Tarver 'i am a living legend'

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 19 Apr 2006, 11:18

No living legend would have lost to Jones in that first fight, Jones was the walking dead that night and still beat him.

Tarver is a world class operator no doubt but he has woeful stamina and a pisspoor workrate.

And living legends dont split fights with Glen Johnson no fuckin way!

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 19 Apr 2006, 11:42

jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
viciousmaussa wrote: Castillo's punches don't look impressive. But he was laying some leather on Mayweather - the problem was, and this is why i don't have a big problem with the first fight's decision, is that he did no damage to Pretty Boy. Mayweather wasn't doing a great deal of punching in either of those two fights. he was emphasising so much on defense that he was flicking his shots and pulling away. that kind of 'grim purpose' that we see in Castillo just didn't pay off, as he couldn't soften Mayweather up.

but he was competitive all the way. ok, he gave the early rds away in fight one, and was actually discouraged in the last two rds of fight two when mayweather put some uice into the right hand. but JLC was competitive all the way - just about.

Judah was outclassed after 4 rounds, clueless after Mayweather found the range for left hooks and right hands.

i still don't think Tarver v Jones is as impressive as Hatton-Tszyu. I don't think Tszyu was badly faded, rather it seems Hatton brought on the older man's demise by making him work, pulling the stea out of him, roughing him up till he'd had enough. Tszyu was still very dangerous, scoring classy shots...but with Tarver-Jones I, Jones was a dead man walking, shockingly without his speed (he's shown since he can't really cut it on a level field). even more shocking, Tarver didn't seem to notice, he seemed glad to just hang in there with Jones

that's what i see as damaging to Tarver's rep. he should have done so much more vs Jones I, but being a counter puncher, I guess he does more whe the opponent does more (as in Jones II), which was more impressive
In the first fight Castillo hurt PBF in 1 of the middle rounds but he gave away the first 4-5 rounds, and went 50-50 after that. And people say it was a gift - you cant win a fight giving away the first 5rounds

I'd agree RJJ was old against Tarver but was he really any worse and more weight drained against Tarver than he was against Ruiz? Or was Tarver just better and a tougher style? RJJ was probably declining for a while but would probably still beat Clinton Woods.
How the smeg could Jones have been weight drained against Ruiz? He weighed in at 199 on the night!

Jones couldn't beat my grandmother now, he's gun shy old and tired. Whatever he did to himself to bulk up to fight Ruiz ruined him. Tarver had the style to give him problems being a very big light heavy with decent speed, but Jones would have made him miss and pay in his prime.

As in he wasn't really weight drained against Tarver and it was an excuse. He was 199 with clothes on, without dieting, boiling down etc. Jones probably would have beat Tarver in his prime, but he'd beat most in his prime.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 19 Apr 2006, 11:45

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote: In the first fight Castillo hurt PBF in 1 of the middle rounds but he gave away the first 4-5 rounds, and went 50-50 after that. And people say it was a gift - you cant win a fight giving away the first 5rounds

I'd agree RJJ was old against Tarver but was he really any worse and more weight drained against Tarver than he was against Ruiz? Or was Tarver just better and a tougher style? RJJ was probably declining for a while but would probably still beat Clinton Woods.
How the smeg could Jones have been weight drained against Ruiz? He weighed in at 199 on the night!

Jones couldn't beat my grandmother now, he's gun shy old and tired. Whatever he did to himself to bulk up to fight Ruiz ruined him. Tarver had the style to give him problems being a very big light heavy with decent speed, but Jones would have made him miss and pay in his prime.
As in he wasn't really weight drained against Tarver and it was an excuse. He was 199 with clothes on, without dieting, boiling down etc. Jones probably would have beat Tarver in his prime, but he'd beat most in his prime.

They weight Jones on fight night and he was 199 or thereabouts - so he lost 24lbs of muscle before the first Tarver fight and he wasn't drained. Have you seen the fight? He looks awful.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 19 Apr 2006, 11:56

Even in the build up to the fight it was clear something was up. Jones had man boobs in the poster for the fight and the commentators said how old he looked at the weight in and just before the 1st round.

Clearly something was wrong with Jones that night. He had probably been in decline for a while, but he fell off of the edge of the precipice that night.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 19 Apr 2006, 12:24

You sound like a Klitchko fanatic

'there was something wrong with him that night'

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 19 Apr 2006, 14:17

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Even in the build up to the fight it was clear something was up. Jones had man boobs in the poster for the fight and the commentators said how old he looked at the weight in and just before the 1st round.

Clearly something was wrong with Jones that night. He had probably been in decline for a while, but he fell off of the edge of the precipice that night.

I agree with everything, except for in decline for a while bit. Think the Woods and Ruiz fights were among his better performance.

I do have to say, the more he fights at Light Heavyweight - the less validity the argument that he had/has problems with his weight hold true.

When he said (after the Tarver escape) he aint ever fighting at the weight again, I believed him - cause I thought he had sense.

