Hughie Fury

[rm1]

What did we think of Hughie on Saturday ? I have said from day one they are rushing him owing to his age but he looked good on Saturday and seems to be hitting harder. A rest has done him good what he needs now is 3/4 carefully chosen matches this year to let him learn while maturing.

[mickey1975]

He's doing really well. He's only 19.

[rm1]

He's doing really well. He's only 19.

Absolutely which is why he doesn't need rushing.

[JimStone]

I was in favour of the initial rush, while there was even a sniff of him taking to the pros like a duck to water and getting a world title shot before January 2015 it was worth pushing him. Now that's not going to happen they can take their foot of the throttle a bit and allow him to develop just under the surface.

[The Insider]

He looked much better Saturday and I think the little break has done him good.

[orbtastic]

He looked decent, but then it's easier to look good, composed, take your time and select your shots when the other guy's throwing nothing back and is effectively a pudgy punchbag.

That said, I think he'd have taken Abell out on Saturday had they stuck him in with him.

[Tuan_Jim]

What's the problem with rushing him if he is truly any good? The heavyweight scene is populated by fat, out of condition middle-aged men who fight twice a year. An active young man who is truly good should mop the floor with these breathless old geezers.

It's unbelievable how long old men can hang on now, and be considered viable contenders. It seems everyone coming through is already 30+ themselves. We need a young ball of energy to shed the heavyweight ranks of it's endless rolls of flab.

Whether Hughie truly is any good... I don't buy it at all.

[expe]

What's the problem with rushing him if he is truly any good? The heavyweight scene is populated by fat, out of condition middle-aged men who fight twice a year. An active young man who is truly good should mop the floor with these breathless old geezers.

It's unbelievable how long old men can hang on now, and be considered viable contenders. It seems everyone coming through is already 30+ themselves. We need a young ball of energy to shed the heavyweight ranks of it's endless rolls of flab.

Whether Hughie truly is any good... I don't buy it at all.

He's 19 years old, he hasn't finished growing yet, wasn't a top amateur at senior level and is still developing as a man and as a fighter. He hasn't been past 6 rounds yet and won't peak physically for a decade, taking it slowly with him and allowing him to improve and grow into his frame.

As for the fat, out of condition, middle aged men, the only top heavyweights around now that potentially fit that billing are Tony Thompson and possibly Chris Arreola, although he isn't middle aged. Thompson's the only heavyweight that could be considered a realistic challenger to a title that's over 40.

[Andrew]

Greer was effectively a human punch bag. Hughie will have learnt a lot more sparring Eddie Chambers the past few weeks.

He did show good punch vartiation though but I won't tip him for big things just yet he hasn't been in with anyone who will hit him back yet.

Joey Abell would have been a good fight for him actually.

Comes across as a good lad so wish him well.

[Tuan_Jim]

He's 19 years old, he hasn't finished growing yet, wasn't a top amateur at senior level and is still developing as a man and as a fighter. He hasn't been past 6 rounds yet and won't peak physically for a decade, taking it slowly with him and allowing him to improve and grow into his frame.

As for the fat, out of condition, middle aged men, the only top heavyweights around now that potentially fit that billing are Tony Thompson and possibly Chris Arreola, although he isn't middle aged. Thompson's the only heavyweight that could be considered a realistic challenger to a title that's over 40.

This is all pure speculation on your part. Physically peak at 29? Why that age? What makes you think that? And what makes you say he's still developing? He's a grown man, a 6'6'' giant, hardly some mere stripling. It's different for everyone. We don't know his personal physical development. Mike Tyson was ripping through men at 19.

As for the heavyweight division, Wladimir is 37, Vitali 40something, Adamek 37, Stiverne fat and 35, Povetkin fat and 35, Thompson 40plus and fat, Solis 33 and fat, Tyson Fury young but with an old man's gut. Pulev is 33 in a couple of months and has no body definition whatsoever. The entire top 10 is 30-40 but for Tyson Fury who is 25 - an age the heavyweight champions of yore were already reigning by. Outside of the top 10 the coming contenders are already pushing or past 30 and generally overweight, and moving at a glacier's pace, fighting twice or at most thrice a year. Christ alive there's not a positive spin you can put on this modern division.

