The Fight Game with Jim Lampley: Overtime September 2014
Sep 21 2014 12:00 AM
{loadposition aboveComponent}

Jim Lampley and Michelle Beadle are joined by Max Kellerman to extend the conversation from Tuesday?s episode of The Fight Game.

Comment on this video

Radam G says:

Danggit! No setups, please! YUP! Money May was indeed hurt in that third round and a tooth was knocked out. But J-Lamp doesn't need to plant a lady on his show to be lady hating and bashing Money May.

We know about his past. We also know about J-Lamp's past of getting drunk and high on weed and using his live-in girlfriend for a combined punching bag, double-end bag and speed bag. And we also know about Max Kellerman chin checking his wifey almost like Ray Price did his wife. So the pots should not be calling the kettle black.

Both jive suckers Money May and J-Lamp did da crime. And in da slammer spent some time.

This J-Lamp segment was his weakest show. And nobody likes to be played for a fool, you ought to know. And whuppin' da hebejeebeez outta dames, damsels and dolls, you should not be on da down low. And about somebody else you blow.

No! No! No! That is not how things flow. Call a spade a spade. And bring your @$$ outta of the shade. Take the heat. And that punkedified [$¡¢] jive of beating da double-x chromosome carriers, don't ever repeat. Holla!

Radam G says:

Wow! Michelle B should call a spade a spade and come clean with it, and not hide in the shade.

She says she wants nothing to do with Money May. But she is a new additional to J-Lamp's show which will be featuring him and Max — both known wackers-attackers of xx chromosome carriers.

Maybe Michelle B ought to STFU or resign from the show already instead of hypocriting. Holla!

amayseng says:

Michelle B was added to give the women support and perspective.

No such thing as bad publicity. Floyd doesnt care, he makes 32 million to bike around for 12 rounds and clinch between some decent right hands and check hooks.

Cant blame him for fighting safe, he is unexciting, selfish and hasnt knocked anyone out in 7 years but makes 32 million a fight……

I am doing something wrong.

Radam G says:

[QUOTE=amayseng;65048]Michelle B was added to give the women support and perspective.

No such thing as bad publicity. Floyd doesnt care, he makes 32 million to bike around for 12 rounds and clinch between some decent right hands and check hooks.

Cant blame him for fighting safe, he is unexciting, selfish and hasnt knocked anyone out in 7 years but makes 32 million a fight……

I am doing something wrong.[/QUOTE]

But she is apparently giving the women a double standard, bias perspective where talking head men are not held to the same rules and respect as pugs and other athletes. Holla!

The Shadow says:

Exactly Radam, they forget/overlook that Lampley got criminal with abuse while Max just got suspended for laying the smack down on wifey.

The hypocrisy is resounding.

Like Floyd, Radam and Hugh, Jim and, by all accounts, Max both love The Rock's brand of pie, preferable fresh and ripe.

Jim loves him some of that Iron Sheik medicine, that we know.

Hey, I ain't trippin'! But the manner in which they spoke — ironically how Lampley stated that given Mayweather's history, expecting no backlash was stupid — I found him doing the exact same thing of which he accused Floyd astounding.

The fact that he was able to do it with a straight face was hilarious as well.

The only reason he supposedly didn't throw her over a balcony was because lacked the strength to execute the throw.

Which brings forth an important point:

I think it's interesting how things in society receive varying degrees of outrage.

There's like this primitive, simplistic public opinion about domestic violence.

When this chick set Floyd up to be robbed, it's Floyd's fault for being stupid.

Yet when these hoes catch the repo, Floyd catches hell.

Jay-Z eats punches from Solange and people ask, “What did he do?”

He? HE?! What did HE do?!

He got assaulted, that's what he did!

And turned the other cheek like Christ, call it the Passion of the Roc.

Yet people justified that and made him the bad guy.

“She's protecting her sister,” or “He's probably cheating!”

Fast forward to Ray Rice and everyone loses their mind in outrage.

So domestic abuse is only bad when it's man-on-woman?

What about emotional abuse, where women have the edge, which often has greater impact?

There are plenty of women who can — and do — beat the s*** out of their men.

“Good for you, girl!”

Just look at this video. That's not bad [url]http://youtu.be/0ZR6NK2sgyc

Here this man is pleading and begging for mercy, yet he gets floored over and over.

And guess what, the video was in a comedy category!

This one chick gave me a black eye out of nowhere. She liked me, we were out together and Shadow was on the hunt. BAM!

Then four months later, another slapped me in my face for rejecting her advances.

Then both had the audacity to later text me, “I forgive you.”

What. The. Heck.

As if it was OK to strike me?

Or how about this scenario:

Say Jay-Z went out with Ronda Rousey? She can kick his ***. She's stronger than him.

Now one day, she's on a high after kicking some ***.

So she tries to do something to Jigga, tries to go to far one day in the sack.

“Tonight, YOU will tap!” and goes rough on the poor guy.

“No,” he pleads. She ignores it. “Stop being a b*tch” and overpowers him. (It happens.)

In desperation, he clocks her and escapes.

