BoxRec

Don't worry about overhand_right. He's still in his bitter phase.

I have a strong dislike of paper titlists - men who get completely outclassed in several world title challenges should not keep getting shots.

When the IBF champ Glen Johnson was trying to unify the three belts with Antonio Tarver the IBF stripped him for not fighting three-time title challenge loser Clinton Woods. What business did Woods have boxing for a title at that point?

At one point Woods the ulitmate stay at home champ went 20 months with only one defence - over shopworn & already beaten Julio Gonzalez. Awful!

His surrender to Antonio Tarver was absolute toilet and the 12 one-sided rds nicely summed up how ridiculous it was having a man like Woods with a belt around his waist in the first place.

To think of Finnegan having to tackle a beast like Bob Foster, then to look at how Clinton got his special gift belt....

Overhand,

I dont think there is a single person who "overrated" Clinton Woods - many peoples opinions of him was that he was a good, honest professional boxer who gave his all - he won fair and square a reputable world title belt and in addition defended it - prior to that he went about his business using the traditional route which was winning Area titles, Commonwealth, British and then European before going on to challenge for World titles -Woods proved his worth at every level he fought at and as someone has already stated he was never in a dull fight.

Your posts hovever he pang of someone who is bitter and twisted or someone who knows f*ck all about the sport - I suspect a mixture of the 2 descriptions is probably more accurate.

You have to be one of the very few people who has had a bad word to say about Clinton Woods - which is why your posts should be treated with the utter contempt they deserve.

Whilst I am here - I am bloody positive Clinton will make a huge success at whatever he decides to do - he has a lovely wife Natalia who will keep Clintons feet firmly on the ground - All the best Pal!!!

I think he could easily of done a job at Euro level but good luck to him. He's done himself proud he is a tough kid

overhand_right wrote:A weak paper titlist gifted repeated underserving shots at the IBF belt, a stay at home champ who bombed when travelling overseas to fight the actual top guys, draws and wins gifted over Glen Johnson, a mediocre boxer who could never have won a title in the days of Bob Foster, Jose Torres, Matthew Saad Muhammad, Eddie Mustafa Muhammad, Victor Galindez, Michael Spinks, Dwight Muhammad Qawi, Marvin Johnson... Would he have even won a rd against a Virgil Hill?

Turkeys like Rico Hoye sold as 'great wins'? Christ I'm glad he's gone - I'd ask if he'll use his money and retirement to see the world but, knowing his history, he'll stay at home in Sheffield..

Fcuk'n'ell Overhand, I won't be asking you to write my obituary

Spud wrote: he won fair and square a reputable world title belt and in addition defended it

What exactly is fair and square about coming up short three times in a row and the IBF still then stripping Glen Johnson of his belt so Clinton can box a punchbag in Sheffield for it, yet again? Was that fair on Glen Johnson? Was it fair on boxing?

Christ, his Tarver fight was dismal almost beyond comprehension and would have barred most boxers from another world title fight for life but no, all he had to do was maul a journeyman in a small hall & he ended back over in the states fighting AGAIN for the IBF belt. Thank Christ Cloud got rid of the big lump for us.

Too many blokes round here come across as pub-knowledge boxing fans, seen the odd Ali fight repeated on TV over the years, watched a bit of Hagler on You Tube, and just lap up whatever nonsense Sky and terrestrial TV boxing pundits feed to them about any semi-successful British boxer, simply because their British and you're more interested in seeing a Brit holding any belt without questioning whether they actually are championship material.

Christ, think of Archie Moore and Ezzard Charles being ducked year after year, and then think of Clinton Woods cuffing that inept Rico Hoye about the ring in his backyard having come up short multiple times against actual world championship calibre fighters.... They must be spinning in their graves.

overhand_right wrote:

Spud wrote: he won fair and square a reputable world title belt and in addition defended it

What exactly is fair and square about coming up short three times in a row and the IBF still then stripping Glen Johnson of his belt so Clinton can box a punchbag in Sheffield for it, yet again? Was that fair on Glen Johnson? Was it fair on boxing?

Christ, his Tarver fight was dismal almost beyond comprehension and would have barred most boxers from another world title fight for life but no, all he had to do was maul a journeyman in a small hall & he ended back over in the states fighting AGAIN for the IBF belt. Thank Christ Cloud got rid of the big lump for us.

Too many blokes round here come across as pub-knowledge boxing fans, seen the odd Ali fight repeated on TV over the years, watched a bit of Hagler on You Tube, and just lap up whatever nonsense Sky and terrestrial TV boxing pundits feed to them about any semi-successful British boxer, simply because their British and you're more interested in seeing a Brit holding any belt without questioning whether they actually are championship material.