Heavyweights? It has become the Overweights, Senior class. I say if you've got a kid who can fight, move him fast and make him demolish these shambling creaking old wrecks.

[Datsue]

Jennings is under thirty, right? Just, I mean...

[expe]

He's 19 years old, he hasn't finished growing yet, wasn't a top amateur at senior level and is still developing as a man and as a fighter. He hasn't been past 6 rounds yet and won't peak physically for a decade, taking it slowly with him and allowing him to improve and grow into his frame.

As for the fat, out of condition, middle aged men, the only top heavyweights around now that potentially fit that billing are Tony Thompson and possibly Chris Arreola, although he isn't middle aged. Thompson's the only heavyweight that could be considered a realistic challenger to a title that's over 40.

This is all pure speculation on your part. Physically peak at 29? Why that age? What makes you think that? And what makes you say he's still developing? He's a grown man, a 6'6'' giant, hardly some mere stripling. It's different for everyone. We don't know his personal physical development. Mike Tyson was ripping through men at 19.

As for the heavyweight division, Wladimir is 37, Vitali 40something, Adamek 37, Stiverne fat and 35, Povetkin fat and 35, Thompson 40plus and fat, Solis 33 and fat, Tyson Fury young but with an old man's gut. Pulev is 33 in a couple of months and has no body definition whatsoever. The entire top 10 is 30-40 but for Tyson Fury who is 25 - an age the heavyweight champions of yore were already reigning by. Outside of the top 10 the coming contenders are already pushing or past 30 and generally overweight, and moving at a glacier's pace, fighting twice or at most thrice a year. Christ alive there's not a positive spin you can put on this modern division.

Heavyweights? It has become the Overweights, Senior class. I say if you've got a kid who can fight, move him fast and make him demolish these shambling creaking old wrecks.

They're over 30 because they're bigger men, they naturally peak later, look down the weight divisions, you'll find that the higher the weight, the older the fighters are and advances in sports science are allowing fighters to continue fighting for longer. Bernard Hopkins is 49, Mayweather's 37 next week, Martinez is 39 on Friday, Marquez is 40, Pacquiao's 35, Bradley's 30, Rigondeaux's 33, most of the top fighters are over 30. Have you not thought that Hughie's not experienced enough to do 12 rounds with the top fighters in the division, to think his way through a fight of that distance. He's clearly still developing, most people don't stop growing until 21, his back and face are still covered in spots and he clearly hasn't fully filled out into his frame yet.

[Tuan_Jim]

They naturally peak later because they are big? I don't know what to make of this. I don't have a clue what you base it on. I'd be interested to hear.

As far as those ages of the big name fighters in lower weights, there's a long discussion to be written on why that is. I would put it down to a shallow talent pool, star fighters being carefully groomed, records maintained by less than hazardous opposition, boxing once or twice a year while a plethora of sanctioning bandits make themselves available to sponsor the show... I don't think all the nebulous, highly mysterious and unknowable 'sports science advances' in the world would help a fighter boxing 15, 20 times a year in a treacherously deep talent pool.

[Tuan_Jim]

Jennings is under thirty, right? Just, I mean...

Turned pro at 26. Turns 30 this year. Boxed once last year. Ah, the saviour of the heavyweight division has arrived!

[Anzi]

He's 19 years old, he hasn't finished growing yet, wasn't a top amateur at senior level and is still developing as a man and as a fighter. He hasn't been past 6 rounds yet and won't peak physically for a decade, taking it slowly with him and allowing him to improve and grow into his frame.

As for the fat, out of condition, middle aged men, the only top heavyweights around now that potentially fit that billing are Tony Thompson and possibly Chris Arreola, although he isn't middle aged. Thompson's the only heavyweight that could be considered a realistic challenger to a title that's over 40.

