Japan have only had one, Koki Kameda. Like Broner Kameda's 3 weight titles were as "legit" as Jordan's tits.stujones wrote:If thats the case - Bob Fitzsimmons and Lennox Lewis aside, we have never produced anybody decent in the UK. We've never had a three weight world champion.
You are missing the point, as is Stu. In your case, as ever, seemingly wilfully.columbo wrote:I'm not saying these guys dont rely on their athleticism to a large degree but to come to the conclusion that they have no boxing ability at all is naive IMO. Athleticism plays a large part in sports generally. That's why a more athletically gifted Dawson beat Hopkins.
No need for the dig. What about Maidana then? He's not exactly a text book boxer. I'm sure if you were teaching a kid the fundamentals, you wouldnt look at someone like Maidana.Datsue wrote:You are missing the point, as is Stu. In your case, as ever, seemingly wilfully.columbo wrote:I'm not saying these guys dont rely on their athleticism to a large degree but to come to the conclusion that they have no boxing ability at all is naive IMO. Athleticism plays a large part in sports generally. That's why a more athletically gifted Dawson beat Hopkins.
It's not that they don't have boxing ability, it is that the proportion of physical ability to ring knowledge & generalship is waaaaaaaaay out of whack.
& importantly, in their development, their reliance on same has meant that no-one ever bothered to teach them what to do when it doesn't get them out the shite.
No, the reason I brought up Curtis is you were saying how big a factor Athleticism is in boxing in regards to certain fighters and you quoted Richardson talking about how Berto was a wrestler in the past and how he'd used his athletic abilities to succeed in boxing. Well unless I imagined it i'm pretty sure Curtis played premiership football at one point in time. Regarding Maidana, of course im not saying he's a great athlete, the point im making is athleticism alone doesnt get you to a certain level by itself. Roy Jones, yeah you can argue that was a big factor but then he was freakishly athletic, not exactly the norm.Datsue wrote:Also, as you brought up Curtis, may I point out that he is blindingly obviously not the case we're talking about here, Lefty.
Because he is a good honest pro rather than a meedja-created entity who happens to box, who people go "OMNOMNOMNOMWhat a great boxer" when they are obviously, in fact, not great boxers & overly reliant on their physical gifts.
Or to put it another way:
If Chad & Bernard were the same age & natural size are you seriously telling me you'd still favour Chad?
Maidana is a caveman. But these days he's a caveman that has been taught the rudiments of head movement & cutting off the ring, & the useful tactical employment of a jab.
I can only assume, again as ever, that you are being deliberately disingenuous. If you seriously think Maidana is the kind of superstar athlete I'm talking about then there is simply no fvcking point talking to you any further.
So what was Berto's success based upon then if not his athletic abilities?columbo wrote: No, the reason I brought up Curtis is you were saying how big a factor Athleticism is in boxing in regards to certain fighters and you quoted Richardson talking about how Berto was a wrestler in the past and how he'd used his athletic abilities to succeed in boxing. Well unless I imagined it i'm pretty sure Curtis played premiership football at one point in time. Regarding Maidana, of course im not saying he's a great athlete, the point im making is athleticism alone doesnt get you to a certain level by itself. Roy Jones, yeah you can argue that was a big factor but then he was freakishly athletic, not exactly the norm.
I wouldnt exactly say that Demarco was a small lightweight. Rees won a world title at 140 himself aswell. So if fundamental win you big time fights, how did Jones beat Hopkins, when they were both in their pomp might I add?Datsue wrote:So what was Berto's success based upon then if not his athletic abilities?columbo wrote: No, the reason I brought up Curtis is you were saying how big a factor Athleticism is in boxing in regards to certain fighters and you quoted Richardson talking about how Berto was a wrestler in the past and how he'd used his athletic abilities to succeed in boxing. Well unless I imagined it i'm pretty sure Curtis played premiership football at one point in time. Regarding Maidana, of course im not saying he's a great athlete, the point im making is athleticism alone doesnt get you to a certain level by itself. Roy Jones, yeah you can argue that was a big factor but then he was freakishly athletic, not exactly the norm.
How much of Broner's success--having seen in his last two fights how he does with limited physical advantages & the application of basic boxing fundamentals like lateral movement & being countered to the body--would your sage counsel parcel up & ascribe to his athletic ability (& these days you've got to add ability to be a massive weight-drainer to that)?
How much of Cintron's?
Ha! And both men abandoned England and learned their trade elsewhere.stujones wrote:If thats the case - Bob Fitzsimmons and Lennox Lewis aside, we have never produced anybody decent in the UK. We've never had a three weight world champion.
Oh yeah, forgot about Dukey's world titles.iamasadlittleboy wrote:Japan have only had one, Koki Kameda. Like Broner Kameda's 3 weight titles were as "legit" as Jordan's tits.stujones wrote:If thats the case - Bob Fitzsimmons and Lennox Lewis aside, we have never produced anybody decent in the UK. We've never had a three weight world champion.
Although, wasn't Duke a 3 weight world champion?
I assume that you believe people gain ridiculous amounts of weight not to give themselves an advantage but because they're afraid of dehydration-related brain damage?columbo wrote:All this size advantage thing is nonsense in my eyes. You could argue that a ton of fighters have an advantage when it comes to that. I mean how much does Kell Brook weigh come fight night? I guess all his success is down to his size aswell then. I mean JCC jnr's size gave him a huge advantage when he fought the small middleweight Martinez.
