How good he was? Obviously, Ike had very good power, great stamina and workrate, was extremely strong and had a great chin. He also had very versatile offence - body punching, hooks, uppercuts, combinations... He could box and he could brawl. I think he was a little bit predictable, but he was very percistent in his attacks.
Ike was scheduled to fight Jeremy Williams in June 1999, but pulled out because he though his purse for that fight would be too low. Then he was expected to fight Michael Grant in November 1999, but we all know what has happened then.
What could have been if he wasn't as crzy as he was? Had he fight Grant in November 1999, I have no doubts that he would KO Michael early in the fight. Then he would have fought prime Lennox Lewis in 2000. I think Ibeabuchi would be really dangerous opponent for Lewis, but Lennox superior height, reach and experience would enable him to outpoint Ike. It wouldn't be an easy fight for Lewis, but he was very, very good in 2000-2001 (except of the first Rahman fight where he wasn't focused). I think Ibeabuchi would easily beat 2000's versions of Tyson and Holyfield and it would be really interesting to see him against Klitschko brothers.
Ike Ibeabuchi: what could have been?
-
Boxing Writer
- Light Heavyweight
- Posts: 1347
- Joined: 27 Oct 2011, 16:45
Re: Ike Ibeabuchi: what could have been?
He would have most likely been rated as a one of the top guys. He could have knocked Grant out, yes. But I don't believe, that he could be a real threat to Lewis. While he obviously had a bigger opportunity of winning past-prime Tyson and Holyfield. After Lewis era he could take some of the belts. However, I don't favour him against any of Klitschko brothers.
-
Ruthless-RKO
- Welterweight
- Posts: 101720
- Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59
Re: Ike Ibeabuchi: what could have been?
I don't think he would have won a world title. That's just my opinion. Maybe if he stuck around he could have won a title between 2004-2006.. Which was probably the worst time for HW.
I don't think he would have beaten the Klits or Lennox Lewis. Depending on which route he wuld have taken, John Ruiz in 2003 would have been an option.
I don't think he would have beaten the Klits or Lennox Lewis. Depending on which route he wuld have taken, John Ruiz in 2003 would have been an option.
Re: Ike Ibeabuchi: what could have been?
At early 2000s? Wlad lost to Brewster, who was just going forward, eating Wlad's punches, and landed his own at the proper moment. That is not to downplay Brewster win, he showed heart and determination, I just mean Ike would be better at any aspect there.
Wlad also went life and death with Peter, who was basically (very) poor man's version of Ike.
I would favour Ike over Wlad any time... not so sure about Vitaly (much better chin and awkward style).
Re: Ike Ibeabuchi: what could have been?
He would have no chance, not because he wasn't gifted as a fighter, but because he was always a flat tire/ highway blowout waiting to happen. The pressure of the climb up the ratings is probably what blew his fuse.
Some are simply not made to get the ENTIRE job done, Which includes keeping your cool. He'd fall in the same category as the Foul Pole.....except even more turbulent.
Some are simply not made to get the ENTIRE job done, Which includes keeping your cool. He'd fall in the same category as the Foul Pole.....except even more turbulent.
Re: Ike Ibeabuchi: what could have been?
Well, at early 2000s Ike could have more chances, but I definitely will not favour him over prime Wlad.gregor wrote: ↑24 Jan 2018, 16:39At early 2000s? Wlad lost to Brewster, who was just going forward, eating Wlad's punches, and landed his own at the proper moment. That is not to downplay Brewster win, he showed heart and determination, I just mean Ike would be better at any aspect there.
Wlad also went life and death with Peter, who was basically (very) poor man's version of Ike.
I would favour Ike over Wlad any time... not so sure about Vitaly (much better chin and awkward style).