BoxRec

tonyevs wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 06:49

Loynesy wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 06:20

Don't really understand why there is a debate about this.

Because the Fury fans think by saying Dubois should have won then it's legitimate reason why Fury can continue to avoid fighting Usyk ...

tonyevs wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 08:54 Just a few years back the UK appeared to be having a golden age of heavyweight boxing.

We had a pair of brave and dominant heavyweights at the top, with another pair coming up to take over from them.

Unfortunately it turned out that the one top guy had shown all his bravery and courage already and wouldn`t be prepared to show anymore - with the other top guy would moving from dominant to looking vulnerable.

The prospects have also imploded. One lacking heart and the other lacking skills.

leejonesjnr wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 05:47

fifth_root wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 04:42

leejonesjnr wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 04:30The body isn’t small enough that landing a shot wearing a boxing glove is tricky.
I’ve never hit shorts wearing 10s for a contest or 16s for sparring.

Right because a glove can't punch a small area, then based on the common Usyk reactions to body shots, we might as well forbid the body punches, as it becomes very hard to land purely the entire glove above the navel.

I don't know what you hit or if it is true. But this is only you - in a sea of fighting people. So what does that prove?

You think it’s impossible to not hit low?
Okay, you have fun and go about your day, I’ll leave you to it.

stevec@france wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 08:15not at all clear what your point is so I cant be arsed to respond especially about unrelated fights from years ago .

The thing that is clear to almost everyone including the ref is - it was a low blow .

fifth_root wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 09:27

leejonesjnr wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 05:47

fifth_root wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 04:42

Right because a glove can't punch a small area, then based on the common Usyk reactions to body shots, we might as well forbid the body punches, as it becomes very hard to land purely the entire glove above the navel.

I don't know what you hit or if it is true. But this is only you - in a sea of fighting people. So what does that prove?

You think it’s impossible to not hit low?
Okay, you have fun and go about your day, I’ll leave you to it.

Had the fun with your nonsense. Thank you.

stevec@france wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 08:15not at all clear what your point is so I cant be arsed to respond especially about unrelated fights from years ago .

The thing that is clear to almost everyone including the ref is - it was a low blow .

You just joined my ignore list along with a few other johnny come lately clowns .

For what is obvious, it is beyond your comprehension, it seems.

tonyevs wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 08:54 Just a few years back the UK appeared to be having a golden age of heavyweight boxing.

We had a pair of brave and dominant heavyweights at the top, with another pair coming up to take over from them.

Unfortunately it turned out that the one top guy had shown all his bravery and courage already and wouldn`t be prepared to show anymore - with the other top guy would moving from dominant to looking vulnerable.

The prospects have also imploded. One lacking heart and the other lacking skills.

Coco wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 05:14

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 05:10

Coco wrote: ↑27 Aug 2023, 05:07 I don't think it was low but DDD lost credibility after collapsing from a jab to a non puncher

It was on the belt not below it, the law is there to stop you getting hit in the nuts

is the scoring area of his glove not below the belt?

But well above his nuts.

If the ref thought it was low he should have taken points off

stevec@france wrote: ↑29 Aug 2023, 12:50You just joined my ignore list along with a few other johnny come lately clowns .

Nightmare Roy wrote: ↑30 Aug 2023, 03:12 I thought it was a legal shot to begin with but after watching numerous vids and reading up on various rules, it seems a low shot is anything bellow the belly button, if that is the case then it definitely is a low shot.

maverick23 wrote: ↑30 Aug 2023, 04:04

Nightmare Roy wrote: ↑30 Aug 2023, 03:12 I thought it was a legal shot to begin with but after watching numerous vids and reading up on various rules, it seems a low shot is anything bellow the belly button, if that is the case then it definitely is a low shot.

Yup.

A lot of the guys saying that it was legal initially though as it didn’t hit his balls are still sticking to it. Now saying Usyk’s shorts were high (Spencer Oliver actually said Usyk’s shorts are notoriously high!) and it landed on the naval and not below it.

stujones wrote: ↑30 Aug 2023, 07:40 FW has dropped a bollock here (no pun intended). If I was him, I would have shut up about it. The shot itself is quite clearly low. If the shoe was on the other foot, Usyk landed that shot on Dubois, started counting and Dubois does not get up as in pain - he would have been calling for a DQ, ruling Usyk as a cheat and the ref being crap.

The shot was clearly low, it was also accidental (hence why no point deduction) - we've all seen headbutts not get point deductions etc if deemed not deliberate - not even Golota got a point deduction everytime he strayed vs Bowe. Yet Warren is using the "no point deduction" as a reason why it wasn't low. Hell, I think he has even said "why wasn't DD disqualified" - what about when Joe Calzaghe admitted to deliberate going low vs Hopkins as "revenge" - why has no British journo really said that was disgusting and needed a retrospective DQ. DD's shot also clearly raised the protector which is why Usyk reacted as he did. For me there is no really such thing as "boderline" - it is low or not and this shot was low and it is not really even that close.

BUT, FW would have been better to have shut up about it, instead the little discussed element (prior to this bout) that Usyk could be weak to the body is now discussed everywhere - it will kind of put of dampener on any Fury victory vs Usyk and kind of will take the glean of anyone who topples Usyk - "oh yes, we know he is weak there" will be the response. For me, the more telling moment of Usyk's last few fights was being hurt to the body vs AJ and him complaining to the ref in this one - not to that particular shot (which was low and looked like it could hurt his nut due to the raising of the protector) but the other non-low shots to the body DD landed. Now though the "tactical genius" that is Fury will just do what any coach will tell any boxer vs Usyk - as I always believe being a bit weak to the body is a bit like being chinny - to a degree you cannot really improve there.

Nightmare Roy wrote: ↑30 Aug 2023, 03:12 I thought it was a legal shot to begin with but after watching numerous vids and reading up on various rules, it seems a low shot is anything bellow the belly button, if that is the case then it definitely is a low shot.

margaret thatcher wrote: ↑30 Aug 2023, 12:52 usyk's trunks werent high at all, just another angle to try to justify it. you can see his belly button in much of the fight even

some people being total weirdos on this one