I'm not saying that it doesnt help but to downplay all success on the fact they're beating up "small men" is a stretch.Datsue wrote:I assume that you believe people gain ridiculous amounts of weight not to give themselves an advantage but because they're afraid of dehydration-related brain damage?columbo wrote:All this size advantage thing is nonsense in my eyes. You could argue that a ton of fighters have an advantage when it comes to that. I mean how much does Kell Brook weigh come fight night? I guess all his success is down to his size aswell then. I mean JCC jnr's size gave him a huge advantage when he fought the small middleweight Martinez.
& to completely ignore it because you don't like the sound of the idea is fvcking moronic.columbo wrote:I'm not saying that it doesnt help but to downplay all success on the fact they're beating up "small men" is a stretch.Datsue wrote:I assume that you believe people gain ridiculous amounts of weight not to give themselves an advantage but because they're afraid of dehydration-related brain damage?columbo wrote:All this size advantage thing is nonsense in my eyes. You could argue that a ton of fighters have an advantage when it comes to that. I mean how much does Kell Brook weigh come fight night? I guess all his success is down to his size aswell then. I mean JCC jnr's size gave him a huge advantage when he fought the small middleweight Martinez.
& to completely ignore it because you don't like the sound of the idea is fvcking moronic.columbo wrote:I'm not saying that it doesnt help but to downplay all success on the fact they're beating up "small men" is a stretch.Datsue wrote:I assume that you believe people gain ridiculous amounts of weight not to give themselves an advantage but because they're afraid of dehydration-related brain damage?columbo wrote:All this size advantage thing is nonsense in my eyes. You could argue that a ton of fighters have an advantage when it comes to that. I mean how much does Kell Brook weigh come fight night? I guess all his success is down to his size aswell then. I mean JCC jnr's size gave him a huge advantage when he fought the small middleweight Martinez.
Joe CalzagheTuan_Jim wrote:Ha! And both men abandoned England and learned their trade elsewhere.stujones wrote:If thats the case - Bob Fitzsimmons and Lennox Lewis aside, we have never produced anybody decent in the UK. We've never had a three weight world champion.
Lennox only reluctantly returned to our small island for financial reasons.
The UK will always have Jimmy Wilde and Ken Buchanan however. Other than those two. . .
Joe struggled against a 40 something who he was supposed to be naturally bigger than who Nazim Richardson has stated wasn't the most naturally gifted of athletes.... if Joe had all the boxes ticked in terms of natural advantages then why did he struggle.expe wrote:Joe CalzagheTuan_Jim wrote:Ha! And both men abandoned England and learned their trade elsewhere.stujones wrote:If thats the case - Bob Fitzsimmons and Lennox Lewis aside, we have never produced anybody decent in the UK. We've never had a three weight world champion.
Lennox only reluctantly returned to our small island for financial reasons.
The UK will always have Jimmy Wilde and Ken Buchanan however. Other than those two. . .
Joe struggled against a 40 something who he was supposed to be naturally bigger than who Nazim Richardson has stated wasn't the most naturally gifted of athletes.... if Joe had all the boxes ticked in terms of natural advantages then why did he struggle.expe wrote:Joe CalzagheTuan_Jim wrote:Ha! And both men abandoned England and learned their trade elsewhere.stujones wrote:If thats the case - Bob Fitzsimmons and Lennox Lewis aside, we have never produced anybody decent in the UK. We've never had a three weight world champion.
Lennox only reluctantly returned to our small island for financial reasons.
The UK will always have Jimmy Wilde and Ken Buchanan however. Other than those two. . .
too right. maidana is a solid top ten contender who trades on toughness, but was fighting a so -called triple world champion. tells us exactly what those titles are worth. there were plenty on here and current scene who fell for the hype, talking about broner as a superstar. the same kind of multi-titled superstar as khan was.....overprotected, and brought through on a diet of men half his size and twice his age.....backed up by the money men and a propaganda machine as out of touch with reality as the old soviets. broner was a scumbag and its so great that he;s been exposed as a bully. one in the neck for the evil empire of haymon is just the icing on the cake. well done maidana. wish i could shake his hand.Tuan_Jim wrote:Adrien Broner is an advert for boxing regulation. There are so many titles now we have become accustomed to 'world champions' being several years and many defences into their reign before they are put into a 50/50 fight. All these belts make it very easy for fighters, managers, promoters and TV channels to milk gullible hype-gobbling boxing fans for as much money as possible.
The horror in Broner's face as Maidana punched through his posturing and pitty-pat, and made a mockery of his shoulder roll 'defence', was something to behold. It looked to me the same nightmare Floyd Mayweather would experience, were he to find himself sharing a ring with Armstrong, Zivic, Robinson, Griffith, Leonard, Duran, Hearns et al.
The point I was trying to make Curtis is of course "athleticism" gives you an edge but I dont believe the likes of Broner, Berto and so on have got to that level in the sport alone. It's a combination of the natural athleticism they possess but also boxing ability.curtis wood wrote:in my experiences people in any sports who are athletically gifted have a head start on others, but what ive also found out is that there is nothing better than learning the basics, it gives you a base to go back to if the "special" stuff just isn't working, I thought once broner started getting tagged and hurt he just didn't know what to do, he had no basics to fall back on, Mayweather is the best because he does the basics perfect AND has that athletic gift, the most athletically gifted normally find it easier than others so don't take the time to learn the boring stuff, i.e jab, defence and footwork so when it starts going wrong they are found wanting, without sounding like a ego maniac im a good athlete, not a "special" athlete but a good one, id like to think I managed to carve out a career in 2 sports as a professional because I mixed being a good athlete with a exceptional work ethic, when I was a kid if I ever moaned to my dad that it was hard work he always use to say to me "so is digging a hole son" that was my dads job for 40 years, god given talent is a great thing but not a patch on work ethic, Mayweather has both, ali had both, that made them the best