Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
It was a shite fight,total waste of money,two men frightned to hit each other a hope there is no rematch,but good to get you to go to sleep

Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Finn wrote:Cant see any of the top 10 beating him.The Revival wrote:Unless Wladimir intends to fight in the rematch. It's pointless. He might as well have not even showed up today. He gave Fury the fight on a silver platter. Fury is about as weak a Heavyweight Champion as there is, and half of the Top 10 could dethrone him in his 1st title defense.
I'm not sure Wlad is one of them though. Wlad was just a complete bitch in there today. Didn't even try to fight, even when Fury was giving him free shots with his hands behind his back.
Is this the same Fury that Cunningham put flat on his back?? Christ the hype is becoming unbearable. He's long, really long. Jabs welll, doesn't get hit easily and fires back but c'mon he's a million miles away from being unbeatable. Watch Povetkins recent fight with Wach for instance. He'd beat Fury.
Bet365 have 3 early markets open on Fury (wlad, haye & joshua) and they have Joshua as a favourite.
-
bigjack
- Heavyweight

Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Povetkin would be a massive threat and best avoided for now.Boxerbeetle wrote:Dunno, Povetkin has the style & power to give Fury nightmares, I'd fancy him to win. And obviously Wilder would have a puncher's chance.Finn wrote:Cant see any of the top 10 beating him.The Revival wrote:Unless Wladimir intends to fight in the rematch. It's pointless. He might as well have not even showed up today. He gave Fury the fight on a silver platter. Fury is about as weak a Heavyweight Champion as there is, and half of the Top 10 could dethrone him in his 1st title defense.
I'm not sure Wlad is one of them though. Wlad was just a complete bitch in there today. Didn't even try to fight, even when Fury was giving him free shots with his hands behind his back.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
So to be clear, Fury once got too casual in a fight, walked onto a punch, got sat down, got up, switched his brain on and concentrated and knocked the other guy senseless, so that means he gets beaten every time against anyone vaguely decent. Seriously people need to separate their dislike for Fury from an objective assessment of his ability. I watched the Cunningham fight and anyone who says he was smashed hard into the floor, almost knocked out etc is talking nonsense. He got over confident and cocky and paid for it, but he got straight back up and took the wake up call. Everything about that incident was in favour of the punch landed, he didn't see it, he walked onto it with his hands down and he was caught flush and he was NOT slammed hard into the canvas.
The guy is big, he knows how to work on the inside, he knows how to move, he can switch stances, he can stick to a game plan, he can use his height and weight to nullify an opponent, he has a good jab and oddly considering how some people write about him on here he is actually unbeaten. The only thing he is really missing is pure punching power but having said that you wouldn't want him to be punching and leaning on you for some rounds. You can see plenty of guys with a shot at beating him because they're well schooled or can really bang but that doesn't mean they're going to beat him automatically or that Fury is a rubbish clown who somehow cheated his way to the title.
The guy is big, he knows how to work on the inside, he knows how to move, he can switch stances, he can stick to a game plan, he can use his height and weight to nullify an opponent, he has a good jab and oddly considering how some people write about him on here he is actually unbeaten. The only thing he is really missing is pure punching power but having said that you wouldn't want him to be punching and leaning on you for some rounds. You can see plenty of guys with a shot at beating him because they're well schooled or can really bang but that doesn't mean they're going to beat him automatically or that Fury is a rubbish clown who somehow cheated his way to the title.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Agree with the above. In fact part of what (IMO) makes Fury such an exciting fighter to follow is that there is the knowledge that he perhaps (on what we know to date) lacks that explosive one-punch power and genuinely has to be a boxer rather than a KO King. At a lighter division you can say the same about Billy Joe Saunders.GPTM1403 wrote:So to be clear, Fury once got too casual in a fight, walked onto a punch, got sat down, got up, switched his brain on and concentrated and knocked the other guy senseless, so that means he gets beaten every time against anyone vaguely decent. Seriously people need to separate their dislike for Fury from an objective assessment of his ability. I watched the Cunningham fight and anyone who says he was smashed hard into the floor, almost knocked out etc is talking nonsense. He got over confident and cocky and paid for it, but he got straight back up and took the wake up call. Everything about that incident was in favour of the punch landed, he didn't see it, he walked onto it with his hands down and he was caught flush and he was NOT slammed hard into the canvas.
