Johnny Nelson interview

adamiw · Post by **adamiw** » 17 Jul 2004, 07:33

http://www.boxingtime.com/Nelson.htm

8)

theguru · Post by **theguru** » 17 Jul 2004, 09:02

Very well written Admin

adamiw · Post by **adamiw** » 17 Jul 2004, 12:30

Is Johnny spot on when he says that Warren's knowledge is equal to that of the 'average joe' on the street? Or has he been a little unfair to Farnk.

His comments about David Haye interested me greatly. He's one of those that thinks that Haye is rushing things, and a win against Thompson elevates him to a level that he's not ready to compete at.

JC · Post by JC » 17 Jul 2004, 13:42

adamiw wrote:His comments about David Haye interested me greatly. He's one of those that thinks that Haye is rushing things, and a win against Thompson elevates him to a level that he's not ready to compete at.

I agree with Johnny that Thompson should not really still be in the top ten, and therefore a win over Thompson should not really put Haye in the top ten. I think if Haye does beat Thompson the selection of his next opponent (after thompson) will be crucial. Is Thompson's IBO title on the line in this one? If it is that will complicate matters event further as, Haye has always stated his intention to go the British/commonwealth/European title route, and then win a genuine world title.

Good interview I enjoyed it.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 17 Jul 2004, 15:09

Sort of agree with your comments JC, I think Thompson should be in the top ten at this moment, but a Haye victory wouldn't necessarily mean a top ten placing, because it might be Thompson losing the fight (age) as opposed to Haye winning it. Haye beat Arthur Williams who was probably in the top twenty at the time, however I think people would be premature to place Haye in the top twenty. Arthur Williams slides down the rankings as opposed to Haye moving up that significantly.

A Haye victory over Thompson would move him into the top 20, but not top 10 - Thompson would slide to outside the top 20.

Kind of like when Willy Wise beat then top tenner Julio Ceasar Chavez, nobody put Wise in the top ten. Chavez moved out of the ten though.

Adam, as for Johnny's comments on his promter certainly controversial and I do disagree with him. The average Joe on the street would know have the boxers Warren has said he has tried to negotiate with. Also, when Warren says "I've tried to get Joe Bloggs but he's asking too much money", I've never thought why is he negotiating with Joe Bloggs, he's not worthy.

I actually disagree strongly, although have never met him Johnny is more equipped to judge than me.

Coconut · Post by **Coconut** » 19 Jul 2004, 06:54

Agreed. Quite similar to the point about Tarver and Jones - Jones is now no longer PFP top dog, but that doesn't make Tarver the boss either. A Haye win versus Thompson will just show that Thompson is sliding, which TBH was shown in the Rothmann fight, where he was getting panned by an average boxer.

I think the problem only arises if Haye starts believing he's top 10. At the moment he's looked good but there's been some judicious matchmaking, which is exactly what a Thompson fight is.

JC · Post by JC » 19 Jul 2004, 07:02

Imagine for a moment that Haye does beat Thompson in a similar way to what people are predicting. Who do people think would be the best opponent for Haye after the Thompson fight?

adamiw · Post by **adamiw** » 19 Jul 2004, 07:26

J-C wrote:Imagine for a moment that Haye does beat Thompson in a similar way to what people are predicting. Who do people think would be the best opponent for Haye after the Thompson fight?

said it for a long time, he should fight Jorge Castro. This guy is tougher than old boots, and is rated in the top 10. He will give Haye a test and most certainly some rounds.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 19 Jul 2004, 08:40

Good call. Yep, or perhaps Guillermo Jones, who is another experienced campaigner, who remarkably started at welterweight! How he ever made that weight is beyond me, the fornicator's 6' 4"! Went the distance with Nelson not so long ago.

Jorge castro is an amazing fighter, only stopped once in a very long career, and that was by a very powerful cruiserweight in JC Gomez.

I wonder whether Castro's lack of size and power at the weight would make it easier for Haye. I think Haye needs to be hurt to be deterred, and I am not sure Castro can do that. Would definetly not make it easy for Haye though.

theguru · Post by **theguru** » 20 Jul 2004, 05:52

He made the lighter weight by taking Diuretics,then when he fought nelson he took anabolic steroids to increase his weight and diuretics to dilute the sample and flush the drug metabolites out of his system,subsequently he failed the drug test.Jones was and is a cheat and deserves no credit or respect,simple as that.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Jul 2004, 05:58

Christ I didn't know that....

knockout · Post by **knockout** » 20 Jul 2004, 06:33

theguru wrote:He made the lighter weight by taking Diuretics,then when he fought nelson he took anabolic steroids to increase his weight and diuretics to dilute the sample and flush the drug metabolites out of his system,subsequently he failed the drug test.Jones was and is a cheat and deserves no credit or respect,simple as that.

a bit harsh.... RJJ, Mosley are both under scrutiny for steriod abuse..... but they dont come under that kind of fire.....

