BoxRec

stevieb_8006 wrote:

Carbo wrote:If you guys think that Tyson has it in him to be as good as either Klitschko, I would think I'm on pretty safe ground to suggest that you're pretty poor judges of talent.

no1 said that. point is hes an 8 fight novice being judged VERY harshly tho.

How the fcuk is it harsh to say that he likely won't be one of the best heavyweights of all time?

Manny likes the big'uns.

Carbo wrote:

stevieb_8006 wrote:

Carbo wrote:If you guys think that Tyson has it in him to be as good as either Klitschko, I would think I'm on pretty safe ground to suggest that you're pretty poor judges of talent.

no1 said that. point is hes an 8 fight novice being judged VERY harshly tho.

How the fcuk is it harsh to say that he likely won't be one of the best heavyweights of all time?

,

well a) no1s said anything about being one of the best heavyweights of all time, we were discussing Wlad Klit who is clearly not one of them (maybe he is in your opinion)

b) The original debate was whether going with Steward would be a wise move. My opinion is yes, given his track record with IMPROVING tall heavyweights. Can you honestly say, regardless of what you think of Tysons current skill level, that training with manny would be detrimental to his progress?

stevieb_8006 wrote:

Carbo wrote:If you guys think that Tyson has it in him to be as good as either Klitschko, I would think I'm on pretty safe ground to suggest that you're pretty poor judges of talent.

no1 said that. point is hes an 8 fight novice being judged VERY harshly tho.

But the problem is he and his team have created that situation - if he acted like an 8-fight novice people would have a different level of expectation, but the grand proclaimations of impending superstardom and world-conquering activity unsurprisingly leave people expecting a whole lot more... and being disappointed when he then struggles massively at domestic level.

Deserter wrote:

stevieb_8006 wrote:

Carbo wrote:If you guys think that Tyson has it in him to be as good as either Klitschko, I would think I'm on pretty safe ground to suggest that you're pretty poor judges of talent.

no1 said that. point is hes an 8 fight novice being judged VERY harshly tho.

But the problem is he and his team have created that situation - if he acted like an 8-fight novice people would have a different level of expectation, but the grand proclaimations of impending superstardom and world-conquering activity unsurprisingly leave people expecting a whole lot more... and being disappointed when he then struggles massively at domestic level.

well yes i agree with that, they should have gone about their work quietly. but hey, boxing would be a much more boring sport if every fighter was the model pro, fights have to be sold. I dont think his dad has helped him with all his daft george foreman talk.

stevieb_8006 wrote: well a) no1s said anything about being one of the best heavyweights of all time, we were discussing Wlad Klit who is clearly not one of them (maybe he is in your opinion)

b) The original debate was whether going with Steward would be a wise move. My opinion is yes, given his track record with IMPROVING tall heavyweights. Can you honestly say, regardless of what you think of Tysons current skill level, that training with manny would be detrimental to his progress?

Sorry, but if you're going to brazenly change what was said it's going to be very difficult for us to have a conversation, isn't it? I think you'll find that Lennox Lewis's name was mentioned within this context, and I think we can all agree that Big Lennox certainly was one of the greatest heavyweights of all time.

So, point 'a' is completely meaningless.

Besides which, Steward took on both Lennox and Wlad when they were already established at the top of the sport. Sure, both had had reverses, and both needed improving technically, but both had also won world championships and demonstrated clearly, to any sane observer, that they had obvious potential to be even better, given the right work.

On the second point, being trained by Steward, as I have said on this thread myself, would be a brilliant move for Fury. My point was -- and this is the point on which I was pulled for apparently being too harsh -- was that Fury is a bit beneath Steward and that he hasn't clearly demonstrated the potential to become a world champion heavyweight.

Carbo wrote:

stevieb_8006 wrote: well a) no1s said anything about being one of the best heavyweights of all time, we were discussing Wlad Klit who is clearly not one of them (maybe he is in your opinion)

b) The original debate was whether going with Steward would be a wise move. My opinion is yes, given his track record with IMPROVING tall heavyweights. Can you honestly say, regardless of what you think of Tysons current skill level, that training with manny would be detrimental to his progress?