The guy is big, he knows how to work on the inside, he knows how to move, he can switch stances, he can stick to a game plan, he can use his height and weight to nullify an opponent, he has a good jab and oddly considering how some people write about him on here he is actually unbeaten. The only thing he is really missing is pure punching power but having said that you wouldn't want him to be punching and leaning on you for some rounds. You can see plenty of guys with a shot at beating him because they're well schooled or can really bang but that doesn't mean they're going to beat him automatically or that Fury is a rubbish clown who somehow cheated his way to the title.
Very much looking forward to watching Fury's journey continue. Ultimately at some stage I would love to see him take on Deontay Wilder. I agree with other posts that Povetkin looks one hell of a risk and perhaps best avoided in immediate future. What a cracking time for British Boxing (over many divisions)!
Slightly off topic, but not too far, I think both Fury and Joshua camps (and both fighters in interviews I have seen) are respectful of the fact that they are at different levels at this immediate stage (that's not a judgement call on them, but statement that AJ is lining up for Commonwealth title and Fury just fought a World Title) and though exciting to talk about, it probably just muddies water discussing them getting matched in the short-term.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Haye threw 40 punches less than Fury and only landed 12 less.
The key to this fight was Fury not getting in distance fro Klitchko to throw which Haye couldn't do due to his size.
The punch stats don't exactly show Fury had more ambition, his size and movement won him the fight and will win it him again
The key to this fight was Fury not getting in distance fro Klitchko to throw which Haye couldn't do due to his size.
The punch stats don't exactly show Fury had more ambition, his size and movement won him the fight and will win it him again
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Fury landed 86 punches, including jabs, over 12 rounds. That's just over 7 punches per round. In a championship fight. Klitschko somewhat less. If this is what heavyweight championship boxing has descended to, it won't be long before the last real fans walk away. Most (not all) of the posters who thought this was a brilliant display of boxing are delirious because a British-born heavyweight, not only didn't end up flat on his back, but finally won the WORLD championship in their lifetime.
I'd pick Povetkin over Fury, but if the gangly giant can make Povetkin miss or not even throw punches for 12 more "exciting" rounds, he'll probably hold on to his title.
I'd pick Povetkin over Fury, but if the gangly giant can make Povetkin miss or not even throw punches for 12 more "exciting" rounds, he'll probably hold on to his title.
Last edited by Cap on 02 Dec 2015, 08:52, edited 2 times in total.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Cap wrote:Fury landed 86 punches, including jabs, over 12 rounds. That's just over 7 punches per round. In a championship fight. Klitschko somewhat less. If this is what heavyweight championship boxing has descended to, it won't be long before the last real fans walk away. Most (not all) of the posters who thought this was a brilliant display of boxing are delirious because a British-born heavyweight, not only didn't end up flat on his back, but finally won the world championship in their lifetime.
I'd pick Povetkin over Fury, but if the gangly giant can make Povetkin miss or not even throw punches for 12 more "exciting" rounds, he'll probably hold on to his title.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Lennox Lewis, Frank Bruno and David Haye are all British-bornCap wrote:Fury landed 86 punches, including jabs, over 12 rounds. That's just over 7 punches per round. In a championship fight. Klitschko somewhat less. If this is what heavyweight championship boxing has descended to, it won't be long before the last real fans walk away. Most (not all) of the posters who thought this was a brilliant display of boxing are delirious because a British-born heavyweight, not only didn't end up flat on his back, but finally won the world championship in their lifetime.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
To be fair the hype on Joshua is off the scale, doesn't surprise me he's betting fav. Sky are doing a great job convincing the public he's the saviour of heavyweight boxing. Beating Whyte handily, which I think he will, won't tell us anything more. Likes of Fury, Chisora, Haye and I suspect Joshua getting a world title shot without beating a top 5-10 opponent is a prime example of everything that's wrong with boxing.Ricky_ wrote:Finn wrote:Cant see any of the top 10 beating him.The Revival wrote:Unless Wladimir intends to fight in the rematch. It's pointless. He might as well have not even showed up today. He gave Fury the fight on a silver platter. Fury is about as weak a Heavyweight Champion as there is, and half of the Top 10 could dethrone him in his 1st title defense.
I'm not sure Wlad is one of them though. Wlad was just a complete bitch in there today. Didn't even try to fight, even when Fury was giving him free shots with his hands behind his back.
Bet365 have 3 early markets open on Fury (wlad, haye & joshua) and they have Joshua as a favourite.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Wales wrote: I suspect Joshua getting a world title shot without beating a top 5-10 opponent is a prime example of everything that's wrong with boxing.
