Hughie Fury vs. Alexander Povetkin - 31 August 2019

[Ilya Muromets]

Povetkin isn’t ten times better than Fury.

You were WRONG but no one can force you to admit it.

I'm curious...how many times better is he?

5.96 times better, but at his peak he was 13.875 times better, so really the guy wasn't exaggerating that much when he rounded it out to 10.

[oogiebe]

I'm curious...how many times better is he?

5.96 times better, but at his peak he was 13.875 times better, so really the guy wasn't exaggerating that much when he rounded it out to 10.

Thank you Mr. Spock. LOL!

[Ilya Muromets]

5.96 times better, but at his peak he was 13.875 times better, so really the guy wasn't exaggerating that much when he rounded it out to 10.

Thank you Mr. Spock. LOL!

[tiny_acres]

I'm curious...how many times better is he?

5.96 times better, but at his peak he was 13.875 times better, so really the guy wasn't exaggerating that much when he rounded it out to 10.

brilliant

[jujigatame]

Hughie is young and could still get to the top of the division, but he has a lot of work to do. He should also probably show he can beat a B-lister before he gets another big fight against a top 10 guy. Which is a category he is now 0-3 against.

[oogiebe]

Hughie is young and could still get to the top of the division, but he has a lot of work to do. He should also probably show he can beat a B-lister before he gets another big fight against a top 10 guy. Which is a category he is now 0-3 against.

Hughie will never even smell the top of the division. He's crap.

[tiny_acres]

There is nothing wrong with being a very good domestic level fighter.
That's how I view Hughie. He's just not a world level fighter. He will lose the big fights but might pull an upset at some point

[jujigatame]

I think Hughie would have a decent shot at beating Joe Joyce. If you're around the top 20 of the division at age 24 you have potential to eventually be a contender. Most HWs don't hit prime until around 30.

That said, he was extremely unimpressive in this fight.

[margaret thatcher]

As it stands, I am giving the 'but he's still very young' argument no credit, because he's shown absolutely no improvement or change in his approach when he fights good opposition. It's the exact same thing every time and it's been 3 losses now. I think we probably see him burnt out earlier too.

Some guys get set in their ways early and never really change it up.

[jujigatame]

As it stands, I am giving the 'but he's still very young' argument no credit, because he's shown absolutely no improvement or change in his approach when he fights good opposition. It's the exact same thing every time and it's been 3 losses now. I think we probably see him burnt out earlier too.

Some guys get set in their ways early and never really change it up.

Not really disagreeing with you. Potential is not always realized.

[oogiebe]

As it stands, I am giving the 'but he's still very young' argument no credit, because he's shown absolutely no improvement or change in his approach when he fights good opposition. It's the exact same thing every time and it's been 3 losses now. I think we probably see him burnt out earlier too.

Some guys get set in their ways early and never really change it up.

Spot on.

[greg]

..actually I thought it's the best Hughie I've seen so far, at least he was not UNWILLING to engage, of course it was not enough..

[oogiebe]

..actually I thought it's the best Hughie I've seen so far, at least he was not UNWILLING to engage, of course it was not enough..

And that's the rub. Now Hughie fans will call out his three best performances which are all losses. He's as good as he'll ever be and it's not very good.

[oogiebe]

By CompuBox

Heavyweights Alexander Povetkin (9 of 33) and Hughie Fury (7 of 25) combined to land 16 of 55 punches per round. The heavyweight average for one fighter is 15 of 45 per round.

[JohnReed]

I don't mean to be argumentative, but you are wrong about Bugner. The reality is that the prime Bugner was easily a higher class fighter than Hughie, possibly in every respect too. I'm talking about the 1973-1976 version of Bugner, especially the one who fought Ali and Frazier in 1973. Bugner's defensive skills, and hand/foot speed were no less good than Hughies. And Bugner's durability was far superior to Hughie's, I think.

Bugner's problem is that when he was put under serious pressure, he went into his defensive shell, and for some reason he stayed there. That's how he lost fights he should have won. Joe also had problems sustaining his offensive, possibly because he was a tad musclebound (that's what Henry Cooper said, at least). But Bugner's flaws weren't as bad as Hughie's.

I can't imagine a prime Bugner being made to feel vulnerable -- and put on the run -- by the likes of Parker and Pulev. Also, I'm certain that a prime Bugner would have used his left jab effectively enough to have outpointed the burned out, aged version of Povektin that Hughie "lost" to today.

eads like this Hughie Fury...

Bugner lost every time he stepped up to a higher level

-Not unlike this Hughie Fury...

But the big difference is that Bugner's losing efforts to Ali (first fight) and Frazier were top notch performances that established him as a legitimate, world-class contender. After the world saw those 1973 Bugner efforts, everyone knew that Joe was unquestionably one of the top eight heavies in the world. After the Frazier fight, some people even speculated that Bugner might be the world's fifth best heavyweight, right behind Ali, Foreman, Frazier, and Norton.

By contrast, Hughie's losing efforts confirm that he is merely a fringe contender. Not a legitimate world-class fighter in any way (as Bugner was). But rather, a top-20 or top-25 guy.

Therefore, no comparison between Bugner and Hughie.

[oogiebe]

eads like this Hughie Fury...

Bugner lost every time he stepped up to a higher level

-Not unlike this Hughie Fury...

