Taylor rules again!

walshb · 08-08-2008 9:44am #1

With all this Olympic talk we seem to be forgetting
about our most successful athlete ever

http://www.rte.ie/sport/boxing/2008/0807/taylork.html

MBC · 08-08-2008 10:06am

Yep well done Katie.........good to see other irish girls competing aswell. Debbie Rogers and Kelly Harrington.

theone · 08-08-2008 1:47pm

if she stays amateur we should get a gold in 2012 fingers crossed on women's boxing being let in.

Big Ears · 08-08-2008 2:38pm

She did only win 1 fight to get to the final but I don't want to play down the achievements of our best amateur boxer, who is quite possibly the best female boxer in the World.

This will be her first time winning the EU's, she lost to eventual winner Gulsum Tatar in the quarter-finals in 2006 and didn't enter in 2007 which Tatar won again.

So hopefully it's soon to be 2006 World Champion, 2005,2006,2007 European Champion, 2008 EU Champion and 2012 Olympic Gold medal winner. Of course with more European and World wins along the way.

walshb · 08-08-2008 2:50pm

Well then, I don't see why you needed to mention it. She has been the worlds best boxer for two years solid now. An amazing talent and a ferocious puncher. What does it matter that she only had one bout en route to the
final? I know of Irish Senior winners who didn't even fight in the year they won their titles. Katie IMO is a sensation!

joepenguin · 08-08-2008 2:55pm

What an athlete. Lets hope womens boxing is included in 2012

buck65 · 08-08-2008 4:11pm

hear hear
class act RTE should be covering this live
about time women's sports were respected.

nacho libre · 08-08-2008 5:46pm

She is an incredible athlete - we don't get to say that very often about an Irish athlete. I hope she does get to compete at an Olympics before she is past her peak.

Dodge · 08-08-2008 7:10pm

buck65 wrote: »

hear hear
class act RTE should be covering this live
about time women's sports were respected.

In fairness they don't cover the mens world championships, nver mind European Championship or the even lower ranked EU Championships, so its not a gender thing.

All signs point to Womens Boxing being included in LOndon BTW.

Hero Of College · 08-08-2008 7:27pm

nacho libre wrote: »

She is an incredible athlete - we don't get to say that very often about an Irish athlete. I hope she does get to compete at an Olympics before she is past her peak.

I have never summoned the courage to ask her dad.........would he prefer she were born a boy.....

:eek:

efb · 08-08-2008 7:41pm

She kept my boxing news when Al Morris showed her her article on winning world Gold. Didn't want to ask for it back...:P I think she thought I was giving her the magazine, lovely girl.

walshb · 10-08-2008 1:19pm

http://www.rte.ie/sport/boxing/2008/0809/taylor.html

Another title for Katie, simply awesome!

cowzerp · 10-08-2008 1:30pm

Fair play to her, she's great for irish boxing...

Big Ears · 10-08-2008 4:13pm

Excellant stuff, it seems all our top amateurs are in fine form at the moment.
An 11-0 win is very impressive and picking up the boxer of the tournament award means she must have been fighting well.

walshb · 10-08-2008 4:21pm

Our men are in fine form at the moment, but Taylor has been in absolute awesome form for the past 3 years!!!

nacho libre · 10-08-2008 4:25pm

An awesome performance to win 11-0. Fair play to her for all her achievements to date.

Hero Of College · 10-08-2008 6:30pm

I think its a real pity that womens boxing will always have the same significance as womens soccer. In other words, none.

Dodge · 10-08-2008 10:07pm

Hero Of College wrote: »

I think its a real pity that womens boxing will always have the same significance as womens soccer. In other words, none.

Or just women in general then :rolleyes:

Hero Of College · 11-08-2008 12:18am

Dodge wrote: »

Or just women in general then :rolleyes:

Well, in Sport, the physical expression of the mental aspect is what we are dealing with.

Women are simply less capable of generating the physical end product. They are slower, less powerful creatures than their male equivalents.

Thus, Cotto and Margarito will always sell out venues, and Katy Taylor will be a lesser attraction.

Plain and Simple.

After all, do you pay money to Setanta to watch Cotto and the Premiership, or to see Live Womens Boxing from Germany followed by the Arsenal Ladies.???