Christ, think of Archie Moore and Ezzard Charles being ducked year after year, and then think of Clinton Woods cuffing that inept Rico Hoye about the ring in his backyard having come up short multiple times against actual world championship calibre fighters.... They must be spinning in their graves.

It's hardly Clintons fault they kept giving him title shots.
Most people would consider Glen Johnson as a top class Light Heavy and Clinton trilogy proved him to be on a par with Glen

Chambers2 wrote:

overhand_right wrote:

Spud wrote: he won fair and square a reputable world title belt and in addition defended it

What exactly is fair and square about coming up short three times in a row and the IBF still then stripping Glen Johnson of his belt so Clinton can box a punchbag in Sheffield for it, yet again? Was that fair on Glen Johnson? Was it fair on boxing?

Christ, his Tarver fight was dismal almost beyond comprehension and would have barred most boxers from another world title fight for life but no, all he had to do was maul a journeyman in a small hall & he ended back over in the states fighting AGAIN for the IBF belt. Thank Christ Cloud got rid of the big lump for us.

Too many blokes round here come across as pub-knowledge boxing fans, seen the odd Ali fight repeated on TV over the years, watched a bit of Hagler on You Tube, and just lap up whatever nonsense Sky and terrestrial TV boxing pundits feed to them about any semi-successful British boxer, simply because their British and you're more interested in seeing a Brit holding any belt without questioning whether they actually are championship material.

Christ, think of Archie Moore and Ezzard Charles being ducked year after year, and then think of Clinton Woods cuffing that inept Rico Hoye about the ring in his backyard having come up short multiple times against actual world championship calibre fighters.... They must be spinning in their graves.

It's hardly Clintons fault they kept giving him title shots.
Most people would consider Glen Johnson as a top class Light Heavy and Clinton trilogy proved him to be on a par with Glen

i agree wuth you chambers!! very good pro was clinton..i think overhand right was maybe ko'd by clinton woods in the amatuers? it isn't clinton's fault they stripped johnson!! you are a complete turd and a hater overhand! we need less of you haters around the boxing world

How are your GCSE's going 'Gemmell'?

Labelling people 'haters'.... Are there any adults in here for me to converse with?

mr overhand rights point is a valid one,woods was indeed a good pro and i wish him well for the future,but im afraid if you look at the facts,clintons IBF trinket and short title reign showed that there is way too many titles in boxing

at least he has been clever with his money and got out at the right time

Great Fighter, who didnt Travel well,At 22 when I first met Him was a Great Guy, still is.

REAL_DEAL wrote:

ERIC GUY wrote:funny enough, just got the DVD today

What dvd. Also why were you wearing a stab proof vest on saturday trying to pass it off as a 6 pack

hah, they are real abs, not as fat as people think!!!

overhand_right wrote:

Spud wrote: he won fair and square a reputable world title belt and in addition defended it

What exactly is fair and square about coming up short three times in a row and the IBF still then stripping Glen Johnson of his belt so Clinton can box a punchbag in Sheffield for it, yet again? Was that fair on Glen Johnson? Was it fair on boxing?

Christ, his Tarver fight was dismal almost beyond comprehension and would have barred most boxers from another world title fight for life but no, all he had to do was maul a journeyman in a small hall & he ended back over in the states fighting AGAIN for the IBF belt. Thank Christ Cloud got rid of the big lump for us.

Too many blokes round here come across as pub-knowledge boxing fans, seen the odd Ali fight repeated on TV over the years, watched a bit of Hagler on You Tube, and just lap up whatever nonsense Sky and terrestrial TV boxing pundits feed to them about any semi-successful British boxer, simply because their British and you're more interested in seeing a Brit holding any belt without questioning whether they actually are championship material.

Christ, think of Archie Moore and Ezzard Charles being ducked year after year, and then think of Clinton Woods cuffing that inept Rico Hoye about the ring in his backyard having come up short multiple times against actual world championship calibre fighters.... They must be spinning in their graves.

Listen pal, I think you must be mentally ill if you think anyone on here is comparing Woods to the great of the light heavyweight division.

Yes, we know he would never have won a title back in the 70's or 80's.

It is hardly Clinton's fault that the sanctioning bodies suck. Our appreciation is for a good solid pro, who at his best was a top 10 fighter in the division, what's wrong with that.

I think you need to take a look around more closely before you slag people on here off as armchair boxing fans.

Look at any of the threads on Calzaghe's career, and it's clear that people on here know the difference between 'shite and shinola.'

Just because Clinton was a footnote in boxing history, and only ever a short lived titlist, doesn't mean he doesn't deserve respect. He made the best of his career and his opportunities, and never gave less than his best (well maybe Tarver aside where he chronically underperformed), and that's all you can ask of a fighter.