Sorry, but if you're going to brazenly change what was said it's going to be very difficult for us to have a conversation, isn't it? I think you'll find that Lennox Lewis's name was mentioned within this context, and I think we can all agree that Big Lennox certainly was one of the greatest heavyweights of all time.

So, point 'a' is completely meaningless.

Besides which, Steward took on both Lennox and Wlad when they were already established at the top of the sport. Sure, both had had reverses, and both needed improving technically, but both had also won world championships and demonstrated clearly, to any sane observer, that they had obvious potential to be even better, given the right work.

On the second point, being trained by Steward, as I have said on this thread myself, would be a brilliant move for Fury. My point was -- and this is the point on which I was pulled for apparently being too harsh -- was that Fury is a bit beneath Steward and that he hasn't clearly demonstrated the potential to become a world champion heavyweight.

with respect, i said manny had success with lewis. at no point did i compare the lennox lewis to tyson fury. feel free to read back and quote me. ok, u have a point that both wlad and lennox were established, but both give manny credit and both went on to greater things after hooking up with him. it seems we basically agree on the point i was making (ie it could potentially be a good match up) but have gone round the houses discussing it.

but mate, u need to chill out. its only a discussion on a boxing novice, u get too heated. every1s entitled to an opinion and that should be respected..

I said:

Carbo wrote:As a trainer, I think Steward would do very well with Fury, but is Fury not way, way below Steward?

Really, how far has Fury got the potential to rise? I'm not sure so very far. Anyway, if the offer from Steward is there, and I was Fury, I would already be on a plane speaking with a Detroit accent.

Then you said

stevieb_8006 wrote:hes a trainer that specialises in getting the best out of tall, cautious, heavyweight fighters. The younger Klit, Lewis....

cant believe people say hes not good enough after his 8th fight! *Sniff, sniff* *sob*

Now, excuse me while I gently weep.

My point is that Fury is beneath Steward's usual standard, and you criticized that point by crying your eyes out about how harsh I was being to judge the lad after eight fights. Well I'm not. If you're going to say that he's not below Steward's normal standard, then you have to say that he has potential to be as good as at least Klitschko, which I don't think he has.

You're the one placing the heavy burden on him, not me.

And if I hear one more person say "everyone's entitled to an opinion that should be respected" I might have an aneurysm. Opinions are not protected. Beliefs are not sacrosanct. Points of view are not immune to attack. It's called "liberty", Steve.

For the record, I think Fury is out of shape, lacks snack, throws arm punches and just doesn't have much power. He'll never be a great heavyweight champion. BUT because he has all these faults - he can get better!

black panther wrote:lacks snack

I think he has far too many snacks personally.

doctorboxing wrote:

black panther wrote:lacks snack

I think he has far too many snacks personally.

i concur

Carbo wrote:I said:

Carbo wrote:As a trainer, I think Steward would do very well with Fury, but is Fury not way, way below Steward?

Really, how far has Fury got the potential to rise? I'm not sure so very far. Anyway, if the offer from Steward is there, and I was Fury, I would already be on a plane speaking with a Detroit accent.

Then you said

stevieb_8006 wrote:hes a trainer that specialises in getting the best out of tall, cautious, heavyweight fighters. The younger Klit, Lewis....

cant believe people say hes not good enough after his 8th fight! *Sniff, sniff* *sob*


Now, excuse me while I gently weep.

My point is that Fury is beneath Steward's usual standard, and you criticized that point by crying your eyes out about how harsh I was being to judge the lad after eight fights. Well I'm not. If you're going to say that he's not below Steward's normal standard, then you have to say that he has potential to be as good as at least Klitschko, which I don't think he has.

You're the one placing the heavy burden on him, not me.

And if I hear one more person say "everyone's entitled to an opinion that should be respected" I might have an aneurysm. Opinions are not protected. Beliefs are not sacrosanct. Points of view are not immune to attack. It's called "liberty", Steve.

yeah good 1. you win.

again a) where did i say fury was up to mannys usual standard? Where exactly did i say that? b) where have i put a heavy burden on him? I havent even said whether i even rate the bloke yet, just said manny would be a good match up and would improve him. And how is saying i think hes being judge harshly for an 8 fight novice putting a burden on him?
c) the childish put downs always weaken an argument.

