Danny points us to our first-ever boxing article
, in which author Kevin Iole makes the following insane comment about boxer Francisco Lorenzo, who apparently won a recent championship bout thanks to a little acting job at the end:Specifically, he won by disqualification with an acting job the likes of which haven’t been seen since Jack Nicholson in “As Good As It Gets” in 1997, but the point is, he won.
Now, this is slightly
better than comparing people who recklessly spend a lot of money to a mildly famous Mexican food-pimping dog,
if for no other reason than at least it's an "acting job" being compared to an acting job. But why "As Good as it Gets?" And why throw in the year?
That characterization is of an old novelist with OCD. So there's obviously no possible actual direct connection. Iole is simply choosing a "great performance," to indicate that Lorenzo really faked his way to the title, and the great acting performance is...this one? It's like Nicholson's 18th best performance in a movie. I don't understand.
Why not Laurence Olivier in "Marathon Man?" Or Pierce Brosnan in "The Thomas Crown Affair?" Or Scott Bakula in "Necessary Roughness?"
Or better yet, why not say something like, "Lorenzo stole this title like Newman and Redford in 'The Sting,'" or something?
There is also this brain twister:“After watching the instant replay, I believe that there is no one in the world not thinking that a disqualification was one of the greatest mistakes ever in boxing,” WBC president Jose Sulaiman said.
Seems like maybe there's an easier way to say that.
Labels: analogies, boxing, jack nicholson, kevin iole, scott bakula