Clinton never stripped Johnson of his IBF belt, the IBF did, so reserve your vitriol for them, not clinton.

overhand_right wrote:A weak paper titlist gifted repeated underserving shots at the IBF belt, a stay at home champ who bombed when travelling overseas to fight the actual top guys, draws and wins gifted over Glen Johnson, a mediocre boxer who could never have won a title in the days of Bob Foster, Jose Torres, Matthew Saad Muhammad, Eddie Mustafa Muhammad, Victor Galindez, Michael Spinks, Dwight Muhammad Qawi, Marvin Johnson... Would he have even won a rd against a Virgil Hill?

Turkeys like Rico Hoye sold as 'great wins'? Christ I'm glad he's gone - I'd ask if he'll use his money and retirement to see the world but, knowing his history, he'll stay at home in Sheffield..

I don't agree with the negative tone, but I agree on the fact that he got loads of opportunities, and after winning it, all but gave it away. We were having a Woods v Cloud debate and someone said that a younger Woods might have beaten Cloud. I thought to myself, bollox, Cloud is raw and learning, and passing decent tests. And Clinton's enough bloody chances, to give hi the benefit of the doubt, to say he would beat this or that fighter.

If you wanted to be harsh, you still could say he had a great fight with Glen Johnson in their 3rd bout.

Agreed, Woods never really had enough of anything to be a top fighter. How could he ever have beaten Cloud? I didn't see a hell of a lot of difference between Woods now and before, to be honest. He's never had much power, always been fairly hittable, not great workrate. And I don't even rate Cloud really, he's just more busy and aggressive which would probably have been enough for any version of Woods.

All in all Clinton has done well for himself given his limitations, or should I say the IBF has done well for him - this is boxing after all... I can see overhand's point, what with all the fighters he mentioned not being given opportunities, but unfortunately for them there will always be the Woods of this world who will always be there or thereabouts in the rankings of a sanctioning body. Then some eliminator or other pops up, the other party sees him as very beatable, marketable because of former opponents, and there ya go, the fight is made and the process repeated ad nauseam.

I think Overhand's tone is harsh, but I think in SOME ways he has a point. No-one has really made the comparison between Lacy and Rico Hoye. What I mean is lots of people have written that Lacy proved to be an over hyped dud, but what about Hoye.

Woods was a good solid pro, I guess his multiple opportunities sort of balanced out with his lack of opportunities when he was WBC #1 and #2 in his prime years - he waited about 2 to 3 years for his chance.

He was fortunate that the first fight with Johnson, who was ranked something like #8 with the IBF was promoted to being for the title, and then it was a draw. So he had his fair share of luck - but was a good solid top 10 fighter, who brought us some entertaining nights and fights.

Clinton became a world champ!! nuff said...........

lovely guy and i was priveliged to be ringside when he stopped hoye and when he beat ole klementsen in a right tear up.

i disagree that he was beaten by a peak jones, RJJ was way past his best when he stopped clinton.

but no disrespect, the boy did well, and can tell his grand children that he was champion of the world.

Not sure why you compare his achievements to the likes of Archie Moore Bob Foster etc. I assume you a taking the viewpoint that these are all time great fighters and that Clinton does not compare to this company? You would be correct in that sumation, however taking this logic and applying it to the rest of the belt holders, across all weights, how many would be able to compete with their peers? PBF? Maybe. RJJ? Probably. Pac-Man? Likely.

Now bar these obvious selections, who else warrants your respect?

The point in this post (which I think you have missed) was that he was a decent fighter, won the belts traditionally, fought abroad a few times, took on the best fighter of the era and engaged in some hard fights, showing bottle and will.

Top it all off, he won and defend the world title a few times and lost a few times. Not too bad, when you consider how some British fighters have had their careers steered and think they achieved something.

Woods DID actually achieve more than he believed possible and made a few quid.

Some good names on his record (by today's standard :) ) and cant be accused of ducking anyone. Can't see what he has done to warrant your disdain, especially, as stated , other British fighters have had more hype and financial backing and fought much weaker opposition and still had the gall to call themselves 'World Champoins'.

A couple from Wales LEAP to mind and mostly anyone connected with FW,

stujones wrote:I think Overhand's tone is harsh, but I think in SOME ways he has a point.

B*llocks!!! - stop being so politcally correct and diplomatic!!

Overhand has disrespected a bloody good boxer who has done well for himself - his posts on this thread are in no way ambigious - he has disrespected an ex world champion.

Whilst I agree with James McDonnell in that I do not think Clinton was a fantastically brilliant world champion - he nonetheless as I have already mentioned went the traditional route by winning Area, Commonwealth, British, European and then a reputable world title and whether people like it or not Woods is in a select club - and for that he should be applauded.