This is all pure speculation on your part. Physically peak at 29? Why that age? What makes you think that? And what makes you say he's still developing? He's a grown man, a 6'6'' giant, hardly some mere stripling. It's different for everyone. We don't know his personal physical development. Mike Tyson was ripping through men at 19.

As for the heavyweight division, Wladimir is 37, Vitali 40something, Adamek 37, Stiverne fat and 35, Povetkin fat and 35, Thompson 40plus and fat, Solis 33 and fat, Tyson Fury young but with an old man's gut. Pulev is 33 in a couple of months and has no body definition whatsoever. The entire top 10 is 30-40 but for Tyson Fury who is 25 - an age the heavyweight champions of yore were already reigning by. Outside of the top 10 the coming contenders are already pushing or past 30 and generally overweight, and moving at a glacier's pace, fighting twice or at most thrice a year. Christ alive there's not a positive spin you can put on this modern division.

Heavyweights? It has become the Overweights, Senior class. I say if you've got a kid who can fight, move him fast and make him demolish these shambling creaking old wrecks.

This should be interesting, 2 idiots collide, it can only end one way, stand off lol.

[wadey]

If your good enough your old enough. The same goes for Anthony Joshua, get them moving and challenging. As lets be honest both Chisora and T. Fury looked poor on Saturday, and they can hype the fight between them as much as they like, but neither of them are going much further than Domestic/European level.

[Coco]

I think Hughie is better than Tyson. I can't believe we are criticising a heavy for being young, busy and ambitious. He seems to have a great attitude

[Datsue]

Jennings is under thirty, right? Just, I mean...

Turned pro at 26. Turns 30 this year. Boxed once last year. Ah, the saviour of the heavyweight division has arrived!

Yes, thank you Mr Waspish, but I never cunting well said he was the saviour of the heavyweight division.

It merely crossed my mind, in the nature of a passing conjecture, whether he was under thirty.

Thank you so much for confirming that.

[lefty]

They naturally peak later because they are big? I don't know what to make of this. I don't have a clue what you base it on. I'd be interested to hear.

As far as those ages of the big name fighters in lower weights, there's a long discussion to be written on why that is. I would put it down to a shallow talent pool, star fighters being carefully groomed, records maintained by less than hazardous opposition, boxing once or twice a year while a plethora of sanctioning bandits make themselves available to sponsor the show... I don't think all the nebulous, highly mysterious and unknowable 'sports science advances' in the world would help a fighter boxing 15, 20 times a year in a treacherously deep talent pool.

It could also be argued with the advancement's in science and the fact that human beings are living longer, there's a good argument that athletes are peaking later than they were in the past and able to perform at the top level at a more advanced age than they were in the past. If you look at the NFL for instance, Peyton Manning who is arguably the best quarterback in the league is 37 years old. Tom Brady is 34 and so on.

[iamasadlittleboy]

They naturally peak later because they are big? I don't know what to make of this. I don't have a clue what you base it on. I'd be interested to hear.

As far as those ages of the big name fighters in lower weights, there's a long discussion to be written on why that is. I would put it down to a shallow talent pool, star fighters being carefully groomed, records maintained by less than hazardous opposition, boxing once or twice a year while a plethora of sanctioning bandits make themselves available to sponsor the show... I don't think all the nebulous, highly mysterious and unknowable 'sports science advances' in the world would help a fighter boxing 15, 20 times a year in a treacherously deep talent pool.

It could also be argued with the advancement's in science and the fact that human beings are living longer, there's a good argument that athletes are peaking later than they were in the past and able to perform at the top level at a more advanced age than they were in the past. If you look at the NFL for instance, Peyton Manning who is arguably the best quarterback in the league is 37 years old. Tom Brady is 34 and so on.

