the importance of geale v sylvester.....

thunderfromdownunder
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1789
Joined: 15 May 2005, 06:55

the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by thunderfromdownunder »

i was thinking yesterday, there is alot riding on this fight. not just a world title. i think australian boxing needs this victory, we need another marketable star. over the next two years its likley mundine, green, darchinyan, n'dou, soliman and maybe even katsidis will retire. thats the bulk of our p4p list, and im not sold on dib or zappavinga either. if daniel can win the title and make some good defences and get in some big fights in america with guys like chavez jnr or martinez i think he will be the guy who carries australian boxing over the next 3-4 years
dan h
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 728
Joined: 19 Jan 2008, 04:49

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dan h »

I see what you are saying and agre that it is very important to the Aussie public. Geale is one of the best we have at the moment, not up to Vic D's level yet but lets hope.

Geale is Australia's most marketable fight for sure. People are over mundine and green and want a home grown champion to support. If Geale winsd thjis his stock will be on the rise big time!
dberry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3350
Joined: 05 Jan 2010, 02:15

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dberry »

dan h wrote:I see what you are saying and agre that it is very important to the Aussie public. Geale is one of the best we have at the moment, not up to Vic D's level yet but lets hope.

Geale is Australia's most marketable fight for sure. People are over mundine and green and want a home grown champion to support. If Geale winsd thjis his stock will be on the rise big time!
Hmmm. Vic Darchinyan is a limited bullying power puncher that likes to avoid boxers, and Daniel Geale is a talented boxer who has proven he can handle come forward power punchers, I think they both sit at around the same level on the world stage in their respective weight classes and one is on the rise and the other, if not over the hill is certainly on the brow of it.
Watch this open up debate and draw ridicule.
patron
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 448
Joined: 26 Mar 2008, 08:39

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by patron »

dberry wrote:
dan h wrote:I see what you are saying and agre that it is very important to the Aussie public. Geale is one of the best we have at the moment, not up to Vic D's level yet but lets hope.

Geale is Australia's most marketable fight for sure. People are over mundine and green and want a home grown champion to support. If Geale winsd thjis his stock will be on the rise big time!
Hmmm. Vic Darchinyan is a limited bullying power puncher that likes to avoid boxers, and Daniel Geale is a talented boxer who has proven he can handle come forward power punchers, I think they both sit at around the same level on the world stage in their respective weight classes and one is on the rise and the other, if not over the hill is certainly on the brow of it.
Watch this open up debate and draw ridicule.
well said, should stir the pot. but didn,t someone say vic wasn,t an aussie? all the best
thunderfromdownunder
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1789
Joined: 15 May 2005, 06:55

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by thunderfromdownunder »

well if your comparing the two at the weights they are at now, your right. But overall vic is above.
thunderfromdownunder
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1789
Joined: 15 May 2005, 06:55

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by thunderfromdownunder »

patron wrote:
dberry wrote:
dan h wrote:I see what you are saying and agre that it is very important to the Aussie public. Geale is one of the best we have at the moment, not up to Vic D's level yet but lets hope.

Geale is Australia's most marketable fight for sure. People are over mundine and green and want a home grown champion to support. If Geale winsd thjis his stock will be on the rise big time!
Hmmm. Vic Darchinyan is a limited bullying power puncher that likes to avoid boxers, and Daniel Geale is a talented boxer who has proven he can handle come forward power punchers, I think they both sit at around the same level on the world stage in their respective weight classes and one is on the rise and the other, if not over the hill is certainly on the brow of it.
Watch this open up debate and draw ridicule.
well said, should stir the pot. but didn,t someone say vic wasn,t an aussie? all the best
well im sure the Armenians claim vic. And rightly so
dan h
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 728
Joined: 19 Jan 2008, 04:49

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dan h »

dberry wrote:
dan h wrote:I see what you are saying and agre that it is very important to the Aussie public. Geale is one of the best we have at the moment, not up to Vic D's level yet but lets hope.

Geale is Australia's most marketable fight for sure. People are over mundine and green and want a home grown champion to support. If Geale winsd thjis his stock will be on the rise big time!
Hmmm. Vic Darchinyan is a limited bullying power puncher that likes to avoid boxers, and Daniel Geale is a talented boxer who has proven he can handle come forward power punchers, I think they both sit at around the same level on the world stage in their respective weight classes and one is on the rise and the other, if not over the hill is certainly on the brow of it.
Watch this open up debate and draw ridicule.
Perhaps I should have explained more thoroughly. What I mean is that he may have more skill than all the aussie boxers and is one of the best we have but he has not reached Vic's level achievement wise. Vic has won 7 world titles in 3 different weight divisions so Daniel is a long way off but who knows, he might be on his way to something just as great.

