactly something to show off, either. And if you do it routinely, well, maybe boxing’s not your sport, right? I’ll elaborate on that in a sec.) When a fighter pushes through a broken nose or hand or what have you, they are deserving of exceptional praise.
Now, that out of the way, I’d like to move on to the whole “unless you’ve been a boxer, you can’t say anything critical of a boxer” line of reasoning.
This kind of formulation is pretty common to anyone who doesn’t like whatever specific criticism they’ve heard of something they like. It could be a boxer, or, say, someone’s own life — like when some actor or star says something to the effect of (and this is admittedly an extreme case), “Until you’ve walked a mile in my shoes, you’ve got no right to question my decision to drive drunk.”
Here’s the thing on that, or, rather, several things on that. If we limited what we could express our thoughts on to things we’ve done, then it’d be a pretty conversation-free life. By that standard, hardly anyone would be allowed to write about anything, ever. College professors couldn’t study tribal behavior and publish a paper about it unless they joined the tribe. In fact, by the own internal reasoning of the formulation, the actual remark “you can’t criticize a fighter unless you’re a fighter” is guilty of the same sin. I could just as easily reply: “You have no right to criticize my boxing writing unless you, too, are a boxing writer.” I won’t reply in that fashion, because if I said that, I’d be wrong, too.
I haven’t been in a fight since the seventh grade. I lost, but I felt like I took a pretty good punch. Still, I can only imagine what it’s like to be a boxer. I have no training. I do think it would enhance my understanding of the sport if I did, but it doesn’t mean I can’t comment on the sport without it.
And, certainly, I have a right to criticize whatever I want, whenever I want, just like everyone else does. I think the standard should be, “Does the criticism have merit?” To reject my point of view merely because it comes from a specific person is a common logical fallacy, taught in basic logic classes in every college in America. This is “argument ad hominem,” or argument to the man. If you say to me, “Tim’s criticism is worthless because he’s never boxed,” you are committing a mistake of argument.
Still, allow me to discuss a little bit of my credentials, such as they are. I’ve written for several boxing sites, including this one, my own blog, TheSweetScience.com, Eastsideboxing.com and BadLeftHook.com. Therefore, at least a few credible people have considered my views worthy of publication. I recently got a fight credential in February in Madison Square Garden, the Mecca of boxing, to cover a fight that got a ton of media coverage, the February heavyweight unification bout. Therefore, at least a few of the powers-that-be in boxing considered me credible enough to treat as a respectable writer. I am not always right in my predictions or things I write, but I have called some beauts; for instance, I was in the minority in predicting that now-middleweight (160 lbs.) champ Kelly Pavlik would viciously knock out Jermain Taylor in their first meeting. That gives me something of a track record. And I’ve been a journalist for nine years, by profession, covering all manner of topics and usually garnering respect from my peers, superiors and sources along the way.
Even if none of the above was true, though, I’d still have the right to my opinion. There’s an additional right, beyond that of just being a human being, that I have earned as well. I’m a consumer of boxing. I shell out money for HBO and Showtime, and, frequently, pay-per-views at $50 a pop. Boxers earn their money by being entertainers, in the same way all sporting figures do. I am their audience. I am one of the many people who are, in effect, paying their salaries, or, when I switch into coverage mode, giving free promotional airtime to their fights. All of that gives me the ability to say — as I did of Klitschko — that a boxer’s performance was horrible. A bad performance is bad entertainment, and I’m not getting my money’s worth. It doesn’t diminish my respect for the courage it takes to be in the profession. It just makes me an unsatisfied customer.