I think you assume im a fury fan, when in fact i can see him for exactly what he is. THE DEBATE IS WHETHER MANNY WOULD BRING HIM ON, NOT WHETHER FURY IS GONNA BE A WORLD BEATER OR AN ATG. Please read more carefully, u obv know ur boxing so dont lower urself to childish youtube style insults.

black panther wrote:For the record, I think Fury is out of shape, lacks snack, throws arm punches and just doesn't have much power. He'll never be a great heavyweight champion. BUT because he has all these faults - he can get better!

exactly, manny would be a good choice. my point.

Everyone remembers the talents Steward bagged that he did well with. He certainly try's to bag the best talent, always has. There have been plenty of quality boxers who failed and got worse under Steward such as Hamed, Jermaine Taylor, Vivian Harris, Cintron. It wasnt hard to make Lennox/Wlad the best in the world as they already were the best in the world when he got them. He had some great fighters at the Kronk but the talent in Detroit was as deep as the Pacific anyway. Plus we all the know the stories of his cocaine use/abuse. Steward is a competant trainer but he isnt changing Fury into a world beater and he'll probably dump him after a year or so when he figures out hes not a real talent

stevieb_8006 wrote:
b) where have i put a heavy burden on him?

Oh, dear God, woman. Read it again:

stevieb_8006 wrote:hes a trainer that specialises in getting the best out of tall, cautious, heavyweight fighters. The younger Klit, Lewis....

Understand now?

Meantime, back at the ranch...

stevieb_8006 wrote:I havent even said whether i even rate the bloke yet, just said manny would be a good match up and would improve him.

I know. I agree. I said that, remember??? We all said that. But then I said, true as this point may be, that Fury isn't up to this standard, and then you responded that I was judging him harshly. So, you said Steward "specialises in getting the best out of tall cautious heavyweight fighters [like] the younger Klit, Lewis," I said (effectively) "true, but Fury isn't that good," and then you said I'm judging him to harshly.

How much more explicitly do I have to spell it out?? You compared him to Lewis and Klitschko, not me. You complained when I said he wasn't that good.

I'm bored with this now. Too much effort on a nothing story.

Carbo wrote:

stevieb_8006 wrote:
b) where have i put a heavy burden on him?

Oh, dear God, woman. Read it again:

stevieb_8006 wrote:hes a trainer that specialises in getting the best out of tall, cautious, heavyweight fighters. The younger Klit, Lewis....

Understand now?

Meantime, back at the ranch...

stevieb_8006 wrote:I havent even said whether i even rate the bloke yet, just said manny would be a good match up and would improve him.

I know. I agree. I said that, remember??? We all said that. But then I said, true as this point may be, that Fury isn't up to this standard, and then you responded that I was judging him harshly. So, you said Steward "specialises in getting the best out of tall cautious heavyweight fighters [like] the younger Klit, Lewis," I said (effectively) "true, but Fury isn't that good," and then you said I'm judging him to harshly.

How much more explicitly do I have to spell it out?? You compared him to Lewis and Klitschko, not me. You complained when I said he wasn't that good.

I'm bored with this now. Too much effort on a nothing story.

OK i see what ur getting at, but dont u feel 8 fights is a little too early to judge ANY fighter. Look at his progress with say, Degales after 8, or even another heavyweight prospect, and its not bad.

But yes, bored now. Make friends make friends, never never break friends?

doctorboxing wrote:

black panther wrote:lacks snack

I think he has far too many snacks personally.

LMAO

The most interesting part I took from the article was the part about Tyson Fury looking so out of shape.
This is a 21 year old kid who is getting alot of hype .. surely he`d put the training in?

Sure he may be fit, but he sure isn`t pushing himself very hard is he. One look at him and you`d never guess he is a full time proffesional boxer.

stevieb_8006 wrote:

Carbo wrote:

stevieb_8006 wrote:
b) where have i put a heavy burden on him?

Oh, dear God, woman. Read it again:

stevieb_8006 wrote:hes a trainer that specialises in getting the best out of tall, cautious, heavyweight fighters. The younger Klit, Lewis....

Understand now?

Meantime, back at the ranch...

stevieb_8006 wrote:I havent even said whether i even rate the bloke yet, just said manny would be a good match up and would improve him.