I am not and never will be in the club of discussing whether a fighter could have beaten another one from a previous era - whether people like it or not it comes down to opinion - there is no conclusive evidence unless 2 fighters have actually met in the ring - so when people come on here with their posh words quite frankly they can shove them up their arse.

The evidence is Clinton Woods was a World Champion of a reputable world title belt - he has done bloody well for himself and I for one am bloody delighted he had such a good career - some have had better but so what.

Well Done Clinton!!!

All the best for the future Clinton

Spud wrote:

stujones wrote:I think Overhand's tone is harsh, but I think in SOME ways he has a point.

Overhand has disrespected a bloody good boxer who has done well for himself - his posts on this thread are in no way ambigious - he has disrespected an ex world champion.

If that's what he thinks about him fair enough but for some reason it does come across as bitter. Time and a place and all that...

I really enjoyed the Hoye fight, particularly as Hoye was seen as a knockout artist. Fight reminds me of Calzaghe v Lacy for pre-fight anticipation and the one sided nature of the fight.

Spud wrote:

stujones wrote:I think Overhand's tone is harsh, but I think in SOME ways he has a point.

B*llocks!!! - stop being so politcally correct and diplomatic!!

Overhand has disrespected a bloody good boxer who has done well for himself - his posts on this thread are in no way ambigious - he has disrespected an ex world champion.

Whilst I agree with James McDonnell in that I do not think Clinton was a fantastically brilliant world champion - he nonetheless as I have already mentioned went the traditional route by winning Area, Commonwealth, British, European and then a reputable world title and whether people like it or not Woods is in a select club - and for that he should be applauded.

I am not and never will be in the club of discussing whether a fighter could have beaten another one from a previous era - whether people like it or not it comes down to opinion - there is no conclusive evidence unless 2 fighters have actually met in the ring - so when people come on here with their posh words quite frankly they can shove them up their arse.

The evidence is Clinton Woods was a World Champion of a reputable world title belt - he has done bloody well for himself and I for one am bloody delighted he had such a good career - some have had better but so what.

Well Done Clinton!!!

I agree with all you say - thats why I said overhand tone was harsh. He was out of order with the disrepecting tone - christ I get misread often on this forum (not just by you on occasion spud).

The point he made about Woods being lucky (or well promoted) to get the 4 cracks at vacated titles was the first post to mention it. Thats the point I agreed with. There have been better fighters who got the one shot and thats it. People should be consistent (and I am sure you are Spud) with their views... look at the criticism Amir Khan got on this forum for fighting Kotelnik... thread after thread, calling it a "paper" title fight... well Kotelnik was more of a champion than Johnson or Hoye were at the time of their meetings (first 2 with Johnson). Only hope the likes of Gavin Rees, Amir Khan, Junior Witter get similar acclaim for being a world champion when they retire.

But completely agree. We don't get many undefeated EBU champions and was proven at top 5 operators. He was absolutely ridiculed in the states ahead of his shot with Jones. I mean, we all said Jones fought some mandated bums at that time.... in the states Woods was considered the worst of them. Whilst his record in the states was poor, he did geniunally shut up the stateside critics with his performances against Johnson.

I have enough respect for Clinton... shame we never got Clinton vs Joe. For me, always gave Clinton more of a chance than I do Froch against Joe.

Achieved more than he ever expected to, worked hard, dedictaed himself and got the rewards. A nice home, lovely family, made some money, became a world champion, fought in front of his beloved Sheffield fans and fought in the states. Fought Roy Jones Jr at his prime, which is something special to remember and fought the guy who beat jones Jr, Antonio Tarver. From the sweaty gyms of Sheffield, to the glitz and glamour of world championship boxing in America, Clinton did the lot and will have many memories to tell, his family, friends, peer group and the rest of the world if he chooses to do so in a book.

Couldn't have happenned to a nicer man. A lovely bloke, who always remained down to earth and will be remembered and loved for many years in Sheffield and up and down the country, with many fight fans and ordinary joe public, being able to empathise with his story. A man with a poor start in life, found himself in trouble, found decent people to get him out of it and turned his life around. What a great example to kids.

Clinton,

I salute you, respect what you have done and admired what you have achieved in the ring and i wish you all the very best with whatever you do in the veru near future

Quixall wrote:Fought Roy Jones Jr at his prime, which is something special to remember and fought the guy who beat jones Jr, Antonio Tarver.

Forgotten to mention his 3 tough fights with Glencoffe (a man, has to be said has been considered a very good dangerman - not many ppl choose to fight Glencoffe by choice)