Dodge · 11-08-2008 1:17am

So you equate sgnificance in terms of Setanta Sports schedules? Is Sonia O'Sullivan's silver medal less significant than John Treacy's?

HollowMan · 11-08-2008 5:13am

Excellent comeback Dodge!

megadodge · 11-08-2008 9:33am

Congrats Katie, yet again.
Fantastic boxer and that's taking no gender into account.
I know she spars with the Joyces in Athy regularly, which shows how good she is.

However, on the topic of women's sport, I can't believe it, but I'm agreeing with Hero here. Women's sport doesn't get the coverage simply because they're not as good as their male equivalents !!

If a women is 'world champion' it means she's the best of half the world.
If a man is 'world champion' it means he's the best in the entire world.

There is no anti-woman sentiment in what I'm saying, they're just the facts.

Hero Of College · 11-08-2008 12:23pm

Dodge wrote: »

So you equate sgnificance in terms of Setanta Sports schedules? Is Sonia O'Sullivan's silver medal less significant than John Treacy's?

No...I equate Setanta Sports schedules in terms of Public Demand. Setanta shows it cos the Public wants it- its why they have Steve Bunce on for 1 hour per week and show 2 Premiership games in the same time frame.

Soccer is more popular than Boxing. It attracts a higher percentage of the Public.

Take for example Sky Sports recent advertising campaign- they are selling their product off the back of 6 sports- boxing not included.

Its the same with womens sports. Setanta and Sky make a hullabaloo about showing sports which are male-dominated.

The bottom line is that, political correctness aside, the worlds doesn't give a flying fukc about womens boxing or womens football. They want to see the best Male stars.

Of course, there will always be time for womens sports, it has a place, naturally. But when push comes to shove, it is the best male stars that make the headlines.

Hero Of College · 11-08-2008 12:30pm

megadodge wrote: »

Congrats Katie, yet again.
Fantastic boxer and that's taking no gender into account.
I know she spars with the Joyces in Athy regularly, which shows how good she is.

However, on the topic of women's sport, I can't believe it, but I'm agreeing with Hero here. Women's sport doesn't get the coverage simply because they're not as good as their male equivalents !!

If a women is 'world champion' it means she's the best of half the world.
If a man is 'world champion' it means he's the best in the entire world.

There is no anti-woman sentiment in what I'm saying, they're just the facts .

Thats basically what it comes down to. And why wouldn't you agree- I always tell the truth.

Why is Womens Football called "WOMENS Football" and not just "FOOTBALL".

Why is the "WOMENS WORLD CUP" called just that??

Was Germany 2006 called "THE MENS WORLD CUP"??

No...it was just "THE WORLD CUP".

The very use of the word "WOMAN" automatically highlights the product in question as being slower, worse, not as good, not as technically proficient, lower, slower, lesser....take your pick of words.

The best female tennis player will hit her serves slower and will always lose to a male counterpart.

The best female high jumper will jump less distance than her best male counterpart.