Vic may be a bullying power puncher but I disagree that he avoids fighters. I would try and prove that point but thanks to Vic's record there is really no need for me to do so.
dberry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3350
Joined: 05 Jan 2010, 02:15

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dberry »

dan h wrote: Perhaps I should have explained more thoroughly. What I mean is that he may have more skill than all the aussie boxers and is one of the best we have but he has not reached Vic's level achievement wise. Vic has won 7 world titles in 3 different weight divisions so Daniel is a long way off but who knows, he might be on his way to something just as great.

Vic may be a bullying power puncher but I disagree that he avoids fighters. I would try and prove that point but thanks to Vic's record there is really no need for me to do so.
Ahh, thanks to his record, my point is proven, where on his record is Wonjonkam, Kameda and Munoz to name but three big names from the flyweight and super flyweight divisions from when Vic was supposedly world champ of those divisions? He would have had to beat those guys to rule those divisions et never pursued those fights. Any way this is old ground, Vic did fight Mijares, his biggest win and some one suited to his style IMO, and seems to be pursuing rematches with Agbeko, Mares and Donair, a fighter who made a name for himself from his KO win over Vic.
dan h
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 728
Joined: 19 Jan 2008, 04:49

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dan h »

Not fighting every fighter in your division doesn't mean you are avoiding fighters. He fought other belt holders for their belt and won most of his world championships off real world champions. More than I can say for most of our fighters. As for the 3 names you mention:

Wonjongkam - Please, this guy rarely fights outside of Thailand and if he does it is in Japan. He has had that many ridulous fights it is not funny. He us a WBC World Champ and his last 3 fights were against guys with records of 0-2, 1-2 and 1-3, a total of 9 fights and 2 wins between them, Vic was always out of his league moneywise and would have been wasting his time fighting the guy.

Kameda - Got beaten by Wonjongkam. Was either not on the map or, when he didd get on the map was fighting at a lighter weight. Although with his recent win is now a definite opponent that Vic should fight.

Munoz - Beaten by Kameda and Mijares. Good opponent but not exactly at the front of the line when it comes to opponents.

Not exactly what I would call avoiding but if these are fights he should have chased in your opinion, well good for you, lol, lucky you're not his manager otherwise I fear his bank balance would be a great deal lighter
dberry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3350
Joined: 05 Jan 2010, 02:15

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dberry »

What are you talking about with the LOL, Wonjonkam, like it or not, was the man to beat at the time Vic was 'fly weight champ', Koki Komeda was the second best flyweight, to Wonjonkam, when Vic was 'flyweight champ' and Munoz was the man to win the super fly weight title off when Darchinyan was first 'super fly weight champ'. I said this would cause debate, no need for you to come and be a smart arse about it with your lol.
dan h
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 728
Joined: 19 Jan 2008, 04:49

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dan h »

I found the fact that you think not fighting these guys was avoiding them to be laughable, hence the lol. It's not about being a smartarse. I like the fact that you have an opinion on the subject and are having your say, that is what this forum is all about. I just find that call of "avoiding" to be funny given Vics career.

Your argument would make more sense if Vic was fighting nobodies while these guys wanted to fight him but that is not the case, he was fighting the biggest and best fighters in the states and making good money winning belts. The guy is a future HOF for sure. Win's over Mijares, Arce, Krilov, Milando and Pacheo are all better than wins over the fighters you mentioned would have been.

Fans love to use the words doging and avoiding all of the time. Sometimes fights just don't happen because other great fights are happening. It is not like Vic is avoiding fighting the best in his division. Wonjongkam was not "the man" to beat at Fly. He was definitely one of the top dogs but not the man to beat. And as far as I am aware, vics people did try and negotiate a fight with him to no avail. It simply worked out that he did not fight them them not that he was avoiding them.

The reason Vic gets the HBO fights and people love watching him is because he doesn't avoid the big fights and he has the ability to demolish world champs with raw power.
amwsnw
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1911
Joined: 19 Oct 2007, 03:24

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by amwsnw »

I reckon daniel has the goods to become one of the greats of Aussie boxing along with the likes of Rose and Tszyu. I know it is a pretty big call but even those who dont follow boxing will support this guy. He doesnt need a rival, such as Munidne v Green , and he is an excellnt fighter who i think can beat a nyone in in his division. A nice guy, bags no one, fights bloody brilliantly and i think will beat the germans on their on soil....GO DANIEL !!!
dberry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3350
Joined: 05 Jan 2010, 02:15

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dberry »

dan h wrote:I found the fact that you think not fighting these guys was avoiding them to be laughable, hence the lol. It's not about being a smartarse. I like the fact that you have an opinion on the subject and are having your say, that is what this forum is all about. I just find that call of "avoiding" to be funny given Vics career.