Who'd be vilified in the press? Doesn't take a genius to figure out.

To take a real example, Tiger Wood got beaten with golf clubs who later took half his ****

“Good for you girl!”

Two months ago, I saw her on the cover of a magazine, how she found herself and even RICHER man, talking' bout “I'm slowly getting over it.”

Getting over what? Hitting the $100m home run with Tiger's iron while not taking the slightest bit of criticism for trying to the crap out of dude with deadly weapons.

My point is abuse and violence is far more than inter-gender and supposed biological factors.

While the image of a girl knocked unconscious was graphic, was it that much worse than a 6-7 heavyweight contender smacking around a novice welterweight in Charlie Z?

And if you have the right to attack any trespasser or burglar with firearms, does the rule no longer apply if the intruder is a woman?

Violence is never the answer. But neither are double standards.

The Good Doctor says:

[QUOTE=The Shadow;65093]Exactly Radam, they forget/overlook that Lampley got criminal with abuse while Max just got suspended for laying the smack down on wifey.

The hypocrisy is resounding.

Like Floyd, Radam and Hugh, Jim and, by all accounts, Max both love The Rock's brand of pie, preferable fresh and ripe.

Jim loves him some of that Iron Sheik medicine, that we know.

Hey, I ain't trippin'! But the manner in which they spoke — ironically how Lampley stated that given Mayweather's history, expecting no backlash was stupid — I found him doing the exact same thing of which he accused Floyd astounding.

The fact that he was able to do it with a straight face was hilarious as well.

The only reason he supposedly didn't throw her over a balcony was because lacked the strength to execute the throw.

Which brings forth an important point:

I think it's interesting how things in society receive varying degrees of outrage.

There's like this primitive, simplistic public opinion about domestic violence.

When this chick set Floyd up to be robbed, it's Floyd's fault for being stupid.

Yet when these hoes catch the repo, Floyd catches hell.

Jay-Z eats punches from Solange and people ask, “What did he do?”

He? HE?! What did HE do?!

He got assaulted, that's what he did!

And turned the other cheek like Christ, call it the Passion of the Roc.

Yet people justified that and made him the bad guy.

“She's protecting her sister,” or “He's probably cheating!”

Fast forward to Ray Rice and everyone loses their mind in outrage.

So domestic abuse is only bad when it's man-on-woman?

What about emotional abuse, where women have the edge, which often has greater impact?

There are plenty of women who can — and do — beat the s*** out of their men.

“Good for you, girl!”

Just look at this video. That's not bad [url]http://youtu.be/0ZR6NK2sgyc

Here this man is pleading and begging for mercy, yet he gets floored over and over.

And guess what, the video was in a comedy category!

This one chick gave me a black eye out of nowhere. She liked me, we were out together and Shadow was on the hunt. BAM!

Then four months later, another slapped me in my face for rejecting her advances.

Then both had the audacity to later text me, “I forgive you.”

What. The. Heck.

As if it was OK to strike me?

Or how about this scenario:

Say Jay-Z went out with Ronda Rousey? She can kick his ***. She's stronger than him.

Now one day, she's on a high after kicking some ***.

So she tries to do something to Jigga, tries to go to far one day in the sack.

“Tonight, YOU will tap!” and goes rough on the poor guy.

“No,” he pleads. She ignores it. “Stop being a b*tch” and overpowers him. (It happens.)

In desperation, he clocks her and escapes.

Who'd be vilified in the press? Doesn't take a genius to figure out.

To take a real example, Tiger Wood got beaten with golf clubs who later took half his ****

“Good for you girl!”

Two months ago, I saw her on the cover of a magazine, how she found herself and even RICHER man, talking' bout “I'm slowly getting over it.”

Getting over what? Hitting the $100m home run with Tiger's iron while not taking the slightest bit of criticism for trying to the crap out of dude with deadly weapons.

My point is abuse and violence is far more than inter-gender and supposed biological factors.

While the image of a girl knocked unconscious was graphic, was it that much worse than a 6-7 heavyweight contender smacking around a novice welterweight in Charlie Z?

And if you have the right to attack any trespasser or burglar with firearms, does the rule no longer apply if the intruder is a woman?

Violence is never the answer. But neither are double standards.[/QUOTE]

I agree it is hypocritical but I am firm believer that you should look past the messenger and look at the message. Jim, Max, and tons of people who criticized Floyd have done their dirt, but even if they have, it doesn't make them wrong.

I think sometimes credibility is overstated and truth is always understated. If I am dumb as wet bricks but I tell you 2+2=4, my credibility says how the heck would I know but the truth is still the truth.

The Shadow says:

[QUOTE=The Good Doctor;65095]I agree it is hypocritical but I am firm believer that you should look past the messenger and look at the message. Jim, Max, and tons of people who criticized Floyd have done their dirt, but even if they have, it doesn't make them wrong.

I think sometimes credibility is overstated and truth is always understated. If I am dumb as wet bricks but I tell you 2+2=4, my credibility says how the heck would I know but the truth is still the truth.[/QUOTE]

That's a very good point. When it comes to the truth or knowledge, the source/medium is irrelevant

That being said, what truth was being told?

