Haye-Maccarinelli ON!

boxbet · Post by **boxbet** » 02 Jan 2007, 18:22

Could this fight possibly go to the scorecards?? I really dont think so, they both like to bang too much.

boxbet · Post by **boxbet** » 02 Jan 2007, 18:26

Even if Enzo looses, Haye will move up to heavy soon leaving Macca to win back the title( Haye will probably vacate).

boxbet · Post by **boxbet** » 02 Jan 2007, 18:27

Even if Calzaghe drops out , this is a must see fight. we need confirmation first.

josh fg · Post by **josh fg** » 02 Jan 2007, 19:41

Deffinatly a fight Id pay to see, would be good to see Haye given the kind of audiance that an ITV hyped fight could get him at this stage in his carrer if the fight goes well I can really see people getting excited by the winner.

Interesting to see how the comentators deal with the fact that although hey hasn't got a "world title" he is proberbly the better fighter without undermining any of there other cash cows titles.

SIMPSONS · Post by **SIMPSONS** » 02 Jan 2007, 20:15

boxbet wrote:Even if Calzaghe drops out , this is a must see fight. we need confirmation first.

And wot does confirmation for a F.W fighter mean exactly?

I won't believe nothing until i see them both weigh in for the fight.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 02 Jan 2007, 21:53

Chesney_Chambers wrote:
Unbeleivable, considering the top class domestic clashes we've missed out on over the years. Respect to both fighters and both promoters if this fight happens, these are the type of fights and this is the type of matchmaking that British boxing needs if it is going to reach the glory days again IMO. I don't think we should be criticising the timing, better now than never IMO

Boxing doesn't get much better than Haye-Enzo (for me anyway) especially as the winner 'should' go on to fight Bell

Thats not my opinion, of course under 99% of situations I would agree. However, I think its is match ups like Hatton vs Tszyu, Honeyghun vs Curry, Lewis vs Tyson etc that really get the juices going. If Hatton had the option of fighting Mayweather or Witter I know which fight I would rather see and I know which fight would capture the imagination better.

There shouldn't be any bananna skins for Haye now. He won the eliminator to fight the best fighter in the devision. Odd as it sounds, but if he beats Enzo he might kiss goodbye his title shot vs Bell/Mormeck. He will probably be out of the WBC ratings.

Of course I would love to see Haye vs Enzo... been shouting this match up for ages - but now he is so close to the WBC title shot - I'd like to see him bring Bell/Mormeck over here. Bell or Mormeck vs Haye (or Enzo) is more appealing for me than a domestic dust up.

Imagine if Hatton had just won the IBF title eliminator and Witter won the WBO Light Welterweight title (which if everything went to plan would have happend) but instead of Hatton going the IBF route he would fight Witter and then lose out on fighting all the big names due to him not being ranked high with the other organisations. We would have been gutted, but it was a very real possibility. I'm so delighted that it was Tszyu that Hatton faced and not Witter - not cause I don't think Hatton would beat Witter (I do think he will comfortably), but because Ricky fought and beat the man.

Haye is not just close to fighting for the big one, he is there. If Bell and Mormeck beat each other up like last time then he stands a decent chance against them. I do find it odd, he's not mentioned Enzo ONCE during his sky interviews. It all been about Bell/Mormeck and I hope he sticks to that thought.

Fight Enzo yes, but after Mormeck/Bell (whatever the result).

Loses that then he can always go back to Enzo's WBO title or move up.

Scrap · Post by **Scrap** » 03 Jan 2007, 02:54

I fancy Enzo in this one interesting hes improving Haye isnt

boxbet · Post by **boxbet** » 03 Jan 2007, 05:13

They both have the tools to win this fight. Slight advantage to Haye with bigger weight. Whatever happens they should have a rematch for themselves and the public.

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 03 Jan 2007, 05:23

what do you mean boxbet, they'll weigh the same? And no way on earth will there ever be a rematch, both will want to move onwards and upwards after this

and stu with Haye having convinced himself time at cruiserweight is limited, waiting for Momeck or Bell isn't the best idea. also a fight against Enzo would certainly better prepare him for the top guys. if he loses then fairplay to Enzo, let him look for the big fights and we can probably safely say Haye wouldn't have beaten Bell if he couldn't beat Enzo.

Chesney_Chambers · Post by **Chesney_Chambers** » 03 Jan 2007, 07:03

stujones wrote: I think its is match ups like Hatton vs Tszyu, Honeyghun vs Curry, Lewis vs Tyson etc that really get the juices going. If Hatton had the option of fighting Mayweather or Witter I know which fight I would rather see and I know which fight would capture the imagination better.

I think the Eubank-Benn-Watson-Collins top class domestic clashes done more for British boxings popularity than Honeyghan-Curry and Lewis-Tyson.