P.S. On a related point, I’ve said it many times before, but I also must add that as a blogger, it is not written anywhere that I cannot have an opinion about the boxers I’m writing about. What I do verges on journalism sometimes, but it is not that. It is a different format. I express my rooting interests regularly so the reader knows my interests and can make up his or her own mind about whether it tarnishes my analysis or predictions. But rest assured, I try to keep those things separate. I predicted Ricky Hatton, a fighter whose personality I like, would lose to Floyd Mayweather, a fighter whose personality I do not like. I predicted a win by Rafael Marquez, one of my favorite fighters, over Israel Vazquez, a fighter I like but like less than Marquez, but had Vazquez winning on my scorecard. My writing history is littered with instances where I have been critical of fighters I have soft spots for, or praise for fighters I can’t stand.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, March 19th, 2008 at 7:19 am and is filed under Column.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
THE AUTHOR
RECENT MVN ARTICLES
ARCHIVE
SPONSORS
19 Responses to ““Who Do You Think You Are?” — A Boxing Writer’s Defense”
March 19th, 2008 at 8:50 am
Take that, you inhibitors of the free expression of thought. And you too you Klitschko love-hounds!
A wonderful defense all ’round. But what do I know? I do not professionally review blogs nor do I professionally review defenses of First Amendment rights. I guess I should keep my mouth shut.
Also, please ignore any political commentary from non-elected officials. And also business advice from non-businessmen. And godforbid anybody accept any good advice from a psychologist that isn’t or hasn’t been certifiably crazy.
That’s why I stick only to this line of commentary:
You suck because the things you write are sucky.
Tautologies mean I’m always right.
March 19th, 2008 at 9:15 am
This is my 1st time visiting this site and thus the 1st article I read at this site. To be honest I’ve read a lot of articles at Eastsideboxing, but I rarely look for or remember the name of the person who wrote the article. So, no cheesy praises or bashing here for any of your past articles that I might have liked or disliked. I’m a Wladimir Klitschko fan, and I didn’t like his last performance either. I think he respected Sultan a lot more than he should have. But, its 1 fight, albeit an important one, and I think he will redeem himself on his next few outings. He has promised to knockout his next opponent. Lets see how he handles Tony Thompson, whom I believe Sultan figured he would have a hard time winning to and fought Wladimir for a bigger payday instead, or Alexander Povetkin, who won the IBF tournament eliminator.
March 19th, 2008 at 9:46 am
JimPanzee: Fantastic. Your comment shall serve as the writerly, satirical analog to my patient explanations of basic linear thinking.
Brandan: Thanks for dropping by. Do feel free to praise or bash as you see fit. I’d be hypocritical to encourage anything less, and I do genuinely enjoy the discourse; I was just responding to a somewhat constant line of faulty reasoning. No need to look at the bylines for Eastsideboxing; I’ve only written a couple pieces for them.
As for your comments about Vlad — I appreciate your honest point of view, i.e., separating your fandom from your evaluation of his performance. I think Vladimir does, indeed, realize he screwed up by giving Sultan too much respect. I’d been on the Vlad bandwagon prior to that fight, arguing that he looked pretty good and entertaining in his several previous fights. If he handles Thompson and Povetkin like he should, I might get back on the bandwagon, but I’m skeptical. He’s the kind of fighter whom, at any point, might revert back to safety first, second, and third. I hope I’m wrong about him, because he’s really talented and very impressive when he’s at his best.
March 19th, 2008 at 10:04 am
Good defense.
Tim Starks, Do you think boxing journalist should be inducted into The International Boxing Hall of Fame?
March 19th, 2008 at 10:12 am
LC: Thanks.
I don’t see why boxing writers shouldn’t be inducted into the Hall of Fame. A lot of sports allow that kind of thing, if not the writers than a kind of “contributors” category or “writers” category, per the annual award at the Baseball Hall of Fame. I can’t say I’d be terribly upset if they didn’t allow it, though. Why do you ask?
March 19th, 2008 at 11:12 am
Just curious. You’re a good boxing writer. I like your style. Keep it up and good luck.
March 19th, 2008 at 11:20 am
Curiosity’s as good a reason as any. Thanks much, LC, for the kind words, and always feel free to drop by with any comment or thoughts you have.
