1_man_army

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem In a nutshell, it's using a quality of someone against their arguments. Ahh, gotcha. Too much of that crap's been going 'round TIF. OT'ers love to throw around terms like ad hominem and strawman even when they aren't using the words in the right context. They're political debate buzzwords here because people think using them is a way to devalue other people's arguments. I cringe when I see people posting ad hominem here.

I disagree Lenin, it's always better to get the unpopular stuff out of the way early. That way you can get it done and get it off the agenda and out of the public eye long before the next election.

A lot of people have been saying that about the German judges, I hope they can have some sort of credibility for this fight. I missed the Valuev Holyfield fight, it didn't really interest me to see an over the hill Holyfield fight anyone, especially not Valuev.

Things could have been better but they could have been worse. I think people were slightly hysterical in their expectations of him though. Overall, I'd say he's had a solid start but he has to do more during the next three years.

I don't mind saying no at all. If I'm not keen on something or if I don't want to do something I won't do it. I would say that I'm relatively strong willed to that extent (some would just say that I'm awkward), I don't understand why people allow themselves to get coerced into doing things that they don't really want to.

[bleep]. +1 She is great looking but the fact that she has been - how do I put this - defiled by Russel Brand is a big negative point for me. As far as previous partners go Russel Brand has to be up there as one of the people you would most dread your partner being with in her past. He's just looks unwashed lol.

I'm convinced the world is against me, I had an triple bet on for tonights football - Spurs beat Everton as expected and St Mirren beat Motherwell as I had hoped. Then comes Real Madrid who were playing a third division Spanish side called Alcorcon and not only do they get beat, the get thumped 4-0! Real spent about £250M during the summer and can't beat a team that most likely survives on a fraction of their hourly wage bill. Bloody useless pampered gits, they've annoyed me now.

Haye vs Valuev is on the 7th of November and Pacquaio vs Cotto is on the 14th. Valuev is a freak of nature with his size but I think it makes him a bit boring to watch boxing because he can keep people at such a distance. Hopefully it'll be entertaining enough though, I think Haye can at least make things interesting.

I was considering making a thread about boxing for a while in OT but I really didn't think that it would work there so I'll use this new forum as an opportunity to make it. Anyway, the purpose of this thread is pretty self-explainatory, discuss anything related to boxing from your all time favourites, upcoming fights, fights you would love to see etc. I can't see this being a contant, high volume thread at all but it might be one to revive every few months when a big fight is coming up. ------- There are 2 big fights coming up in the next few fights: David Haye vs Nikolai Valuev and Manny Pacquaio vs Miguel Cotto. Haye vs Valuev I'm not sure how this one will turn out, Haye is a decent boxer and he's pretty quick and athletic but he has a suspect chin. Valuev will try to use his height and reach as usual but I think Haye can give him problems on the inside if he can get on the inside. The thing for Haye is he'll have problems hurting Valuev, the man is built like a tree truck and he's never been down but he doesn't move well which could work to Haye's advantage if he fights a smart fight. This one could go either way although I hope Haye wins because he might shake up the division for a while as it is boring to watch the Klitchkos and Valuev dominate. Manny Pacquaio vs Miguel Cotto This one has fight of the year written all over it - two high enery fighters who don't mind brawling and love to throw lots of punches. Obviously Manny is coming off of an amazin knockout of Hatton (who was out before he hit the canvas) and that probably makes him the favourite to win this one. Cotto only just beat Joshua Clottey in his last fight after fighting half of the fight in a slumber. Some people reckon Cotto isn't himself after being beaten to a pulp by Margarito eventhough Margarito was found with plaster on his wraps in his next fight which brought the Cotto-Margarito fight into question. I don't buy that theory, I think a huge fight like this will motivate him into giving a big performance. This is another tough one to pick a winner for, Manny is lightning quck and aggressive but Cotto hits hard and is the bigger man but he - like Haye - has a suspect chin. I was watching the first episode of the HBO 24/7 program that gives an insight to their training and Manny's camp doesn't look great, they had problems with the typhoons in the Phillipines and conflicts between his cornermen. That could play a part in the outcome of the fight but I hope not. If I had to pick a winner I'd say Manny just because of his speed and the fact that he has the southpaw jab to throw Cotto off a bit. If I'm right then Pacquaio vs Mayweather has to happen if Floyd wants to prove he is as good as he says he is.