DG. · Post by **DG.** » 19 Apr 2006, 15:00

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Replace the letters 'Leg' with 'Knob' and I think this is more accurate.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 19 Apr 2006, 16:38

nickd wrote:
They weight Jones on fight night and he was 199 or thereabouts - so he lost 24lbs of muscle before the first Tarver fight and he wasn't drained. Have you seen the fight? He looks awful.

NICK, he wore clothes to that weigh in - thats 5lbs off, he didn't diet to make weight, he didnt need to boil down. Losing 20lbs of water is quite easy over a few weeks.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 19 Apr 2006, 17:19

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
nickd wrote:
They weight Jones on fight night and he was 199 or thereabouts - so he lost 24lbs of muscle before the first Tarver fight and he wasn't drained. Have you seen the fight? He looks awful.
NICK, he wore clothes to that weigh in - thats 5lbs off, he didn't diet to make weight, he didnt need to boil down. Losing 20lbs of water is quite easy over a few weeks.

Have you seen Tarver v Jones I? If you have then there is no way you can suggest he wasn't drained. Just take one look at his body and his sunken face.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Apr 2006, 05:27

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:You sound like a Klitchko fanatic 'there was something wrong with him that night'

Nope, just realistic.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Apr 2006, 05:30

stujones wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:Even in the build up to the fight it was clear something was up. Jones had man boobs in the poster for the fight and the commentators said how old he looked at the weight in and just before the 1st round.

Clearly something was wrong with Jones that night. He had probably been in decline for a while, but he fell off of the edge of the precipice that night.
I agree with everything, except for in decline for a while bit. Think the Woods and Ruiz fights were among his better performance.

I do have to say, the more he fights at Light Heavyweight - the less validity the argument that he had/has problems with his weight hold true.

When he said (after the Tarver escape) he aint ever fighting at the weight again, I believed him - cause I thought he had sense.

The Ruiz fight may well have flattered to deceive, the ref for that fight (was it Cortez?) spoiled Ruiz' party by actually enforcing the rules and not allowing Ruiz to hold all night and Johnny Boy didn't have a clue what to do without his only tactic. Jones was too quick for him to get close to.

My personal belief is that Jones was juicing in the run up to the Ruiz fight, did something to his body in the process, and ruined himself. Post Tarver, I think his confidence is shot to shit, which explains his passive performance against Johnson and against Tarver in their 3rd fight.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 20 Apr 2006, 05:38

nickd wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:
nickd wrote:
They weight Jones on fight night and he was 199 or thereabouts - so he lost 24lbs of muscle before the first Tarver fight and he wasn't drained. Have you seen the fight? He looks awful.
NICK, he wore clothes to that weigh in - thats 5lbs off, he didn't diet to make weight, he didnt need to boil down. Losing 20lbs of water is quite easy over a few weeks.
Have you seen Tarver v Jones I? If you have then there is no way you can suggest he wasn't drained. Just take one look at his body and his sunken face.

Yes I have and RJJ won that fight despite the controversy (7-5 on my card), he looked allot smaller than Tarver too, he didnt look his old self, but was pressured and made to fight unlike the RUiz fight where he was aloud to pose and fight when he felt like it. Tarver had faster hands, better combos, and a better defense than Ruiz.

Maybe he was a bit drained and maybe a bit old and maybe a bit underprepared (probably). I don't but if he was drained it was his own fault for not preparing properly. Anyway Corrales/Castillo/Morales/Harrison/Cotto/Delahoya have made a career out of draining their bodys 20lbs below their lowest weight. You've got a day to put the weight back on

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 20 Apr 2006, 05:40

Jones with massive muscles just looked all wrong. he was still fast enough to beat Ruiz but even then you had to worry how he'd get his body back down. i'm no Jones supporter, but he looked like he'd been 12 hard rounds before he stepped between the ropes for Tarver I

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 20 Apr 2006, 05:47

Terence wrote:Give Jones his due. I had him winning Tarver I, those rights to the body were negating the sporadic showy flurries of Tarver IMO. This fight and ODH Shane II show that many people no longer pay attention to body blows.

that's all he could do, throw slappy body shots off balance. then again, maybe that prevented Tarver from closing strong

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Apr 2006, 06:05

Terence wrote:For what its worth I thought Jones looked jaded and a little less mercurial versus Woods. Then for Ruiz he put on a lot of weight and in reducing it he must have badly faded his skills. It is like stretching an elestic band too far, eventually it will lose its elasticity. Look at Bowe-Golota II, Bowe had been blowing up for years then suddenly gets himself to his prime weight and his legs were gone, no muscle definition. It could be that when you pile on too much weight and then boil down it damages your muscles and renders them less effective. Coupled with the fact that Jones always relied on reflexes and you have a possible answer; his legs looked like little strips of wood post-Ruiz. As did Bowe's for Golota II and neither man could hold a shot in the aforementioned fights.