Your argument would make more sense if Vic was fighting nobodies while these guys wanted to fight him but that is not the case, he was fighting the biggest and best fighters in the states and making good money winning belts. The guy is a future HOF for sure. Win's over Mijares, Arce, Krilov, Milando and Pacheo are all better than wins over the fighters you mentioned would have been.

Fans love to use the words doging and avoiding all of the time. Sometimes fights just don't happen because other great fights are happening. It is not like Vic is avoiding fighting the best in his division. Wonjongkam was not "the man" to beat at Fly. He was definitely one of the top dogs but not the man to beat. And as far as I am aware, vics people did try and negotiate a fight with him to no avail. It simply worked out that he did not fight them them not that he was avoiding them.

The reason Vic gets the HBO fights and people love watching him is because he doesn't avoid the big fights and he has the ability to demolish world champs with raw power.
You have some valid points there, I don't think Vic himself avoids any body, I think his handlers at the time kept him away from boxers, I do believe Wonjonkam, at that point in time was the man to beat at flyweight but perhaps thats merely my opinion. Vics raw power and hunting, intimidating (bullying) style is exciting to watch and earns him the big bucks, I don't know about HOFer. Yet. If he avenges at least a couple of his losses, to the three top guys in his current division, then that'll be another story. He clearly wants this, his new team will pursue this and if these guys accept it will make for some great fights.At this stage Mijares is the highlight on Vic's resume. His last fight against Perez shows he is still there.
Brute
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6993
Joined: 03 Dec 2005, 03:05

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by Brute »

dberry wrote:
dan h wrote:I found the fact that you think not fighting these guys was avoiding them to be laughable, hence the lol. It's not about being a smartarse. I like the fact that you have an opinion on the subject and are having your say, that is what this forum is all about. I just find that call of "avoiding" to be funny given Vics career.

Your argument would make more sense if Vic was fighting nobodies while these guys wanted to fight him but that is not the case, he was fighting the biggest and best fighters in the states and making good money winning belts. The guy is a future HOF for sure. Win's over Mijares, Arce, Krilov, Milando and Pacheo are all better than wins over the fighters you mentioned would have been.

Fans love to use the words doging and avoiding all of the time. Sometimes fights just don't happen because other great fights are happening. It is not like Vic is avoiding fighting the best in his division. Wonjongkam was not "the man" to beat at Fly. He was definitely one of the top dogs but not the man to beat. And as far as I am aware, vics people did try and negotiate a fight with him to no avail. It simply worked out that he did not fight them them not that he was avoiding them.

The reason Vic gets the HBO fights and people love watching him is because he doesn't avoid the big fights and he has the ability to demolish world champs with raw power.
You have some valid points there, I don't think Vic himself avoids any body, I think his handlers at the time kept him away from boxers, I do believe Wonjonkam, at that point in time was the man to beat at flyweight but perhaps thats merely my opinion. Vics raw power and hunting, intimidating (bullying) style is exciting to watch and earns him the big bucks, I don't know about HOFer. Yet. If he avenges at least a couple of his losses, to the three top guys in his current division, then that'll be another story. He clearly wants this, his new team will pursue this and if these guys accept it will make for some great fights.At this stage Mijares is the highlight on Vic's resume. His last fight against Perez shows he is still there.
There are a lot of fighters in the halls who have achieved less than Darchinian. To be a "Hall of Famer" you do not have to be a world champion.
dberry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3350
Joined: 05 Jan 2010, 02:15

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dberry »

That's a fair point Brute, one that comes to mind from my era would obviously be Micky Ward. Is he a Hall Of Famer? Joe Bugner is another that I think should be in the Hall Of Fame. Can anyone think of any others that have never held a real world title and are/should be in the Hall Of Fame?
PacSugarThunder
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 40
Joined: 05 Oct 2009, 19:43

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by PacSugarThunder »

dan h wrote:I found the fact that you think not fighting these guys was avoiding them to be laughable, hence the lol. It's not about being a smartarse. I like the fact that you have an opinion on the subject and are having your say, that is what this forum is all about. I just find that call of "avoiding" to be funny given Vics career.