On the World scene Haye Vs Bell/Mormeck is more important than Haye Vs Enzo, but I think that the Great British population would rather see 2 British boxers that they've heard of (and probably seen fight) square off against each other rather than seeing Haye Vs Bell - who the strong majority won't have seen fight and alot won't have heard of. Enzo-Haye is a casual fans dream IMO especially considering we're pretty much guarenteed a KO (whichever way it goes). ITV have so far been excellent at promoting their boxing shows IMO and they should be able to go to town on this one

I can see your point Stu, but I don't agree with it. Its 'Horses for Courses' I suppose, but I like to see who the best in Britain is before I see who the best in the world is.

Bell and Mormeck aren't fighting til March, so it's unlikely that the Haye/Enzo Vs Bell/Mormeck match is going to happen in the second half of the year, so fair play to Haye for aggressive matchmaking it makes a very refreshing change. Haye could have quite easily had a marking time gimme fight whilst he waited for Bell, but he wants to fight the best fighters and entertain the fans and he certainly does that IMO

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 03 Jan 2007, 08:22

Scrap wrote:I fancy Enzo in this one interesting hes improving Haye isnt

a debatable but very interesting point ! but its easy to look like you are improving when you are fighting tomato cans (no offence to mark hobson), lets be honest, the standard of hayes opposition has been better than that of enzo throughout his career.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 03 Jan 2007, 09:03

Haye vs Maccarinelli has certainly devided the "Jones" household. Both myself and my father think its a question of who lands first. Haye is probably more likely, but I'm not sure one punch will be enough to put Enzo Mac away. He has shown such fighting qualities vs Hobson, Dominguez and Scott. In two of these fights he was really on the brink of defeat and has shown terrific power when hurt.

I just have the feeling that Enzo might catch Haye when Haye thinks he's got him beat.

I just think Enzo has that slightly better chin, Haye was hurt vs Fragomeni who (although tough) isn't a puncher at all. Although give Haye his dues he showed excellent heart in that one also. Thats why I give him a shot vs Bell/Mormeck.

boxbet · Post by **boxbet** » 03 Jan 2007, 09:05

Lenny Albert wrote:what do you mean boxbet, they'll weigh the same? And no way on earth will there ever be a rematch, both will want to move onwards and upwards after this

and stu with Haye having convinced himself time at cruiserweight is limited, waiting for Momeck or Bell isn't the best idea. also a fight against Enzo would certainly better prepare him for the top guys. if he loses then fairplay to Enzo, let him look for the big fights and we can probably safely say Haye wouldn't have beaten Bell if he couldn't beat Enzo.

On fight night Haye will be the heavier man, we all know he has to lose alot to make weight. with weigh in day before then he could put best part of a stone or more on come fight night.

states · Post by **states** » 03 Jan 2007, 09:18

rhino222 wrote:
Scrap wrote:I fancy Enzo in this one interesting hes improving Haye isnt
a debatable but very interesting point ! but its easy to look like you are improving when you are fighting tomato cans (no offence to mark hobson), lets be honest, the standard of hayes opposition has been better than that of enzo throughout his career.

That's the general consensus, but you could say that's up for debate as well. Yes, Haye went in with Thompson early, as well as 'names' like Williams and Kelly. But he lost one of those, and Kelly and Williams both looked shot.

Now, some of Maccarinelli's opposition has been truly, truly awful, I agree. But him and Haye have more than one shared opponent. And Enzo got to them first. For all the talk of Haye's better opposition to date, I've not really been impressed with his recent scalps, Gurov excluded.

I wouldn't argue with those who say that Haye has been matched tougher, I just don't feel there's such a massive gap as some make out.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 03 Jan 2007, 09:30

Lenny Albert wrote:what do you mean boxbet, they'll weigh the same? And no way on earth will there ever be a rematch, both will want to move onwards and upwards after this

and stu with Haye having convinced himself time at cruiserweight is limited, waiting for Momeck or Bell isn't the best idea. also a fight against Enzo would certainly better prepare him for the top guys. if he loses then fairplay to Enzo, let him look for the big fights and we can probably safely say Haye wouldn't have beaten Bell if he couldn't beat Enzo.

Yes in theory, but that is my worry. WIN or LOSE vs Enzo that could well be the end of Haye's WBC ranking and therefore chance with Bell/Mormeck.

I know his time at the weight is limited - but I would have more respect for him had if he sat on his WBC ranking really got his weight right and focused on that, and then win or lose can move up with at least the "weight making issues" as a valid reason to move up. As opposed to what would appear the current thoughts - fight Enzo Mac, calling himself a world champion (should he win) and then move up. Enzo hasn't proven himself World class yet.

Indeed, I do find it odd that all of a sudden Haye wants Enzo. He hasn't mentioned him before.... does he know his limits, and secretly thinks that Bell/Mormeck is too big an ask.

Chesney_Chambers · Post by **Chesney_Chambers** » 03 Jan 2007, 10:33

stujones wrote: As opposed to what would appear the current thoughts - fight Enzo Mac, calling himself a world champion (should he win) and then move up. Enzo hasn't proven himself World class yet.