Using the same examples, is Peyton as good as he was? Was Brady not better 5 or 6 years ago?
For NFL the game has changed significantly and whilst the experience of Brady, Manning and Drew Brees (35) is invaluable. Andrew Luck is only 24, Colin Keapernick is 26, Russel Wilson is 25. The change in the game has seen pocket passers (such as Brady and Manning) going out of favour slightly with more athletically gifted QB's taking over)

[lefty]

They naturally peak later because they are big? I don't know what to make of this. I don't have a clue what you base it on. I'd be interested to hear.

As far as those ages of the big name fighters in lower weights, there's a long discussion to be written on why that is. I would put it down to a shallow talent pool, star fighters being carefully groomed, records maintained by less than hazardous opposition, boxing once or twice a year while a plethora of sanctioning bandits make themselves available to sponsor the show... I don't think all the nebulous, highly mysterious and unknowable 'sports science advances' in the world would help a fighter boxing 15, 20 times a year in a treacherously deep talent pool.

It could also be argued with the advancement's in science and the fact that human beings are living longer, there's a good argument that athletes are peaking later than they were in the past and able to perform at the top level at a more advanced age than they were in the past. If you look at the NFL for instance, Peyton Manning who is arguably the best quarterback in the league is 37 years old. Tom Brady is 34 and so on.

Using the same examples, is Peyton as good as he was? Was Brady not better 5 or 6 years ago?
For NFL the game has changed significantly and whilst the experience of Brady, Manning and Drew Brees (35) is invaluable. Andrew Luck is only 24, Colin Keapernick is 26, Russel Wilson is 25. The change in the game has seen pocket passers (such as Brady and Manning) going out of favour slightly with more athletically gifted QB's taking over)

Oh im not saying age doesnt help you in sport but I think there's also evidence that guys are still able to compete at the highest level even at at an advanced age *you'd think 35 was 60 the way people talk about it*

[expe]

He's 19 years old, he hasn't finished growing yet, wasn't a top amateur at senior level and is still developing as a man and as a fighter. He hasn't been past 6 rounds yet and won't peak physically for a decade, taking it slowly with him and allowing him to improve and grow into his frame.

As for the fat, out of condition, middle aged men, the only top heavyweights around now that potentially fit that billing are Tony Thompson and possibly Chris Arreola, although he isn't middle aged. Thompson's the only heavyweight that could be considered a realistic challenger to a title that's over 40.

This is all pure speculation on your part. Physically peak at 29? Why that age? What makes you think that? And what makes you say he's still developing? He's a grown man, a 6'6'' giant, hardly some mere stripling. It's different for everyone. We don't know his personal physical development. Mike Tyson was ripping through men at 19.

As for the heavyweight division, Wladimir is 37, Vitali 40something, Adamek 37, Stiverne fat and 35, Povetkin fat and 35, Thompson 40plus and fat, Solis 33 and fat, Tyson Fury young but with an old man's gut. Pulev is 33 in a couple of months and has no body definition whatsoever. The entire top 10 is 30-40 but for Tyson Fury who is 25 - an age the heavyweight champions of yore were already reigning by. Outside of the top 10 the coming contenders are already pushing or past 30 and generally overweight, and moving at a glacier's pace, fighting twice or at most thrice a year. Christ alive there's not a positive spin you can put on this modern division.

Heavyweights? It has become the Overweights, Senior class. I say if you've got a kid who can fight, move him fast and make him demolish these shambling creaking old wrecks.

This should be interesting, 2 idiots collide, it can only end one way, stand off lol.

Who are you bumping into?

[stevieb_8006]

the furys will always be damned if they do and damned if they don't. If it was Anthony Joshua fighting that regularly and getting those results every1 would be creaming themselves.

Good luck to him, hes a baby.

[JimJim2009]

He looked much better Saturday and I think the little break has done him good.

X2. He was poor last time out, much improved on Saturday.

[CiganoBoxer]

the furys will always be damned if they do and damned if they don't. If it was Anthony Joshua fighting that regularly and getting those results every1 would be creaming themselves.

Good luck to him, hes a baby.

this x2