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Jul 2004, 06:50

Only because nothing has been unequivocally proven as yet.

knockout · Post by **knockout** » 20 Jul 2004, 06:52

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Only because nothing has been unequivocally proven as yet.

I thought RJJ had failed the drug test end of story.....

Mosleys time will come....

knockout artist · Post by **knockout artist** » 20 Jul 2004, 07:42

theguru wrote:He made the lighter weight by taking Diuretics,then when he fought nelson he took anabolic steroids to increase his weight and diuretics to dilute the sample and flush the drug metabolites out of his system,subsequently he failed the drug test.Jones was and is a cheat and deserves no credit or respect,simple as that.

Same goes for Roy Jones?

Lugh · Post by **Lugh** » 20 Jul 2004, 07:45

knockout wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:Only because nothing has been unequivocally proven as yet.
I thought RJJ had failed the drug test end of story.....

Mosleys time will come....

Ironic for both fighters (RJJ & SSM ) that their once-stellar careers may well end up (when viewed in the future) being seen in a totally different way.

Less famous than infamous perhaps?

J · Post by J » 20 Jul 2004, 07:51

Lugh wrote:
knockout wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:Only because nothing has been unequivocally proven as yet.
I thought RJJ had failed the drug test end of story.....

Mosleys time will come....
Ironic for both fighters (RJJ & SSM ) that their once-stellar careers may well end up (when viewed in the future) being seen in a totally different way.

Less famous than infamous perhaps?

is this true though, I heard rumours? Why if Jones is a drugs cheat was he not banned like in any other sport. If this is true this TOTALLY tarnishes his career acheivements and standing in the overall picture of greats. (not that he was in my top ten anyway) but ive never liked the man at all. Not one bit.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Jul 2004, 08:00

I'm indifferent to his persona, but his skills are undeniable. In his prime he was one of the most naturally gifted fighters of all time, and to be honest, I fail to see how steroids would have benefitted his style, they aren't going to improve your reflexes or defensive skills.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 20 Jul 2004, 08:14

Jones AND an opponent BOTH failed a steriod test for a title match.

Both got away with it scot free.

Its not what you know its .....

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Jul 2004, 08:23

How much money you bring into the sport.....

J · Post by J » 20 Jul 2004, 08:24

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I'm indifferent to his persona, but his skills are undeniable. In his prime he was one of the most naturally gifted fighters of all time, and to be honest, I fail to see how steroids would have benefitted his style, they aren't going to improve your reflexes or defensive skills.

sorry mate but bollocks. Rules are rules and using banned substances gives you an edge be it mental or physical, steroids can be used to bulk up so how woudl that not have helped him when fighting the naturally bigger Ruiz?

fornicate the skills, cheats a cheat.
to get off with it scott free is even worse, those responsible should hang their heads in shame. No wonder boxing has allegations of crookedness levelled against it every other day.

knockout · Post by **knockout** » 20 Jul 2004, 08:25

jamesmcdonnell wrote:I'm indifferent to his persona, but his skills are undeniable. In his prime he was one of the most naturally gifted fighters of all time, and to be honest, I fail to see how steroids would have benefitted his style, they aren't going to improve your reflexes or defensive skills.

RJJ would still have been amazing without the steriods, but to make the impact at 175 it seems he wanted a bit more strength and size....

just like sprinters take it to make themselves more explosive RJJ got the same benefits and I would alledge Sugar Shane did the same...

Of course it wont improve your reflexes or defensive skills but it can make you more explosive and powerful.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Jul 2004, 08:30

I think that Steroid abuse is probably rife in boxing, really I do, there is no real incentive to ban people as unlike other sports, individuals bring a lot of money into the sport, banning them would lose a lot of people a lot of money. Other sports are not as reliant on big stars. For instance, Golf would survive if Tiger woods was banned. There is a structure and the sport is resilient, unlike boxing which has no structure and isn't.

J · Post by J » 20 Jul 2004, 08:36

so where is the deterrent?
WIth this thinking then steroid abuse will become an inherent part of the sport.
Then no-one will take it seriously it will be finished unless you turn it into WWE.
Not having a go mate but Im surprised by your reaction here.
Seems you almost condone use of steroids in certain instances? (i.e how much potential money they can earn)

I would hardly say athletics is a majority headline sport other than the olympics, they seem to ban you if you have talen a cold remedy let alone proven performance enhancers.

Personally Id ban em, for 12 months. Then re-test.
this is exactly the same reason why Tyson as allowed to box post biting Holyfields ear, money talks at the expense of morals I guess.

The Devil In Roy Jones · Post by **The Devil In Roy Jones** » 20 Jul 2004, 08:43

I blame the p4p craze. Everyone wants to be p4p this and p4p that, so they bounce around weight divisions like a yo-yo.

By the way, talking about Tiger Woods and golf, I was at the Open the other day and it was the most boring and un-electrifying major sporting event I've ever attended. The only good thing about the day is that you can see me on the TV coverage as Hamilton sinks his winning put. I think the fact I had to stand on the same spot for 4 hours (to keep my place at the front) helped make my day shit.