March 19th, 2008 at 12:05 pm
I know by now you are already disgusted by the Filipino boxing fans, well this time it’s different. I’m proud of Manny and I’m proud to be Filipino. I’m not proud of my fellow Pinoys though. I’m not dumb or narrow minded like most of the Filipino Pacquiao fans who keeps on e-mailing you and giving you rude remarks. That’s why they don’t go far in life. All they do is moan and complain, too lazy to even comprehend facts and take comments as a good thing. Comments and criticism, if you digest well is a lesson learned. I am not bias and I had it a point for Marquez.
I read lot of articles regarding the fight and I learned a lot from it. The articles are clever and well written. Most of them had the fight won by Marquez, one thing is for sure though, it was a close and unforgettable fight.
Thanks and keep up the good work.
March 19th, 2008 at 12:27 pm
Rey — I’m not disgusted by them. I admire their passion for Manny. I like them visiting the site, and want them to continue doing so.
It’s just that some of them have gotten a little wacky. I do think some of them are narrow-minded, and they’ve been giving other boxing writers besides myself hell too, like Kevin Iole, for predicting a Marquez win, as if that were some kind of crime punishable by revocation of an imaginary “writer’s license.”
I know, though, that a great many of them, such as yourself, have been very open-minded even scored the fight for Marquez.
I did not mean to generalize about all Pac-Man fans; I only take issue with a handful of them who were a little overly-fervent in defending their guy and resorted to name-calling and such in the process.
Thank you for the kind words, and please, don’t hesitate to argue with me when you think I’m wrong.
March 19th, 2008 at 6:03 pm
This wasn’t really a boxing article but ironically (after searching for Pacman/Marquez news) I thought this was very fun to read. And the best one I would say.
Some guys that are still fighting about whether Pacman or JMM won should read this article. More specially to this so-called journalist under RingTalk.com named Pedro Fernandez who has been talking too much smack about how ignorant FILIPINO Pacquiao fans are. I hate these self-proclaimed Boxing Intellects who bashes on people for speaking their mind incorrectly about a recent boxing event (for example, mispronouncing a knockdown as a knockout.) Like those who label other fans as bandwagoners because they don’t know who Archie Moore was. But that’s a different story.
Well, Tim keep writing. Keep predicting potential fight outcomes to the best of your abilities. By the way who won on your card Pacquiao or JMM? If JMM then BOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (j/k)
March 20th, 2008 at 5:55 am
‘Twas JMM, RoWyN. Yer boos are welcome.
And thanks for the kind words.
March 20th, 2008 at 7:01 am
Well said, Mr. Starks! I couldn´t agree with you more.
Keep it up! I really enjoy reading your stuff.
By the way, do you think Sam Peter would fare
any better in a possible rematch with Wlad Klitschko?
March 20th, 2008 at 7:30 am
Thanks, Fredrik, for the comment and the kindness.
Really good question. In some ways, Peter has gotten better and worse than in their previous meeting, while Vlad has, if anything, gotten better (”better” and “more boring” are not mutually exclusive). So I’d still favor Vlad, but there’s a case for Peter. You?
March 20th, 2008 at 4:52 pm
Good Stuff, Tim. You already know where I stand. Just let the haters hate. But if you need me to regulate things in your blog, I’ll gladly do it, provided your provide the money necessary for this to happen. LOL, j/k.
March 21st, 2008 at 7:13 am
E-ROC: Hmmm, I’ll consider your offer to regulate, which is quite generous (minus the fact you want some dough). Nothing like having the military having your back.
March 21st, 2008 at 8:49 pm
I am Korroth, Lord of Destruction!
March 21st, 2008 at 8:55 pm
OK, that one’s over my head.
March 27th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
found this little treasure of an interview. Have ur filipino friends (or enemies) translate it to u.
http://208.65.153.238/watch?v=refRjV_zsAE
March 30th, 2008 at 1:54 am
Mr. Starks,
I still think Wlad would be too much for Peter. Klitschko more polished and Peter still too raw.
As for Klitschko - Thompson, this “Tiger” hardly has the bite to seriously threaten Dr. Steelhammer.
He probably won´t fall as easily as Ray Austin did a year ago, but I just can´t see him win this fight.
Leave a comment