Your argument would make more sense if Vic was fighting nobodies while these guys wanted to fight him but that is not the case, he was fighting the biggest and best fighters in the states and making good money winning belts. The guy is a future HOF for sure. Win's over Mijares, Arce, Krilov, Milando and Pacheo are all better than wins over the fighters you mentioned would have been.

Fans love to use the words doging and avoiding all of the time. Sometimes fights just don't happen because other great fights are happening. It is not like Vic is avoiding fighting the best in his division. Wonjongkam was not "the man" to beat at Fly. He was definitely one of the top dogs but not the man to beat. And as far as I am aware, vics people did try and negotiate a fight with him to no avail. It simply worked out that he did not fight them them not that he was avoiding them.

The reason Vic gets the HBO fights and people love watching him is because he doesn't avoid the big fights and he has the ability to demolish world champs with raw power.

Vic doesn't get HBO fights, all his fights have been on ShowTime.
dan h
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 728
Joined: 19 Jan 2008, 04:49

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dan h »

Fair enough - Showtime then. My point is he gets great TV exposure in the US
Brute
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6993
Joined: 03 Dec 2005, 03:05

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by Brute »

dberry wrote:That's a fair point Brute, one that comes to mind from my era would obviously be Micky Ward. Is he a Hall Of Famer? Joe Bugner is another that I think should be in the Hall Of Fame. Can anyone think of any others that have never held a real world title and are/should be in the Hall Of Fame?

Bennie Briscoe and Lou Nova never won world titles but they are in the hall based on their quality as fighters and their opposition. Briscoe was active at the same time as Monzon and Valdez (fought both), Nova challenged Louis.
crusader
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 16875
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 20:14

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by crusader »

dberry wrote:That's a fair point Brute, one that comes to mind from my era would obviously be Micky Ward. Is he a Hall Of Famer? Joe Bugner is another that I think should be in the Hall Of Fame. Can anyone think of any others that have never held a real world title and are/should be in the Hall Of Fame?
Why do you think Bugner should be in the Hall of Fame? I think that should be an honor reserved for the best of the best--something which Bugner clearly wasn't.
Marlin
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5078
Joined: 08 May 2006, 06:56

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by Marlin »

How many fights will be televised?
dberry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3350
Joined: 05 Jan 2010, 02:15

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dberry »

crusader wrote:
dberry wrote:That's a fair point Brute, one that comes to mind from my era would obviously be Micky Ward. Is he a Hall Of Famer? Joe Bugner is another that I think should be in the Hall Of Fame. Can anyone think of any others that have never held a real world title and are/should be in the Hall Of Fame?
Why do you think Bugner should be in the Hall of Fame? I think that should be an honor reserved for the best of the best--something which Bugner clearly wasn't.
Bugner was a good hw contender in a competitive era, he is also famous, and it is the hall of fame, he is famous from directly from boxing, in his prime, he was the European champion, clearly the best from his country, and the best from his continent, he went the distance with Joe Frazier once and Mahammad Ali twice, Ali is considered by most as the greatest hw of all time and Bugner was competitive with him first time out, as he was with Frazier.

Bugner campaigned in Australia in his 40's and was clearly the best heavy locally at the time. At the age of 48 he was successfull in a fight with 'Bonecrusher' Smith for a, all be it bullshit WBF, world title. It's only my opinion but I think his 69-13-1 record, regional dominance, incredible durability and worthy contendership for the world heavy weight title during a very competitive era and becoming a household name through boxing alone, for mine, should make him more than eligible for HOF membership.
Brute
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6993
Joined: 03 Dec 2005, 03:05

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by Brute »

Smith did his shoulder in at the end of the first round and quit.

Hardly a famous victory.
dberry
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3350
Joined: 05 Jan 2010, 02:15

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by dberry »

yep, and Odlanier Solis popped his knee in the first round against Klitschko, Klitschko still won the fight, how about commenting on the overall post, do you think Bugner is HOF material or not?
Brute
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 6993
Joined: 03 Dec 2005, 03:05

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by Brute »

No. Smith was well and truly washed up by the time Bugner fought him. Joe was no problem for Ali or Frazier, just an easy defence.
caveman
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 519
Joined: 28 Dec 2009, 00:16

Re: the importance of geale v sylvester.....

Post by caveman »

dont agree brute,bugner nearly done frazier,like him or not,he is famous for his boxing,i reckon he deserves to be there,it was a great era he was in
Post Reply