Fury never fought any top 10 contenders.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
I know. I said "the likes of Fury, Haye ,Chisora and I suspect Joshua getting a world title shot without..."Ricky_ wrote:Wales wrote: I suspect Joshua getting a world title shot without beating a top 5-10 opponent is a prime example of everything that's wrong with boxing.
Fury never fought any top 10 contenders.
Fury Haye Chisora all had title shots without beating anyone in top 5-10 and I think AJ will jump the queue too.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Wales wrote:I know. I said "the likes of Fury, Haye ,Chisora and I suspect Joshua getting a world title shot without..."Ricky_ wrote:Wales wrote: I suspect Joshua getting a world title shot without beating a top 5-10 opponent is a prime example of everything that's wrong with boxing.
Fury never fought any top 10 contenders.
Fury Haye Chisora all had title shots without beating anyone in top 5-10 and I think AJ will jump the queue too.
Perhaps. They seem to get there via the 11-20 range i guess. Kevin Johnson, Chisora etc. Joshua could easily KO Malik Scott whos in the top 10.
Pulev, Ustinov, Povetkin.... they constitute legit top 10 but beyond that it's really thin.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Exactly. How do you get a title shot by beating someone ranked between 10-20??
Really speaking to fight the champion you should have beaten, at the very least, someone in the top 5. If not top 2. Fury got his on the back of beating Christian Hamer!
Boxing politics, you don't get what you deserve. You get what you negotiate.
Really speaking to fight the champion you should have beaten, at the very least, someone in the top 5. If not top 2. Fury got his on the back of beating Christian Hamer!
Boxing politics, you don't get what you deserve. You get what you negotiate.
-
forcefraser
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 5430
- Joined: 17 Jun 2008, 06:15
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Wilder v fury is the fight I want to see.
Fury is a superior boxer but wilder a better athlete and carries some real power.
Stadium fight in manchester next summer.
Fury is a superior boxer but wilder a better athlete and carries some real power.
Stadium fight in manchester next summer.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Boxing is entertainment like a Vegas show. Klitschko chose Fury because it seemed the most profit for the least risk. Blame experts like Boxrec that had Fury at the top without beating anyone of note.Wales wrote:Exactly. How do you get a title shot by beating someone ranked between 10-20??
Really speaking to fight the champion you should have beaten, at the very least, someone in the top 5. If not top 2. Fury got his on the back of beating Christian Hamer!
Boxing politics, you don't get what you deserve. You get what you negotiate.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Cap wrote:Boxing is entertainment like a Vegas show. Klitschko chose Fury because it seemed the most profit for the least risk. Blame experts like Boxrec that had Fury at the top without beating anyone of note.Wales wrote:Exactly. How do you get a title shot by beating someone ranked between 10-20??
Really speaking to fight the champion you should have beaten, at the very least, someone in the top 5. If not top 2. Fury got his on the back of beating Christian Hamer!
Boxing politics, you don't get what you deserve. You get what you negotiate.
Fury was mandatory.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
So was Henry Akinwande.dookus wrote:Lennox Lewis, Frank Bruno and David Haye are all British-bornCap wrote:Fury landed 86 punches, including jabs, over 12 rounds. That's just over 7 punches per round. In a championship fight. Klitschko somewhat less. If this is what heavyweight championship boxing has descended to, it won't be long before the last real fans walk away. Most (not all) of the posters who thought this was a brilliant display of boxing are delirious because a British-born heavyweight, not only didn't end up flat on his back, but finally won the world championship in their lifetime.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Fury will likely win again if he boxes in disciplined manner, which he's done well (in a Wlad-like way) over his last three fights. However, if he gets overly confident due to his win and opens up significantly more, while Wlad ups the aggression and fights more passionately due to the circumstances, I wouldn't be shocked to see Wlad win.
I suspect that it will probably be a Fury repeat though. At nearly 40 I don't think Wlad pulls the trigger well enough and he's reminding me of Vitali near the end of his career.
I suspect that it will probably be a Fury repeat though. At nearly 40 I don't think Wlad pulls the trigger well enough and he's reminding me of Vitali near the end of his career.
