RandomUsername wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 10:40
If Chisora is a gatekeeper or a journeyman than Dillan Whyte is a step below that.
Whyte beat Chisora
That is extremely arguable. A decision win does not constitute BEATING anyone.
The fight was close in my opinion and could of gone either way.
Some are adamant that Chisora won that fight. Close close fight but not a robbery in my opinion
That's true, but I thought Whyte deserved the nod personally, and I certainly don't expect Whyte will be the very best Heavyweight out there at any point. His career will probably ultimately wind up resembling Chisora's.
Someone on here (I forget who, sorry) calls Dereck "Loser to the stars" which I think is pretty accurate. You have got to be good to beat him especially when he is really motivated. He was aiming to destroy the hated Dillian Whyte which added another level to the difficulty to beating him. People think "It's only Chisora - Whyte can't be all that or Chisora would have been easy work for him" but IMO they have little idea about the two sides of Dereck Chisora.
I agree he's a high level gate-keeper but it seems to me we need a few more descriptive terms or ranks. To me the term "journeyman" is too vague, covering as it does, the whole spectrum of abilities from touring opponent i.e. professional loser, right up to fringe contender. How would you describe Dimitrenko for example? No way is he in contention even on the fringes, but it's absurd to categorize him alongside Jamaal Woods or Stacy Frazier.
And am I the only one who finds it a little absurd to be referring to a 35 year old as a"prospect"?
That is extremely arguable. A decision win does not constitute BEATING anyone.
The fight was close in my opinion and could of gone either way.
Some are adamant that Chisora won that fight. Close close fight but not a robbery in my opinion
That's true, but I thought Whyte deserved the nod personally, and I certainly don't expect Whyte will be the very best Heavyweight out there at any point. His career will probably ultimately wind up resembling Chisora's.
spot on. I have it Whyte up by 1 round.
And I also agree Whyte will end up just like Chisora
RandomUsername wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 10:40
If Chisora is a gatekeeper or a journeyman than Dillan Whyte is a step below that.
Whyte beat Chisora
That is extremely arguable. A decision win does not constitute BEATING anyone.
The fight was close in my opinion and could of gone either way.
Some are adamant that Chisora won that fight. Close close fight but not a robbery in my opinion
Thing with Chisora is, some of the fights he lost, he clearly wasn't motivated, also some he lost in very close decisions. He was extremely motivated vs. Whyte. I scored it for him, but I agree, could have gone either way..
candyslim wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 11:30
Someone on here (I forget who, sorry) calls Dereck "Loser to the stars" which I think is pretty accurate. You have got to be good to beat him especially when he is really motivated. He was aiming to destroy the hated Dillian Whyte which added another level to the difficulty to beating him. People think "It's only Chisora - Whyte can't be all that or Chisora would have been easy work for him" but IMO they have little idea about the two sides of Dereck Chisora.
I agree he's a high level gate-keeper but it seems to me we need a few more descriptive terms or ranks. To me the term "journeyman" is too vague, covering as it does, the whole spectrum of abilities from touring opponent i.e. professional loser, right up to fringe contender. How would you describe Dimitrenko for example? No way is he in contention even on the fringes, but it's absurd to categorize him alongside Jamaal Woods or Stacy Frazier.
And am I the only one who finds it a little absurd to be referring to a 35 year old as a"prospect"?
I guess I have too much time on my hands but I've broken down categories:
Great: Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Louis Excellent: Norton, Povetkin, Rahman Contenders: Quarry, Lyle, Gatekeepers: Chisora, Duhaupas Journeymen: Butler, Gavern Jobbers: most fighters with close to .500 records
I don't want to use the word "bums," but guys who get KOd most of the time.
I didn't want to provide too many examples because my point was not to argue about specific fighters but to make classifications.
candyslim wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 11:30
Someone on here (I forget who, sorry) calls Dereck "Loser to the stars" which I think is pretty accurate. You have got to be good to beat him especially when he is really motivated. He was aiming to destroy the hated Dillian Whyte which added another level to the difficulty to beating him. People think "It's only Chisora - Whyte can't be all that or Chisora would have been easy work for him" but IMO they have little idea about the two sides of Dereck Chisora.
I agree he's a high level gate-keeper but it seems to me we need a few more descriptive terms or ranks. To me the term "journeyman" is too vague, covering as it does, the whole spectrum of abilities from touring opponent i.e. professional loser, right up to fringe contender. How would you describe Dimitrenko for example? No way is he in contention even on the fringes, but it's absurd to categorize him alongside Jamaal Woods or Stacy Frazier.