I know. I agree. I said that, remember??? We all said that. But then I said, true as this point may be, that Fury isn't up to this standard, and then you responded that I was judging him harshly. So, you said Steward "specialises in getting the best out of tall cautious heavyweight fighters [like] the younger Klit, Lewis," I said (effectively) "true, but Fury isn't that good," and then you said I'm judging him to harshly.

How much more explicitly do I have to spell it out?? You compared him to Lewis and Klitschko, not me. You complained when I said he wasn't that good.

I'm bored with this now. Too much effort on a nothing story.

OK i see what ur getting at, but dont u feel 8 fights is a little too early to judge ANY fighter. Look at his progress with say, Degales after 8, or even another heavyweight prospect, and its not bad.

But yes, bored now. Make friends make friends, never never break friends?

Well, was I the only one who, after watching Audley Harrison's first eight fights, that felt that was absolutely no way tha the was ever going to be what he claimed he was going to be?

Equally, I saw some of Hamed's very earliest fights and thought, to be honest, that there was no way he wouldn't become world champ. I think he could have won one of the bantamweight in his fifth fight, to be honest. When I saw David Haye's debut and early fights, I thought that he was a tremendously exciting prospect who definitely had it in him to go a long, long way.

Personally, I really like Fury. His confidence is ok with me as he actually seems to have some brains behind the ears and when he's not in full on braggadocio fight promotion mode, he seems to talk sense. But I just don't think he has it in him to reach the heights mentioned. And I think that's clear in eight fights. He doesn't quite destroy his opponents in the way you'd expect someone like that to destroy them. He doesn't quite have the sharpness of work, or an instantly concussive honey punch.

I mean, look at the difference between Fury's work, and the manner he wins his fights against the journeyman and British/Area level characters he's fought in his first 8, and look at the way Haye did it. And Haye's probably not as good as Wlad.

He just doesn't do it for me, sorry.

Could be completely wrong. I'm sure if I saw Bernard Hopkins after eight, I'd have said the same thing.

Well, was I the only one who, after watching Audley Harrison's first eight fights, that felt that was absolutely no way tha the was ever going to be what he claimed he was going to be?

Equally, I saw some of Hamed's very earliest fights and thought, to be honest, that there was no way he wouldn't become world champ. I think he could have won one of the bantamweight in his fifth fight, to be honest. When I saw David Haye's debut and early fights, I thought that he was a tremendously exciting prospect who definitely had it in him to go a long, long way.

Personally, I really like Fury. His confidence is ok with me as he actually seems to have some brains behind the ears and when he's not in full on braggadocio fight promotion mode, he seems to talk sense. But I just don't think he has it in him to reach the heights mentioned. And I think that's clear in eight fights. He doesn't quite destroy his opponents in the way you'd expect someone like that to destroy them. He doesn't quite have the sharpness of work, or an instantly concussive honey punch.

I mean, look at the difference between Fury's work, and the manner he wins his fights against the journeyman and British/Area level characters he's fought in his first 8, and look at the way Haye did it. And Haye's probably not as good as Wlad.

He just doesn't do it for me, sorry.

Could be completely wrong. I'm sure if I saw Bernard Hopkins after eight, I'd have said the same thing.[/quote]


yes cant really knock that post, 1 point i would make is that heavys usually mature later (audley was quite old when he turned over) so time is on furys side to get plenty of experience.

I know u'll prob say "either got it or you havent" and thats fair enough, but managed correctly and in the current shocking HW climate its not an impossible dream (remember Klits will prob b gone by the time furys 25).

I agreed with most of the judgements u made on those fighters as well. But saying that, i never thought carl froch or clinton woods would win world belts and they proved me wrong.

Poor article. It was being far too severe on Fury. He is a legitimately good prospect. To say he is woeful or some of the other terms used to describe him in this article is just to get a few cheap laughs in my opinion.

punchoutsb wrote:Poor article. It was being far too severe on Fury. He is a legitimately good prospect. To say he is woeful or some of the other terms used to describe him in this article is just to get a few cheap laughs in my opinion.

I didn't read it but most of the stuff on that site is absolute shittt

PN is very near the truth. Also there were some great Trainers at the Kronks Manny was the front man. Fury is a good prospect, with limited Amatuer Bouts. He has certainly caused interest. Met Him seems a nice Boy.