Who next for Virgil Hill?

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 02 Feb 2006, 11:07

Yes, that's a fair point. I do wish that Jones would have faced off against more top notch light heavies, particularly Michaelszewski. I wonder whether his punch resistance was always as poor as it looked against Tarver and Johnson?

Manos de Oro · Post by **Manos de Oro** » 02 Feb 2006, 20:51

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Manos de Oro wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:How is it 'bad luck' that Jones stopped him with a fantastic shot or that Hearns outpointed him with relative ease?
Because on his right night I think he could have possibly beaten both of them.
What a ridiculous comment. do you actually read what you type?

That's like me getting blown out by Naomi campbell after trying to chat her up and saying 'I reckon on another night I'd have shagged her bandy.'

Hey I reckon that on the right night that Danny Williams could have beaten Vitali Klitchsko, never mind the fact that he got knocked bandy, IT WAS JUST BAD LUCK.

There is no bad luck involved, Jones Jr battered him and hearns boxed his ears off.

The majority of the time I ignore your posts. Please extend the same courtesy.

Razor · Post by **Razor** » 02 Feb 2006, 20:51

The retirement home, dont like these grandads doing 12 rounds man, cant be good for health

Axe · Post by **Axe** » 03 Feb 2006, 04:28

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Manos de Oro wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:How is it 'bad luck' that Jones stopped him with a fantastic shot or that Hearns outpointed him with relative ease?
Because on his right night I think he could have possibly beaten both of them.
What a ridiculous comment. do you actually read what you type?

That's like me getting blown out by Naomi campbell after trying to chat her up and saying 'I reckon on another night I'd have shagged her bandy.'

Hey I reckon that on the right night that Danny Williams could have beaten Vitali Klitchsko, never mind the fact that he got knocked bandy, IT WAS JUST BAD LUCK.

There is no bad luck involved, Jones Jr battered him and hearns boxed his ears off.

Tommy Hearns beat Virgil Hill BY A SINGLE ROUND, geez, do you people even watch the figths you comment on???

As for Jones, he went punch for punch with Virgil, until Hill was stopped by a shot to the ribs. Hill had been on a nearly year-long layoff, and still was landing the jab on a prime Jones, despite being a bit past his best already, and coming off a loss...not to mention the cowardly antics Jones pulled in order to sap Hill of even more strength at the weigh-in.

Max Molyneux · Post by **Max Molyneux** » 03 Feb 2006, 07:14

Raff The Frenchman wrote:tiozzo was all rusty, fat and inactive when Hill KOed him the second time...Tiozzo just didnt fit the CW, now he is back to LH and he beating the top guys again...while Hill didnt fit LH and was feeling much much better at CW. no surprise he beat Brudov in their rematch.

Not that inactive.

He's being too inactive now though.

Dm was coming off a long layoff too.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 03 Feb 2006, 07:38

Manos de Oro wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Manos de Oro wrote: Because on his right night I think he could have possibly beaten both of them.
What a ridiculous comment. do you actually read what you type?

That's like me getting blown out by Naomi campbell after trying to chat her up and saying 'I reckon on another night I'd have shagged her bandy.'

Hey I reckon that on the right night that Danny Williams could have beaten Vitali Klitchsko, never mind the fact that he got knocked bandy, IT WAS JUST BAD LUCK.

There is no bad luck involved, Jones Jr battered him and hearns boxed his ears off.
The majority of the time I ignore your posts. Please extend the same courtesy.

I'll do exactly as I wish, don't tell me what to do you mollusc.

Dutch Windmill · Post by **Dutch Windmill** » 03 Feb 2006, 07:50

Let's not get ahead of ourselves here.

Brudov is a very one-dimensional fighter, who showed no lateral movement, not good at cutting off the ring, and just threw one-twos all night.
Yet he had Virgill in trouble a few times.

Great performance by Hill but I think there are not too many cruisers in the top-10 that he can beat at this stage of his career

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 03 Feb 2006, 07:57

Axe wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Manos de Oro wrote: Because on his right night I think he could have possibly beaten both of them.
What a ridiculous comment. do you actually read what you type?