Yes, I watched the Bowe Golota fights the other night, and it's shocking how bad Bowe looks. His balance is completely gone, and virtually every shot Golota landed had him wobbling all over the place, even in the first fight he wasn't at all right. I wonder if weight draining damages the nerve endings perhaps, after all, dehydration is quite a serious thing, it can kill you.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Apr 2006, 07:03

Yes there is long term physical damage which results from starvation and dehydration, which really is what some boxers are bordering on. Eating virtually nothing for 2 weeks in the lead up to a fight whilst doing roadwork and generally training like a bastard cannot be good for a body.

Think this is why so many of the old timers had longer periods of success I think. Look at Sugar Ray Robinson's incredible run before his decline set in, or Archie Moore, or Henry Armstrong or any number of others. Not enough time for long layoffs and getting hugely out of shape.

It will be interesting to see what DLH looks like when he fights Mayorga, I've a sneaking suspicion that he may get his arse kicked badly, Mayorga doesn't rely on cute timing or reflexes and his power won't have gone anywhere despite not being that active himself of late.

Oscar hasn't looked good since his last fight with Mosley, and even then wasn't that impressive.

Achybreaky · Post by **Achybreaky** » 20 Apr 2006, 07:44

Terence wrote:
jamesmcdonnell wrote:Yes there is long term physical damage which results from starvation and dehydration, which really is what some boxers are bordering on. Eating virtually nothing for 2 weeks in the lead up to a fight whilst doing roadwork and generally training like a bastard cannot be good for a body.

Think this is why so many of the old timers had longer periods of success I think. Look at Sugar Ray Robinson's incredible run before his decline set in, or Archie Moore, or Henry Armstrong or any number of others. Not enough time for long layoffs and getting hugely out of shape.

It will be interesting to see what DLH looks like when he fights Mayorga, I've a sneaking suspicion that he may get his arse kicked badly, Mayorga doesn't rely on cute timing or reflexes and his power won't have gone anywhere despite not being that active himself of late.

Oscar hasn't looked good since his last fight with Mosley, and even then wasn't that impressive.
I was thinking about the ODH-Mayorga fight last night and was worried that ODH may get beaten also. I'm not a big Oscar fan but it would be tragic for him to lose to Ricardo (who I will admit I cannot stand and am prejudiced against, mainly because he beat my man Forrest twice, second time undeserved IMO). I just don't see Oscar having that beat 'em back power Tito brought to his fight with Ricardo and it could be that the Nicaraguan takes some early lumps then beats an unfit, blunt and frankly always poor late-on Oscar by decision. I hate to presume here but I think that would be hard to take for most boxing purists.

Glad that it will unfurl live on Sky, I'm not going to start fawning over Sky just yet though. If they can show "Live Darts from the Ape and Apple in Doncaster" they should show this stuff.

Dont mean to be picky but darts is re-emerging as a mainsteram sport with a bigger fanbase at the minute than boxing whereas boxing is in decline wether we like it or not. Thus sky showing the darts a lot more recently.

Plus sky are a shower of clowns who expect us to pay for the hatton fight even though sky is essentially pay for view anyway.

nickd · Post by **nickd** » 20 Apr 2006, 08:10

And I'm sure its a lot cheaper to rig up a few cameras at the Circus Tavern or wherever than live feed boxing from the US.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 20 Apr 2006, 08:16

Also consider that the total prize money for the darts or snooker world championships is less than Hatton would expect for a single fight.

as bang per buck, boxing is not great value to a broadcaster unless it is PPV and they can guarantee big numbers.

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 20 Apr 2006, 09:43

I am going to the darts next Thursday at the Gordon Craig Leisure Centre in Stevenage, i'll let you all know how it compairs to the last fight I went to see (Harrison v Williams by the way)

it's been a long time since the days of Spencer Oliver and Billy Schwer fighting there which of course I would rather see

states · Post by **states** » 20 Apr 2006, 09:54

Darts is great. I'll be watching Taylor-Barneveld tonight.

Now there's an idea, the two best in the world actually facing each other......

scurlaruntings · Post by **scurlaruntings** » 20 Apr 2006, 09:54

tarver is a classic right time right place guy.his attitude has endeared him to know one and fortunately for him the demise of the real living legend RJJ has now made him a 3 time world champ which is a very very inflated stat indeed.he has credible names to his moniker but a win over a shot RJJ a win over an over acheiving high quality and honest pro like glen johnson isnt the stuff of legends at all

hitman_hatton1 · Post by **hitman_hatton1** » 20 Apr 2006, 10:00

the only thing tarver will go down in legend for is his role in rocky 6.

scurlaruntings · Post by **scurlaruntings** » 20 Apr 2006, 10:01

i hope stallone batters the shit out of him.i cant stand the guy

states · Post by **states** » 20 Apr 2006, 11:12

Terence wrote:I don't want to ruin the ending guys but I have a feeling Rocky will win this one! By KO as well!

Last round, do you think? Possibly after getting the shit kicked out of him?