BoxRec

ValMar wrote:

Kalan wrote:

candyslim wrote: I think one cause of confusion is to misdescribe any effective boxer (as opposed to a fighter who trades on his physicality) as "skillful" thereby conjuring a false expectation of a Pep, a Locche or a Whitaker" .... "So in summing up I don't believe Fury at his best, is/was, a particularly skillful boxer, but he is a very effective one. So I guess whether you want to argue about whether or not what he has can be described as a high level of skill, or something else, doesn't make much difference in a practical sense. Like the great man said "A rose by any other name would smell as sweet", but I feel we as fans should recognize and appreciate the distinction .

Pep was extremely skillful... Locche was not particularly skillful. Whenever he met a skillful boxer (not very often) Locche didn't do that well... Whitaker was no Mayweather. He got tagged up by Nelson, Ramirez, Rivera, De La Hoya, Hurtado, and Trinidad... He was skilled, but not outstandingly so.

The Fury of the Chisora and Klitschko fights had a solid stance... good footwork... good feinting skills... good jab... good right lead... good right hand counter... counters well with his left hook... good head movement in slipping and ducking shots... could block, parry, and roll punches well... Fury is not so tall.. so rangy.. so powerful.. so wonderfully athletic.. or so big a puncher that he can rely on his natural gifts to beat anybody.. A man with his less than super unbelievable physical dimensions -- and over-all moderate athletic assets -- still requires a skill-set to be effective and he certainly has it.

Is he a Floyd Mayweather, Jack Johnson, Gene Tunney, or Luis Ortiz??? ... NO... And the skills he has are diminishing because he's not maintaining them.

It is almost impossible to compare WW (FMJ) and HW (TF)....For me it is like compare Bolt with some guys who compete at 1500 metars race.

Right!!! ... Better to compare Fury with ATG Wladimir Klitschko who he performed a clinic on -- and with ATG Muhammad Ali who got decked with left hooks by such little guys as 190-pound Sonny Banks... 185-pound Henry Cooper.. and 205-pound Joe Frazier.. got his jaw broken by 210-pound Ken Norton (who was previously knocked cold by 188-pound Jose Luis Garcia).. and variously got battered by a lot of unnecessary head punches that took a toll, softened his chin, and lessened his effectiveness as a boxer at a fairly young age.

We all know that Tyson Fury has a ton of problems... None of them stem from his performance in the ring -- but more a general lack of ambition, discipline and tact -- and his proclaimed disinterest in Boxing as a discipline and profession -- which doesn't make any sense... But from a standpoint of height, weight, reach, range, innate ring cleverness and natural boxing instincts, Fury compares favorably with most any Heavyweight from the past.

An in shape fury schools Joshua.

I suspect we may find out about that at some point... It's hard for me to imagine school being in session and Fury being the professor in Joshua vs Fury...

First of all, Wladimir Klitschko was the perfect foil for Tyson Fury... A man he had height, weight, and reach on... A man who relies on the jab and controlling fights from the outside... A man with no body attack... A man whose skill-set doesn't include cutting the ring off; attacking behind the jab; infighting skills; or throwing sustained combinations... Fury was all wrong for Wladimir from day one... As brilliant a trainer as Emmanuel Steward was -- he couldn't prepare Wlad for the day he met a 6'9" X 250 competent outside boxer with a jab, movement, and the ability to slip punches and counterpunch sharply.

Anthony Joshua is a vastly different cup o tea... He DOES have a strong body attack... He DOES cut the ring off well... He DOES attack well... He DOES fight inside well, and CAN throw sustained combinations... So you can't analyze the Joshua-Fury match-up exclusively off who took less punishment from Klitschko.