Dieting and smoking are not the same as sexuality. You can't decide who you are attracted to, it is a matter of personal taste just like how you can't choose to like certain foods.

You could argue that she's from the Indian Sub-continent in a feeble attempt to be correct ;) Anyway, to get back on topic, the last film that I watched was Requiem for a Heavyweight. It was ok, Anthony Quinn played a punch drunk boxer forced into retirement (after a fight with a very young Cassius Clay) and is trying to adjust to normal life while his scheming manager tries to manipulate him. For boxing fans, there are a few cameos from great old boxing greats (Jack Dempsey, Willie Pep & Cassius Clay as I mentioned earlier ). Not bad for a film that was shot while Anthony Quinn was on a break from filming Lawrence of Arabia.

That's funny because she's from Sri Lanka not India.

Oooo double sarcasm... To unspamify this post - What the posters above me are saying (if it isn't already clear) is that if you know the lyrics you can easily google them to find the song that they are from.

"It's illegal - deal with it" isn't any sort of logical argument here. We're debating whether or not it should be legal based on facts about the use of marijuana its effects on society - we all know it's illegal (in most places). Just because something is the law doesn't mean that it should be blindly accepted and not discussed. Lastly, if pro-legalisation people bombard the anti-legalisation people with arguments then the people who are against legalisation can make contructive and logical posts to counter - that is the purpose of a discussion forum, to discuss things.

You don't need to apologise like you offended me lol. I was just finding the two bumps confusing.

What is it with people bumping ancient posts today? First the Pulp Fiction thread in MM&T now this. I keep seeing posts by Bubsa & Riza, it's confusing.

I have done, you said he threatened you, that still doesn't make it self-defence.

Dizzle - you're advocating going out and attacking them pre-emptively because you reckon he's going to hurt somebody. It doesn't matter how you present it, what you want to do is illegal and pretty well stupid. Even if you did it, what makes you think his friends won't do the same or worse to you in retaliation? If somebody physically attacks you, you are allowed to protect yourself but what you're talking about is not self-defence at all. Maybe this guy doesn't like you because of the 'superior' attitude you're giving off in this thread.

I think the blame for all this confusion can rest with Noah Webster. He had a great idea in making English more simple but he's helped to cause so much confusion.

It isn't really an issue of cost, smoking that many joints would make you sick.

Danqazmlp - You're right, a joint can be the equivalent of half a cigarette (half weed, half tobacco). However, anyone who smokes marijuana will not be able to smoke the same number of joints as they can cigarettes. So while there is still half a cigarette worth of tobacco being smoked per joint - there is even less th tobacco smoked because it just isn't possible to smoke the same number of joints.

I was looking for that one as well, I couldn't find it though.

Barihawk, didn't Kissinger get one as well? Edit - That being said, I know it was a while back that he got it.

It's a bit daft to give him the Peace prize when he has still to achieve anything internationally, he's taken good first steps but that's not anything to write home about. It's an annoying distraction from the real issues, hopefully he'll do well and deserve it one day but right now he hasn't done anything to earn it.

I though moronic blackface acts were gotten rid of during the 60's, good to see that society is making progress. In short, yes it is offensive. A little background on blackface acts: Blackface (Wikipedia) Edit - To clarify, I don't know if those guys meant to be offensive and I don't know if they are racists or not, I deliberately didn't say it was was racist - I say it was offensive, I consider it ignorance more than anything.