-
jamesmcdonnell
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 45213
- Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
I suspect that either it pans out almost identically, with Wlad not able to pull the trigger, partly from age, and partly due to fear of being countered - he really hates getting hit.crusader wrote:Fury will likely win again if he boxes in disciplined manner, which he's done well (in a Wlad-like way) over his last three fights. However, if he gets overly confident due to his win and opens up significantly more, while Wlad ups the aggression and fights more passionately due to the circumstances, I wouldn't be shocked to see Wlad win.
I suspect that it will probably be a Fury repeat though. At nearly 40 I don't think Wlad pulls the trigger well enough and he's reminding me of Vitali near the end of his career.
or
Wlad fights way more aggressively, but in doing so walks onto a lot more shots - in this case it could be 50-50, neither guy has a great chin, and Wlad hits a hell of a lot harder - not sure Tyson could pull off that trick under pressure,. but also not sure Wlad could fight like that, he's so naturally cautious. The young less disciplined Wlad probably could, but I think it's too deep ingrained now, especially after several KO losses.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Frank Bruno, David Haye and Henry Akinwande were never regarded as WORLD champions anywhere except England. Lewis was world champion and when he retired, Klitschko gained universal recognition from boxing fans as WORLD champion.
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
Two pretty convincing scenariosI suspect that either it pans out almost identically, with Wlad not able to pull the trigger, partly from age, and partly due to fear of being countered - he really hates getting hit.
or
Wlad fights way more aggressively, but in doing so walks onto a lot more shots - in this case it could be 50-50, neither guy has a great chin, and Wlad hits a hell of a lot harder - not sure Tyson could pull off that trick under pressure,. but also not sure Wlad could fight like that, he's so naturally cautious. The young less disciplined Wlad probably could, but I think it's too deep ingrained now, especially after several KO losses.
I would genuinely like to be an insider in the Wlad camp and get an understanding of the key areas they believe they can upscale between now and next year. Wlad's fought to a pattern for a long, long time now and re-booting the programme at his age will be a test and and a half!
Surely, they cannot hope to try and patiently stalk Fury again and allow him to control the range and move?
That's surely a second night of taking another helping of occasional, but stiff and scoring Fury jabs and seeing the rounds slip away.
And as the challenger Wlad needs to be doing/showing more.
The thought of Wlad bull-rushing Tyson or at least pulling the trigger as hard and often as he is able (taking some big risks in the process) does make the rematch a more interesting prospect. Seeing Wlad come back into the ring just letting his power go would be good and I think he's pissed that he did not do it far earlier in the first fight; but as the champion he was in the mindframe that he did not have to do this.
Maybe there is a third scenario - a completely new and surprising Wlad? That's a big ask but he's a hell of an athlete and judging by his determination to enforece the rematch he's in the right mood for it as well.
-
HomicideHenry
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 18722
- Joined: 08 Sep 2005, 00:43
Re: Fury vs Klitschko II? Poll
I think because of the low punch numbers, you are seriously undermining the fact that the Klitschko brothers are incredibly awkward and skilled---- they are incredibly hard to hit---- when's the last time you remember anyone landing much of anything against either one of them? The fact that Fury rarely got hit, and landed (still) nearly three times as much as Klitschko shows that Fury is a rather skilled man himself to out-box/out-chess Klitschko at his own game.Cap wrote:Fury landed 86 punches, including jabs, over 12 rounds. That's just over 7 punches per round. In a championship fight. Klitschko somewhat less. If this is what heavyweight championship boxing has descended to, it won't be long before the last real fans walk away. Most (not all) of the posters who thought this was a brilliant display of boxing are delirious because a British-born heavyweight, not only didn't end up flat on his back, but finally won the WORLD championship in their lifetime.
I'd pick Povetkin over Fury, but if the gangly giant can make Povetkin miss or not even throw punches for 12 more "exciting" rounds, he'll probably hold on to his title.
The fact that you bring up a man, who failed miserably against Vladimir, to beat Fury.... a man who is only 6'2" in height.... shows me, that you are having serious sour grapes about Fury being the champion, or (in the words of Jeff Mayweather) "Dont know shit about boxing!"... There have been several men in history (Ali included) who won decisions by low punch margins. It doesnt detract one iota from the victory.
Here was a man who made somewhere between 18-23 title defenses (depends on whether you include the IBC) and nobody thought could be beaten, etc. and he was given a boxing lesson---- it goes down in comparison to such upsets as Braddock and Baer. Yet nobody wants to acknowledge it. Why? Because the fight wasn't exciting? Big deal. Boxing is the ART of not getting hit, while getting your own punches off. And that is exactly what Fury did.