They weren't talking facts, they were talking opinion.

Lampley's main contention seemed to be that Floyd Mayweather was a bad human being who was stupid to think he wouldn't get attacked publicly for speaking on a topic given his past.

That just makes HBO and Lampley lose credibility, especially considering who the target was and the motivation behind it.

Moreover, their decision to “attack” Floyd with the vigor they did — and using those two to convey the message — makes them guilty of the exact same ill-advised reasoning they accused Mayweather of.

And I still maintain that this topic should be broached with much greater nuance and sophistication.

In the end, his/HBO's point was pointless and inherently fallacious on several different levels.

dino da vinci says:

Whoa, slow right down. Lampley is a gentleman. The incident you're referring to is one of those 'three sides to every story' story. Man is a class act. At the time of the incident Lamps had two artificial hips. The man might not have been favored in that particular scrap.

That said, we've already covered this topic in this space. A man is never to hit a woman. End of story.

The Good Doctor says:

[QUOTE=The Shadow;65096]That's a very good point. When it comes to the truth or knowledge, the source/medium is irrelevant

That being said, what truth was being told?

They weren't talking facts, they were talking opinion.

[B]Lampley's main contention seemed to be that Floyd Mayweather was a bad human being who was stupid to think he wouldn't get attacked publicly for speaking on a topic given his past.
[/B]
That just makes HBO and Lampley lose credibility, especially considering who the target was and the motivation behind it.

Moreover, their decision to “attack” Floyd with the vigor they did — and using those two to convey the message — makes them guilty of the exact same ill-advised reasoning they accused Mayweather of.

And I still maintain that this topic should be broached with much greater nuance and sophistication.

In the end, his/HBO's point was pointless and inherently fallacious on several different levels.[/QUOTE]

I don't think Lampley is wrong in sending that message. Floyd has by in large demonstrated that he isn't the best of dudes during the most prominent parts of his career. In addition, in this

“I am looking for something to be mad about society”, Floyd had to know that even if he said all the right things about the situation he still would have caught shade for even opening his mouth.

As for using Lampley and Max, the look is peculiar at best. Because domestic violence is the “glory” topic right now, I guess they had to broach it, but I think they could have found better ways to convey it.

The sad part about this is, is that everybody's so called outrage and call to arms is not over Ray Rice, it's over a tape and being opportunistic. Yes I said it.

The Shadow says:

[QUOTE=dino da vinci;65099]Whoa, slow right down. Lampley is a gentleman. The incident you're referring to is one of those 'three sides to every story' story. Man is a class act. At the time of the incident Lamps had two artificial hips. The man might not have been favored in that particular scrap.

That said, we've already covered this topic in this space. A man is never to hit a woman. End of story.[/QUOTE]

Exactly, that's my point. The overall public debate lacks nuance.

No one is to ever hit anyone.

He may have been overmatched, maybe even heroic. I don't really know.

I don't judge him either way, I only question the lack of nuance in how the topic is/was broached.

In Mayweather's case, the same one has admitted (bragged?). to pulling a gun on him and hitting him on numerous occasions.

Again, none of my business. I don't judge nor do I care.

But all that being said, abuse isn't the answer.

Especially one not when you have a significant advantage over another.

That shouldn't just apply to women exclusively. Abuse is wrong, no matter who does it.

Radam G says:

We live in a world of “double standards” and contradictions. And that is the way the ball bounces. Life isn't fair, and it never will never be.

It is a bytch! And then you die. It's like Chess, the kings are bosses, but the queens are controlling syet — I mean the board. You don't put your hands on queen bytches. Stank momma either. They will either f*** you up, or be the reason that you get f***ed up.

J-Zay was keeping it real. He went out on his shield. Took his arse whuppin' by a woman — his sister-in-law — like a man.

I've seen a whole lot of men go out on their shields. GOAT Ali, Richard Pryor, Red Foxx, Drew Bundini and myself, just to name a few.

We guys just have to chillax, keep going out on our shields and just take those arse thrashing like men with stiff upward lips. And be thankful to God that we are not black widows. 'Cause doze spider chicks luv ya long time, and then kill your arse. OMFG! Holla!

brooklynrules says:

Thought it was a good show. I wished to pass on Mayweather-Madaina 2 cause it was a setup for Floyd to re-do, and Chino to pick up a few; dollars that is. However, I had a big bet on Mickey Bey so… I think Kellerman gave intelligent responses, Im not sure why a woman who doesn't know all that much about the sport is in there; why not a female ex-boxer instead?
Enough about Floyd beating on women already, lets stick to boxing… It's looking more and more that GGG – the most exciting fighter this side of Pacman – will go up to 168 or so and fight Ward. Cotto, Canello would lose millions and their titles to Genady, and as Paulie Malinagi said, Golovkin would hospitalize Chavez, so what's left at 160 for Gennady?

amayseng says:

I have taken a few shots to the face from a few crazy girls in my youth…No I never fired back, I was never even mad about it, just put off. I grew up with 3 sisters so I know women can be violent, but I would never strike one back.