And am I the only one who finds it a little absurd to be referring to a 35 year old as a"prospect"?
I guess I have too much time on my hands but I've broken down categories:
Great: Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Louis Excellent: Norton, Povetkin, Rahman Contenders: Quarry, Lyle, Gatekeepers: Chisora, Duhaupas Journeymen: Butler, Gavern Jobbers: most fighters with close to .500 records
I don't want to use the word "bums," but guys who get KOd most of the time.
I didn't want to provide too many examples because my point was not to argue about specific fighters but to make classifications.
To me it's hard to put Rahman just a level below the greats, his one punch night of glory notwithstanding.
Althought they never won a title, Quarry and Lyle would probably be favored over him.
Pretty much the same with Povetkin. Good enough log but he wasn't in the same ballpark as Wlad when he had his title opportunity.
He's a contender like Quarry, Lyle.
Is Kevin Johnson a journeyman or a jobber these days?
candyslim wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 11:30
Someone on here (I forget who, sorry) calls Dereck "Loser to the stars" which I think is pretty accurate. You have got to be good to beat him especially when he is really motivated. He was aiming to destroy the hated Dillian Whyte which added another level to the difficulty to beating him. People think "It's only Chisora - Whyte can't be all that or Chisora would have been easy work for him" but IMO they have little idea about the two sides of Dereck Chisora.
I agree he's a high level gate-keeper but it seems to me we need a few more descriptive terms or ranks. To me the term "journeyman" is too vague, covering as it does, the whole spectrum of abilities from touring opponent i.e. professional loser, right up to fringe contender. How would you describe Dimitrenko for example? No way is he in contention even on the fringes, but it's absurd to categorize him alongside Jamaal Woods or Stacy Frazier.
And am I the only one who finds it a little absurd to be referring to a 35 year old as a"prospect"?
I guess I have too much time on my hands but I've broken down categories:
Great: Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Louis Excellent: Norton, Povetkin, Rahman Contenders: Quarry, Lyle, Gatekeepers: Chisora, Duhaupas Journeymen: Butler, Gavern Jobbers: most fighters with close to .500 records
I don't want to use the word "bums," but guys who get KOd most of the time.
I didn't want to provide too many examples because my point was not to argue about specific fighters but to make classifications.
To me it's hard to put Rahman just a level below the greats, his one punch night of glory notwithstanding.
Althought they never won a title, Quarry and Lyle would probably be favored over him.
Pretty much the same with Povetkin. Good enough log but he wasn't in the same ballpark as Wlad when he had his title opportunity.
He's a contender like Quarry, Lyle.
Is Kevin Johnson a journeyman or a jobber these days?
Good question. I'd say journeymen. Johnson was a contender.
Perhaps I should have given a descrption in lieu of names, as names are so debatable. I debate myself on them.
Great is all time great. That's easy.
Excellent is just a tad under that.
A contender is someone who spent many years in the top 10 of his division. IE. Jimmy Young would be sooo hard to classify.
A gatekeeper is someone who tests a prospect. Rest is pretty self explanatory.
candyslim wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 11:30
Someone on here (I forget who, sorry) calls Dereck "Loser to the stars" which I think is pretty accurate. You have got to be good to beat him especially when he is really motivated. He was aiming to destroy the hated Dillian Whyte which added another level to the difficulty to beating him. People think "It's only Chisora - Whyte can't be all that or Chisora would have been easy work for him" but IMO they have little idea about the two sides of Dereck Chisora.
I agree he's a high level gate-keeper but it seems to me we need a few more descriptive terms or ranks. To me the term "journeyman" is too vague, covering as it does, the whole spectrum of abilities from touring opponent i.e. professional loser, right up to fringe contender. How would you describe Dimitrenko for example? No way is he in contention even on the fringes, but it's absurd to categorize him alongside Jamaal Woods or Stacy Frazier.
And am I the only one who finds it a little absurd to be referring to a 35 year old as a"prospect"?
I guess I have too much time on my hands but I've broken down categories:
Great: Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Louis Excellent: Norton, Povetkin, Rahman Contenders: Quarry, Lyle, Gatekeepers: Chisora, Duhaupas Journeymen: Butler, Gavern Jobbers: most fighters with close to .500 records
I don't want to use the word "bums," but guys who get KOd most of the time.
I didn't want to provide too many examples because my point was not to argue about specific fighters but to make classifications.
candyslim wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 11:30
Someone on here (I forget who, sorry) calls Dereck "Loser to the stars" which I think is pretty accurate. You have got to be good to beat him especially when he is really motivated. He was aiming to destroy the hated Dillian Whyte which added another level to the difficulty to beating him. People think "It's only Chisora - Whyte can't be all that or Chisora would have been easy work for him" but IMO they have little idea about the two sides of Dereck Chisora.