But the big difference is that Bugner's losing efforts to Ali (first fight) and Frazier were top notch performances that established him as a legitimate, world-class contender. After the world saw those 1973 Bugner efforts, everyone knew that Joe was unquestionably one of the top eight heavies in the world. After the Frazier fight, some people even speculated that Bugner might be the world's fifth best heavyweight, right behind Ali, Foreman, Frazier, and Norton.

By contrast, Hughie's losing efforts confirm that he is merely a fringe contender. Not a legitimate world-class fighter in any way (as Bugner was). But rather, a top-20 or top-25 guy.

Therefore, no comparison between Bugner and Hughie.

None.

[Onetimeonly]

By CompuBox

Heavyweights Alexander Povetkin (9 of 33) and Hughie Fury (7 of 25) combined to land 16 of 55 punches per round. The heavyweight average for one fighter is 15 of 45 per round.

I made a huge mistake and put this on, I fell asleep in the second and missed the first 3 rounds of loma.

[Onetimeonly]

But the big difference is that Bugner's losing efforts to Ali (first fight) and Frazier were top notch performances that established him as a legitimate, world-class contender. After the world saw those 1973 Bugner efforts, everyone knew that Joe was unquestionably one of the top eight heavies in the world. After the Frazier fight, some people even speculated that Bugner might be the world's fifth best heavyweight, right behind Ali, Foreman, Frazier, and Norton.

By contrast, Hughie's losing efforts confirm that he is merely a fringe contender. Not a legitimate world-class fighter in any way (as Bugner was). But rather, a top-20 or top-25 guy.

Therefore, no comparison between Bugner and Hughie.

None.

Bugner could well be #1 today.

[oogiebe]

By CompuBox

Heavyweights Alexander Povetkin (9 of 33) and Hughie Fury (7 of 25) combined to land 16 of 55 punches per round. The heavyweight average for one fighter is 15 of 45 per round.

I made a huge mistake and put this on, I fell asleep in the second and missed the first 3 rounds of loma.

You should've known better! Tsk tsk.

[oogiebe]

None.

Bugner could well be #1 today.

Wouldn't go that far, but he'd give the top guys a lot of problems.

[Onetimeonly]

Bugner could well be #1 today.

Wouldn't go that far, but he'd give the top guys a lot of problems.

He's definitely better than anyone Hughie has faced. Ruiz would have nothing for him. I'd favor fury most over him, but at 5 jabs a Rd Joe would be much more active. Kind of ironic that he was known as a bit of a spoiler in his day but he threw more than any of these guys. Usyk would also be bad news for him IMO.

[oogiebe]

Wouldn't go that far, but he'd give the top guys a lot of problems.

He's definitely better than anyone Hughie has faced. Ruiz would have nothing for him. I'd favor fury most over him, but at 5 jabs a Rd Joe would be much more active. Kind of ironic that he was known as a bit of a spoiler in his day but he threw more than any of these guys. Usyk would also be bad news for him IMO.

No question about it. Bugner fought in arguably the best and most competitive environment in HW history and held his own with the top dogs in his prime. He had good movement; size; skills; hand speed and enough of a punch to keep his opponent somewhat honest. Just not enough to get over the top. I was a fan back then.

[RandyMatchO'Man]

Fury on the attack last night was too slow and telegraphed. Povetkin could see it was coming so early and was able to get away. Even at his age...I was rooting for Fury to show more of himself, but apart from his jabby jab he's not got enough offence. It's a shame because he's got great movement for a tall guy. It wasn't as bad as the Parker-Fury fight, anyway. Why doesn't he go down to cruiserweight ?

[sturm vogel]

eads like this Hughie Fury...

Bugner lost every time he stepped up to a higher level

-Not unlike this Hughie Fury...

But the big difference is that Bugner's losing efforts to Ali (first fight) and Frazier were top notch performances that established him as a legitimate, world-class contender. After the world saw those 1973 Bugner efforts, everyone knew that Joe was unquestionably one of the top eight heavies in the world. After the Frazier fight, some people even speculated that Bugner might be the world's fifth best heavyweight, right behind Ali, Foreman, Frazier, and Norton.

By contrast, Hughie's losing efforts confirm that he is merely a fringe contender. Not a legitimate world-class fighter in any way (as Bugner was). But rather, a top-20 or top-25 guy.

Therefore, no comparison between Bugner and Hughie.

We compare skill sets. We can't compare competition because one fought in a different time. We can compare the skills based on what both did and do because we have video.

[ironbeard]

But the big difference is that Bugner's losing efforts to Ali (first fight) and Frazier were top notch performances that established him as a legitimate, world-class contender. After the world saw those 1973 Bugner efforts, everyone knew that Joe was unquestionably one of the top eight heavies in the world. After the Frazier fight, some people even speculated that Bugner might be the world's fifth best heavyweight, right behind Ali, Foreman, Frazier, and Norton.

By contrast, Hughie's losing efforts confirm that he is merely a fringe contender. Not a legitimate world-class fighter in any way (as Bugner was). But rather, a top-20 or top-25 guy.

Therefore, no comparison between Bugner and Hughie.

We compare skill sets. We can't compare competition because one fought in a different time. We can compare the skills based on what both did and do because we have video.

Of course we can compare competition, and we can form opinions. Mine is that Bugner beats Hughie 8 out of 10 times.