That's like me getting blown out by Naomi campbell after trying to chat her up and saying 'I reckon on another night I'd have shagged her bandy.'

Hey I reckon that on the right night that Danny Williams could have beaten Vitali Klitchsko, never mind the fact that he got knocked bandy, IT WAS JUST BAD LUCK.

There is no bad luck involved, Jones Jr battered him and hearns boxed his ears off.

Tommy Hearns beat Virgil Hill BY A SINGLE ROUND, geez, do you people even watch the figths you comment on???

As for Jones, he went punch for punch with Virgil, until Hill was stopped by a shot to the ribs. Hill had been on a nearly year-long layoff, and still was landing the jab on a prime Jones, despite being a bit past his best already, and coming off a loss...not to mention the cowardly antics Jones pulled in order to sap Hill of even more strength at the weigh-in.

It was 2, 1 and 1 rounds on the cards actually. Ok, let me rephrase that., the fact that old man hearns was able to outbox the boxer at a weight where Hill was the natural when clearly past his best indicates the level that Hill operated at.

It would have been like Jones Jr losing to McCallum when they fought.

You can say whatever you like about how well Hill was doing against Jones, the fact is he got stopped, so it's a moot point about how he landed the jab so well. There are 12 rounds in a fight, and you have to complete them all in order to win on points.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 03 Feb 2006, 09:58

interesting point, but Hearns seemed to have one great effort left in him - he trained for Hill a whole year. (Tommy had distinguished himself at light heavy before, in '87, by thrashing the very tough Dennis Andries.) after that he'd lose to Barkley again.

my take on Hill-Hearns is that Hill's cuffing, amateur style couldn't make too much of a dent on Hearns' beautiful straight & long punches. Hearns was hitting with laser like shots. Hearns was definitely a master at long range. no shame in losing to the great Hearns.

whereas McCallum, vs Jones, didn't look too hot. McCallum had come off a beating in his previous world title fight

Hill hit the best form of his career after taking time off, and rededicating himself. he operated at a very high level. otherwise he would't have beaten undefeated versions of Maske & Tiozzo, on their territory. Tiozzo being a beast and Maske being a skilled, accomplished southpaw

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 03 Feb 2006, 10:06

I never realised until I just looked that hearns was actually relatively young at 33 when they fought! I guess it's because he'd been a pro since 75 that he seemed older...

Axe · Post by **Axe** » 03 Feb 2006, 17:40

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Axe wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote: What a ridiculous comment. do you actually read what you type?

That's like me getting blown out by Naomi campbell after trying to chat her up and saying 'I reckon on another night I'd have shagged her bandy.'

Hey I reckon that on the right night that Danny Williams could have beaten Vitali Klitchsko, never mind the fact that he got knocked bandy, IT WAS JUST BAD LUCK.

There is no bad luck involved, Jones Jr battered him and hearns boxed his ears off.

Tommy Hearns beat Virgil Hill BY A SINGLE ROUND, geez, do you people even watch the figths you comment on???

As for Jones, he went punch for punch with Virgil, until Hill was stopped by a shot to the ribs. Hill had been on a nearly year-long layoff, and still was landing the jab on a prime Jones, despite being a bit past his best already, and coming off a loss...not to mention the cowardly antics Jones pulled in order to sap Hill of even more strength at the weigh-in.
It was 2, 1 and 1 rounds on the cards actually. Ok, let me rephrase that., the fact that old man hearns was able to outbox the boxer at a weight where Hill was the natural when clearly past his best indicates the level that Hill operated at.

It would have been like Jones Jr losing to McCallum when they fought.

You can say whatever you like about how well Hill was doing against Jones, the fact is he got stopped, so it's a moot point about how he landed the jab so well. There are 12 rounds in a fight, and you have to complete them all in order to win on points.

I am agreeing with you here. But keep in mind taht Hearns was 33 whereas McCallum was 40, so thers no comparison between the two. EVERY champion has off nights, and this was one of Virgil's only ones, he lost the fight by a single round, which is not shameful considering Hearns had more success at 175 as well.

And no way would Jones have done nearly as well against a prime Virgil Hill.