Indeed, I do find it odd that all of a sudden Haye wants Enzo. He hasn't mentioned him before.... does he know his limits, and secretly thinks that Bell/Mormeck is too big an ask.

I don't think Haye is lacking confidence in his own ability

As far as I'm aware Haye wants Enzo followed by Bell/Mormeck, I've not read anything that says Haye is taking on Enzo instead of Bell. Haye doesn't want the WBO belt and he wants to be the main man in the division before he moves up

Haye said he's amended his plans to fight Enzo because the fans are calling for it, which they have. Since Haye beat Fragomeni and Enzo beat Hobbo the forums have been littered with posts and threads calling for them to square off......mostly by me and 25 pseudonyms

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 03 Jan 2007, 10:37

But as Haye keeps stating he wants a non title fight surely his WBC ranking won't be affected should he win?

Haye would be in for some serious stick should he call himself a world champ after beating Enzo, afteral he has consitantly talked down the WBO belt and called Enzo a paper champ.

As for why all of the sudden wanting to fight Enzo, maybe what Warren says about a hand injury that could effect him at any time could be true.

On a side note I saw David Haye is soho just before xmas and couldn't believe how small he was. Even my girlfriend said so and she's 5ft nothing

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 03 Jan 2007, 10:42

I certainly wouldn't say Haye was small, are you sure it was Haye. Unless you call 6' 3" small. I'm 6' 3" and Haye is around my height, and definetly a bigger guy, though he certainly doesn't have the build of a true heavyweight, especially the neck and surrounding muscles, nor the barrel chest of a heavyweight boxer.

Scrap · Post by **Scrap** » 03 Jan 2007, 10:45

Posture tells a lot Hayes loosing his.

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 03 Jan 2007, 10:53

Yeah sure it was him. Not small as in height or compaired to most people in the street, but he looked more light heavy than heavy. With all his clothes on (how gay does that sound) he definitely didn't look like the imposing figure you'd expect a guy with heavyweight ambitions in todays world would look

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 03 Jan 2007, 11:24

Lenny Albert wrote:Yeah sure it was him. Not small as in height or compaired to most people in the street, but he looked more light heavy than heavy. With all his clothes on (how gay does that sound) he definitely didn't look like the imposing figure you'd expect a guy with heavyweight ambitions in todays world would look

Well it depends on your definition of impossing, perhaps your 6 foot yourself. However, I saw Enzo Mac at the Gammer vs Krence fight and he is certainly a big man. He "looked" Heavier than Gammer, Krence and Kevin Evans.

There was a Welsh Light Heavyweight (as announced twice) who had just been signed by Paul Boyce and he looked TINY when being making his way to the ring next to Clinton Woods (who also looks bigger than he does on the TV), Kevin Evans and Enzo Mac. I'm not sure who he was, but either the ring announcer made a mistake twice or he is going to struggle big style.

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 03 Jan 2007, 11:31

No i'm 5'9, everybody is big to me. He just wasn't as big as I expected a guy who is struggling to keep his weight down to 200 pounds. More like James said, big sure, but not massive round the chest and shoulders.

Maybe small was the wrong word but smaller than I would have expected.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 03 Jan 2007, 11:32

Lenny Albert wrote:Yeah sure it was him. Not small as in height or compaired to most people in the street, but he looked more light heavy than heavy. With all his clothes on (how gay does that sound) he definitely didn't look like the imposing figure you'd expect a guy with heavyweight ambitions in todays world would look

That's because he doesn't have a heavyweight's physique. He's certainly not small for a cruiserweight, though having said that, Johnny Nelson looks the naturally bigger man of the two, with broader shoulders and longer levers.

When you look at a natural 220 lb fighter, like say, Tyson in his younger days, what is noticable, is how much of their frame is muscle. Tyson, though naturally muscular was lean, with long supple muscle tissue, not the bunched up bulky muscle of someone who lifts weights to increase their muscle mass. Same with Riddick Bowe, and a young Lennox Lewis, neither man was particularly muscle bound, and most of their mass was from the natural weight of their big skeletal frame.

You can turn a cruiserweight into a heavyweight with correct training, but as to how much of that extra weight is an advantage to them, is a debatable point. Holyfield was at his best at around 205-215, Tyson's prime fighting weight was 215-220. Lewis and Bowe were probably at their best around 235, but they were very big men.

It will be interesting to see how heavy Haye starts his heavyweight career at. I suspect it will be around the 225 mark, as he will probably want the psychological edge of the extra mass and strength.

How will Haye react the first time he gets clocked by a genuine Heavyweight, will the neck and shoulder muscles be strong enough to take a full blooded shot from a 240 lb monster? Haye's going to need to work on slipping and riding shots out against the big men, or I think the heavyweight crusade will be over before it's begun.

Lenny · Post by **Lenny** » 03 Jan 2007, 11:33

Nail on the head

boxbet · Post by **boxbet** » 03 Jan 2007, 13:08

WHY IS IT TAKING SO LONG TO ANNOUNCE IT?