The best female fighter will always be pounded into a gooey mash by her best male counterpart. Its why when women "fight" men, the woman is usually in tip-top shape and the male is a 5' oriental dwarf with the reach of a t-rex and the heart-rate of a hyperactive mouse.
http://espn.go.com/boxing/news/1999/1009/106430.html
Margaret McGregor won every round on every card of her four-round, history-making bout Saturday night against Loi Chow, a jockey who showed virtually no boxing skills.
McGregor, a 36-year-old hometown favorite from Bremerton, Wash., towered over Chow and threw combinations that racked up points, even if they didn't seem to do any damage.
All three judges scored the bout 40-36 in McGregor's favor.
McGregor, in a red top and gold trunks, landed a right to the head in the first two-minute round, then a four-punch combination. Chow responded by bouncing away. He kept bouncing all over the ring, smiling and doing not much else.
Chow, 0-3, hardly posed a worthy opponent. The 33-year-old from Vancouver threw punches awkwardly, covered up most of the fight, and landed only a few punches. Listed as 5-foot-2, he seemed a head shorter than the 5-4 McGregor.
McGregor, 4-0, threw punches like a trained fighter, even if she never came close to hurting Chow. She was the busier fighter throughout the bout, and never looked intimidated by Chow or the occasion. As the fourth round came to a close, the crowd chanted, "Margaret, Margaret," and she responded with a combination to the body.
"It was like my dream was coming true right before my eyes," McGregor said of those chants. "This is the biggest day of my life."
The crowd of 2,768 roared with delight at the decision in her favor, but booed Chow for his defensive, lackluster effort.
"I fought my best tonight," McGregor said. "All I want to do is keep getting better and better. I don't care who it is, I'll fight anybody."
Chow's blood pressure was high an hour before the fight card started, and the doctor told him to rest a while before taking it again to make sure he was OK. Chow passed the test the second time.
Chow blamed his loss on his high blood pressure, saying that his blood pressure actually peaked at 185 over 115 before he took some medication to bring it down.
"I didn't feel right," Chow said. "I don't think I got whipped. I hit her with a couple of good shots."
Asked what, if anything, the bout proved, Chow responded with a smile and a bit of bravado: "It proves a woman cannot hurt a man."
Asked the same question, McGregor said: "Just that I'm a winner."
A lot of fans, though, attached more significance to the fight.
"I think it's breaking a lot of barriers. I feel like I'm taking part in this big event in history," said Rosemarie Moore, 18, Seattle, attending her first fight.
"Women are saying, `Hey, we're just as good as you.' We've come a long way."
Another fan disagreed.
"It's not a good thing for boxing," said Sherman Daniels, 47, from Renton, Wash. "With all the controversy, this might be the first and the last time a man and a woman fight.

Hero Of College · 11-08-2008 12:31pm

HollowMan wrote: »

Excellent comeback Dodge!

No...it wasn't. It was the sort of response one would expect from those crippled by the social dystrophy that is Political Correctness.

buck65 · 11-08-2008 1:01pm

No, it was a good comeback, take your spanking.

Hero Of College · 11-08-2008 1:07pm

Dodge wrote: »

So you equate sgnificance in terms of Setanta Sports schedules? Is Sonia O'Sullivan's silver medal less significant than John Treacy's?

No, Treacy ran the Marathon, in 1984, I think, and O'Sullivan ran a much shorter race in 2000.

Treacys Silver in the Marathon was more significant than the Silver a WOMAN achieved in the same marathon the same year. Conversely, the male silver medalist in the same race O'Sullivan won her Silver in the Same year {2000} would have run a better time than O'Sullivan- and Szabo too.

As it happens, Women MIGHT be better "Super-Marathon" runners. Maybe that makes you feel better.

Hero Of College · 11-08-2008 1:08pm

buck65 wrote: »

No, it was a good comeback, take your spanking.

Dude- when I am nailed I know it. I, uh, Dodged the shot.

Now, if a MAN had thrown that shot....:pac::pac::pac:

T-K-O · 11-08-2008 3:03pm

IMO womens sport is simply not as good as mens.

Take nothing away from KT she is an outstanding boxer.

walshb · 11-08-2008 3:21pm

If you simply watch Taylor and take away the fact it's women boxing, I see a really brilliant and amazing talent. She seems to be that bit ahead of every woman and is almost approaching mens level. She is that good. I agree that mens sport always seems more enjoyable to watch, but physically, men are simply more adept at sporting activity, stronger, faster, fitter, more agile etc. It's nature!

Dodge · 11-08-2008 3:22pm

Hero Of College wrote: »

No...it wasn't. It was the sort of response one would expect from those crippled by the social dystrophy that is Political Correctness.

You couldn't be further from the truth. However continue to think what you like about me based on internet postings on Sport....

Hero Of College wrote: »

No, Treacy ran the Marathon, in 1984, I think, and O'Sullivan ran a much shorter race in 2000.

Treacys Silver in the Marathon was more significant than the Silver a WOMAN achieved in the same marathon the same year. Conversely, the male silver medalist in the same race O'Sullivan won her Silver in the Same year {2000} would have run a better time than O'Sullivan- and Szabo too.

Again, how does the distance/time etc ralte to the significance of it? It could be argued that O'Sullivan's was more significant as hers was the only medal ever won by an Irish woman in track & field.

By your popularity logic, the Silver medal won by Irish sailors in 1980 is less significant than the bronze won by Hugh Russell. Then again by your length of event logic, the sailor's was more significant.

Taylor rules again!

Comments