I agree he's a high level gate-keeper but it seems to me we need a few more descriptive terms or ranks. To me the term "journeyman" is too vague, covering as it does, the whole spectrum of abilities from touring opponent i.e. professional loser, right up to fringe contender. How would you describe Dimitrenko for example? No way is he in contention even on the fringes, but it's absurd to categorize him alongside Jamaal Woods or Stacy Frazier.
And am I the only one who finds it a little absurd to be referring to a 35 year old as a"prospect"?
I guess I have too much time on my hands but I've broken down categories:
Great: Ali, Holmes, Lewis, Louis Excellent: Norton, Povetkin, Rahman Contenders: Quarry, Lyle, Gatekeepers: Chisora, Duhaupas Journeymen: Butler, Gavern Jobbers: most fighters with close to .500 records
I don't want to use the word "bums," but guys who get KOd most of the time.
To me it's hard to put Rahman just a level below the greats, his one punch night of glory notwithstanding.
Sometimes I may be too easy, but yes I think you are right on Rahman.
Yes Tony, I agree I don't like to describe any man who has the guts to fight for a living as a bum, although I'm sure I have used that term on occasion. I tend to differentiate between contender (as anyone who would have an outside chance of beating the/a champion, and a top-contender who would have a realistic chance even if being an underdog.
"Jobber" could be a useful addition were it to catch on. I appreciate your efforts. Any thoughts about those superannuated "prospects" ?
Anyone else got any ideas for terms to divide the various levels of journeymen into different categories ?
RandomUsername wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 10:40
If Chisora is a gatekeeper or a journeyman than Dillan Whyte is a step below that.
Whyte beat Chisora
He did not.
He got the nod anyway. If you want to argue that Chisora deserved the decision go for it. I'd argue he didn't, and we'd get nowhere.
Whyte is clearly the guy on the upside right now, while Chisora is the aging gatekeeper. If they had a rematch Whyte would win again, but it would make business sense for them to do that so they won't.
Well I too got Chisora as the winner on my point card.
However the fight really was close enough that even I won't call it robbery.
Still I have to admit that it irks me bit that I know that if Chisora was the raising name who was expected to make big bucks later he would have gotten the nod.
That's not a way that boxing matches should be judged
Heretic wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 15:17
Well I too got Chisora as the winner on my point card.
However the fight really was close enough that even I won't call it robbery.
Still I have to admit that it irks me bit that I know that if Chisora was the raising name who was expected to make big bucks later he would have gotten the nod.
That's not a way that boxing matches should be judged
And no one should disagree that this is not the way the sport should be ran. But it always has and more than likely always will be this way. As sad as it is
ya i thought chisora beat whyte too, and helenius while helenius was still unbeaten and there was excitment about him. okay the whyte fight was close but he totally schooled helenius. scott was a decent win too.
problem for chis is that hes pretty much been the b side in his big fights and hasnt gotten any luck with scoring. even against klit even though he clearly lost i thought he deserved at least 2 more rounds then they gave him
i can see why ppl would say hes a journyeman at a high level, although he was euro champ and i thought he was at least fringe world level. hes basically the opponent a lot of the time. if he was the 'man' hed have gotten the whyte and helenius wins imo
I have mixed feelings about the guy. On one hand I hate the prick. On the other hand I can't deny that hes been great for boxing. Fought everyone and has all action style.
jamamb wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 15:24
ya i thought chisora beat whyte too, and helenius while helenius was still unbeaten and there was excitment about him. okay the whyte fight was close but he totally schooled helenius. scott was a decent win too.
Heretic wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 15:33
I have mixed feelings about the guy. On one hand I hate the prick. On the other hand I can't deny that hes been great for boxing. Fought everyone and has all action style.
We need more Chisoras in boxing
Some Chisora's actions are really prick-like. That kissing the opponents or spitting water in Wlad's face. But that table throwing was fukkin' epic.
Heretic wrote: ↑18 May 2018, 15:33
I have mixed feelings about the guy. On one hand I hate the prick. On the other hand I can't deny that hes been great for boxing. Fought everyone and has all action style.
We need more Chisoras in boxing
Some Chisora's actions are really prick-like. That kissing the opponents or spitting water in Wlad's face. But that table throwing was fukkin' epic.
Escapades aside, he is one tough MF'er. Prick or no prick...
Chisora is a career criminal. You used to be able to access Zimbabwe News online and there was a big article on his record of armed robbery and other violent crimes.
?
