BoxRec

thechump wrote:

asdfjkl wrote:

thechump wrote: Av you got proof? If not dont say it

First of all, Holyfield got a very very odd way of growing, he gained about 3 inches after the age of 20.
Mike Tyson himself even fully admitted that he cheated on all kinds of drugstests, why would he do that if he had nothing to hide?
Holyfield was also linked to all kind of doping affairs.

"On February 28, 2007, Holyfield was anonymously linked to Applied Pharmacy Services, a pharmacy in Alabama that is currently under investigation for supplying athletes with illegal steroids and human growth hormone (HGH). He denies ever using performance enhancers.
Holyfield's name does not appear in the law enforcement documents reviewed. However, a patient by the name of "Evan Fields" caught investigators' attention. "Fields" shares the same birth date as Holyfield—October 19, 1962. The listed address for "Fields" was 794 Evander, Fairfield, Ga. 30213. Holyfield has a very similar address. When the phone number that, according to the documents, was associated with the "Fields" prescription, was dialed, Holyfield answered.
Is ped use in boxing common? Is it like bodybuilding where testing is basically non existent? Is it not unfair that someone could have the advantage of PED's like steroids/hgh and they get in the ring with someone who puts in the same amount of hard work in the gym as they do just without the help of drugs?"

If that is true then evan fields should be stripped of every title he has ever held in that time frame

asdfjkl wrote:

thechump wrote:

asdfjkl wrote: First of all, Holyfield got a very very odd way of growing, he gained about 3 inches after the age of 20.
Mike Tyson himself even fully admitted that he cheated on all kinds of drugstests, why would he do that if he had nothing to hide?
Holyfield was also linked to all kind of doping affairs.

"On February 28, 2007, Holyfield was anonymously linked to Applied Pharmacy Services, a pharmacy in Alabama that is currently under investigation for supplying athletes with illegal steroids and human growth hormone (HGH). He denies ever using performance enhancers.
Holyfield's name does not appear in the law enforcement documents reviewed. However, a patient by the name of "Evan Fields" caught investigators' attention. "Fields" shares the same birth date as Holyfield—October 19, 1962. The listed address for "Fields" was 794 Evander, Fairfield, Ga. 30213. Holyfield has a very similar address. When the phone number that, according to the documents, was associated with the "Fields" prescription, was dialed, Holyfield answered.
Is ped use in boxing common? Is it like bodybuilding where testing is basically non existent? Is it not unfair that someone could have the advantage of PED's like steroids/hgh and they get in the ring with someone who puts in the same amount of hard work in the gym as they do just without the help of drugs?"

If that is true then evan fields should be stripped of every title he has ever held in that time frame

But, he's American, so it doesn't work like that any more.

punchoutsb wrote:

Rob3_142 wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:
I'm just confused: are you saying beating timid Malik Scott, 45 year old Tony Thompson, and Bryant Jennings make you the number one heavyweight???? Luis Ortiz has one decent win; Bryant Jennings. Heck Povetkins last four craps all over that list. If Tyson Fury is truly retired then there is no clear number one heavyweight based on resume. So if we're basing it off the "look" test then 65 year old Ortiz shouldn't be in the top five...or ten.

Povetkin's lack of activity removes him from contention for me. He hasn't fought in 13 months, so he joins Klischko and Fury in the inactive club.

As much as I do not rate Scott myself, his UD win over Thompson does raise his stock, and as ugly as the fight was, he did manage to take Ortiz 12 rounds. Out of fighters that have fought in the last 12 months, who has a better resume than Ortiz?

Well Povetkin is fighting in three days so...

If Ortiz resume is based off of ancient Tony, no-hoper Scott, and B-level Jennings then I'd rate Wilder, AJ, Parker, possibly Pulev, heck you could even make a case for Lucas Browne and Johann Duhaupas having better wins. Ortiz just fought Dave Allen...that should tell you pretty much all you need to know.

tiny_acres wrote:

Sequitorian wrote:Joshua would be good for boxing ... (great, in fact) ... Wilder would be bad ... (all bad) ...

Out of curiosity why would Joshua be good and Wilder be bad for the sport?
Both are big athletic powerful and entertaining fighters.

Rob3_142 wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:

Rob3_142 wrote:
Povetkin's lack of activity removes him from contention for me. He hasn't fought in 13 months, so he joins Klischko and Fury in the inactive club.

As much as I do not rate Scott myself, his UD win over Thompson does raise his stock, and as ugly as the fight was, he did manage to take Ortiz 12 rounds. Out of fighters that have fought in the last 12 months, who has a better resume than Ortiz?

Well Povetkin is fighting in three days so...

If Ortiz resume is based off of ancient Tony, no-hoper Scott, and B-level Jennings then I'd rate Wilder, AJ, Parker, possibly Pulev, heck you could even make a case for Lucas Browne and Johann Duhaupas having better wins. Ortiz just fought Dave Allen...that should tell you pretty much all you need to know.

Ah well, so much for Povetkin fighting in 3 days...

punchoutsb wrote:

Rob3_142 wrote:

punchoutsb wrote:
Well Povetkin is fighting in three days so...

If Ortiz resume is based off of ancient Tony, no-hoper Scott, and B-level Jennings then I'd rate Wilder, AJ, Parker, possibly Pulev, heck you could even make a case for Lucas Browne and Johann Duhaupas having better wins. Ortiz just fought Dave Allen...that should tell you pretty much all you need to know.

Ah well, so much for Povetkin fighting in 3 days...

He's still fighting. Ortiz has failed a drug test, hasn't he?