Oh REALLY? That's funny, because I've been bored out of my mind during 80% of boxing matches I've ever watched.

Ok and I care because? That's not even relevant.

__________________

Now you're just being retarded. The whole point of your first comment was that "boxing matches are exciting because they're REEL FITES". Well when I know that what two people are going to be doing is fighting, and all I see is forearm shots all match long, I'm going to be bored. However, when I go to watch a HOCKEY game, and two people start fighting, that makes it EXCITING. Know why? Because hockey fights are for MOMENTUM.

CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL

No it was not, I never associated exciting with boxing.

I said that the majority of hockey fights are lame and stupid, and that even the ones that are exciting still aren't real fights.

I cited boxing as real fighting, and gave examples to as such. I let boxing go there, but somehow you're continuing to associate it and trying to compare it to hockey, which is stupid because the things you are saying have nothing to do with what I've been saying. Which is why I've called it irrelevant.

I honestly DON'T CARE about the excitement factor of boxing, if you find it boring that that's your opinion.

And anyone who actually watches boxing knows that forearm shots are a rarity, I'm beginning to wonder if you even know what your talking about. I mean really how would one even get a forearm shot.......unless the boxer literally laid his arms by his side and that would be stupid-open head shot

Hockey fights are lame extractions for people who probably would get all happy to see a monkey pee in it's own mouth. They won't make a team win or lose, their just sheer spectacles of stupidity.

Not to mention the overall lack of "fighting" that actually occurs.

__________________

You are the most confusing individual I have ever seen. You cite boxing as "real fights", I tell you that boxing is about fighting and hockey fights are about momentum, as WELL as beating the sh*t out of the other guy. You tell me boxing fights are exciting and hockey ones aren't because boxing fights yield better results, I say that boxing fights and hockey fights yield equal results because in boxing there are rarely real KO punches, and it's the same with hockey. You say that the infrequency of hockey fights makes it pointless (which ALREADY contradicts your fights=popularity equation), and I say that's what makes them special.

GG?

I never said hockey fights aren't exciting, SOME of them are, but even if that's the case they aren't real fights.

And as far as the contradiction, I said the rarity of exciting fights, but anyway it doesn't matter because people will pay to see the game and the chance that they'll see a good fight.


But w/e I'm tired of talking about hockey, it's not the 2nd roughest sport, but it is a good sport and is entertaining.

__________________

Thats what you think.