Another Thompson v Haye report

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 12 Sep 2004, 04:26

http://www.thesweetscience.com/boxing-a ... aten-haye/

If you can be arsed.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 12 Sep 2004, 07:14

Good article, it seems that this is one of those fights that being ringside makes alot of difference. From the TV, whilst it was clear Haye was tiring, he certainly didn't look that much in trouble in the 4th.

I thought Neilly and McKenzie were going over the top talking about the demise of Thompson, obviously they were there and I wasn't and it appears apparently that they commentary was quite accurate on this occasion.

I did find the whole stoppage a surprise from the TV set, Haye didn't see that hurt by the knockdown (didn't look a clean shot either) and I thought the first time he was hurt by Thompsons' punches (and not just fatigued) was when he staggered. With only a few seconds left in the round I thought it was an odd decision to throw in the towel, especially as Haye could hurt Thomspon.

However, from your piece, and the ringside commentary - I suspect the TV wasn't showing quite how badly Thompson had hurt Haye in the 4th and 5th rounds.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 12 Sep 2004, 07:26

David, just had a look at the site - quite a good one.

Never heard of it before, I read your profile that also was an eye opener.

Radio work in the States? Wow, how did you get that gig may I ask. That would be something I would love to do and I think my experience as a lecturer will hold me in good stead.

One of my former lecturers (and still a mate) has done alot of TV work with his Psychology, so I am hoping that once (if) I get my doctrate I can follow his lead when it comes to Sport Psychology.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 12 Sep 2004, 08:50

stujones wrote:David, just had a look at the site - quite a good one.

Never heard of it before, I read your profile that also was an eye opener.

Radio work in the States? Wow, how did you get that gig may I ask. That would be something I would love to do and I think my experience as a lecturer will hold me in good stead.

One of my former lecturers (and still a mate) has done alot of TV work with his Psychology, so I am hoping that once (if) I get my doctrate I can follow his lead when it comes to Sport Psychology.

Hi mate - the site is a real classy operation and has big, big plans. I'm delighted to be on board there.

As for the radio work, I was approached by a Sports Radio station from Cleveland to provide insight on Lewis v Vitaly and spoke at length on Bruno, Roy Jones et al who were all topics at the time.

Probably the best 20 minutes of my life, well within context.

adamiw · Post by **adamiw** » 12 Sep 2004, 09:30

nice one. did my report last night, nearly 2000 words, and that was on the Thompson-Haye fight alone. Too long i think, but it's alright.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 13 Sep 2004, 04:43

I watched it on saturday afternoon and you could tell Thompson was getting to him in the fourth round. You can also notice a complete change in Haye's demeanour in the fourth round as he realises he has thrown his best shots and Thompson is still coming at him. I picked Thompson in 6 so pretty close.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 13 Sep 2004, 06:53

Good report David, and good to meet you at Wembley too.

That was some win by Thompson, he went through hell fire in the first couple of rounds.
Haye deserves credit for taking the fight, but his tactics were terrible: Blow out Carl early.....and that was it!

No back up plan, and looked like he hadn't been doing much road work either. He'd shot his bolt, and it soon became obvious to everyone, including The Cat.
Back to the drawing board, all is not lost.
He just has to look at a similar result a few years back, when another big hitting, talented Londoner came badly unstuck at the hands of a seasoned pro: Watson v Benn.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 13 Sep 2004, 06:59

Yep - great to meet you too MW.

Haye's tactics and prep were clearly deeply flawed.

He can come back, if he's humble enough to do so.

Not sure how big that particular IF is.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 13 Sep 2004, 07:02

Watson v Benn is the fight which sprang to mind for me too. However, this loss is less significant, Benn was no novice when he lost to Watson, he just wasn't prepared for someone who didn't fall over, and had no backup plan. Watson schooled him,

I really don't know whether or not Haye was physically tired, if he didn't train for this fight then he is bloody mad, he must have known nobody can guarantee knocking out Carl early. Ezra sellers had to knock him down four times before he stopped him, and Sellers was a massive hitter.

J · Post by J » 13 Sep 2004, 08:29

yeah interesting Im trying to get an i/view with Haye, have been for some weeks and have been promised.
Interesting to see what he says , top night though, much silliness later on and always good to meet up!!! Thought Haye looked tired and puffing halfway through the second round, he lost zip in his punches and and as MW says "shot his bolt".

I find that incredible though that a top ahtlete should only have 5 mins worth of stamina no matter how much he put into those two rounds.

haiving said that I really dont know how the eff Carl stayed upright in those first two rounds.

gotta be up there as one of the best chins around.

Matchfixer · Post by **Matchfixer** » 13 Sep 2004, 09:04

J wrote: haiving said that I really dont know how the eff Carl stayed upright in those first two rounds.

gotta be up there as one of the best chins around.

Makes me wonder why everyone called him a chinny banger.

A wobbly legged banger is fair enough, but chinny???

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 13 Sep 2004, 09:14

Watching that display against Haye, has made me re-evaluate Carl's chin. I think it is poor balance which makes him look like he's constantly in trouble. When he gets hit it's normally when he's off balance, because if his opponent is moving, he's always one step behind him. In the 1st round, Carl would be facing the wrong direction whenever he tried to fight back, because Haye was simply dancing around him at will.

I think this makes Carl look like he's more hurt than he often is, sometimes he's staggered but his head is totally clear.

With the passing of time, Eubank's back to back fights with Carl look more and more impressive, as does Johnny Nelson's victory. Carl is obviously past his best, even though he finds a way to win, for Eubank to even go the distance with him, against a quicker and fitter Thompson is some achievement.

adamiw · Post by **adamiw** » 13 Sep 2004, 09:21

yeah, think it's a combo of 3 things. His balance, the way he sags back when near the ropes to appear tired and also tht he gets hurt but recovers very quickly.

J · Post by J » 13 Sep 2004, 09:24

yip the balance thing makes him look likehe is permanently in trouble having said that there were a few punches in there that would have floored anyone with a supsect chin.

including a monstorous uppercut in the second.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 13 Sep 2004, 09:32

The poor footwork is probably a result of his kickboxing career.

But Uriah Grant shook him with jabs....

Haye also passed the chin test despite his defeat IMO.

H failed the tactical and stamina tests however.

J · Post by J » 13 Sep 2004, 09:39

i'd go along with that .

J · Post by J » 13 Sep 2004, 09:39

i'd go along with that .

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 13 Sep 2004, 09:42

so sure you said it twice

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 13 Sep 2004, 09:48

DavidPayne wrote:But Uriah Grant shook him with jabs....

I've seen you say this before Dave but wasn't it the other way around? Admittedly I only watched the fight once but the way I remember it Thompson only had to look like he was going to punch and Grant would be all over the place.

DavidPayne · Post by **DavidPayne** » 13 Sep 2004, 09:50

To be honest Kilburn, they were as bad as one another. Thompson won and Grant was about 74 years old then, but both looked totally shot that night and that was what...3 years ago?

J · Post by J » 13 Sep 2004, 09:57

DavidPayne wrote:so sure you said it twice

sorry bout that my connection is playing up sometimes and goes double slow.

i refresh and it posts again, apologies I know listening to me once can be enough

Priff · Post by **Priff** » 13 Sep 2004, 10:10

stujones wrote:I thought Neilly and McKenzie were going over the top talking about the demise of Thompson, obviously they were there and I wasn't and it appears apparently that they commentary was quite accurate on this occasion.

The bit that pissed me off about the commentary was as soon as the towel was thrown in (good call by the corner), Neilly screams, "Haye's career is in tatters!, Haye's career is in tatters!".

Why? Because he's lost a fight? Give me a f*cking break. I was more pissed at that comment than anything I saw in the ring.

FW wraps his fighters in cotton wool, and everyone wonders why. It's people claiming a career is over or a fighter is exposed by losing 1 fight that contribute to the idea that fighters have to remain unbeaten.
Haye was exposed as a 10 fight novice for anyone who needed that fact exposing, if was not a career ending fight in anyone elses eyes.

I think Haye needed that learning experience and it came at a time where he will not lose career momentum...although I was surprised about how little about the fight Hayed seemed to understand. He thought he was caught by a good punch but otherwise OK. That's not how it looked to me.