BoxRec

JWP wrote:Damien Wills would have zero interest seeing as he won a million dollars on a scratch card a couple of weeks back.

Didn't know that. Good on him.

JWP wrote:

Damien Wills would have zero interest seeing as he won a million dollars on a scratch card a couple of weeks back.

Lucky fvck!

columbo wrote: I bet though that if Joshua goes on to hold 3 of the 4 belts like Wlad does and yet has done it against the same kind of calibre of opposition you'll be labelling him as a 'great' even though you think Wlad is shite

Wlad isn't great for a number of reasons, average-quality opponents, and losses to average-quality opponents, being chief among them.

If Joshua develops to be a dominant heavyweight, beating more convincingly the same sub-standard foes as Wlad has been, with no embarrassing losses to any of them, showing better skills along the way (which is always feasible when you're talking about jab 'n' Grabimir and looks the case even now), and maybe beating a couple of threatening rivals himself instead of having to rely on a big brother to do it for him, he might end up with a claim to greatness.

That's a few ways he can end up different to Wlad. If however he gets splattered three times and knocked down 10 times in his career, has to resort to holding even against the dross he is forced to face, is reduced to punch artillery limited to a left jab and an occasional straight right, and all the while boring his audience to suicide, no, he won't be great.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

columbo wrote: I bet though that if Joshua goes on to hold 3 of the 4 belts like Wlad does and yet has done it against the same kind of calibre of opposition you'll be labelling him as a 'great' even though you think Wlad is shite

Wlad isn't great for a number of reasons, average-quality opponents, and losses to average-quality opponents, being chief among them.
.

I guess that Pacquiao must be a bit shit considering his early career losses...and Hopkins, what was he doing losing an early career fight to...who?

Boxing Prospect wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

columbo wrote: I bet though that if Joshua goes on to hold 3 of the 4 belts like Wlad does and yet has done it against the same kind of calibre of opposition you'll be labelling him as a 'great' even though you think Wlad is shite

Wlad isn't great for a number of reasons, average-quality opponents, and losses to average-quality opponents, being chief among them.
.

I guess that Pacquiao must be a bit poo considering his early career losses...and Hopkins, what was he doing losing an early career fight to...who?

!!!
Pac was a kid when he lost those fights! A shadow of what he was to become, which was a beast taking on and beating almost all the legends of the scene at the time he could possibly face. Look at all the legends Wlad faced. COME ON!

Hopkins lost one close four round decision, again right at the start of his career.

Yeah but his losses were 10 plus years ago.

Riddick Blowe wrote: !!!
Pac was a kid when he lost those fights! A shadow of what he was to become, which was a beast taking on and beating almost all the legends of the scene at the time he could possibly face. Look at all the legends Wlad faced. COME ON!

Hopkins lost one close four round decision, again right at the start of his career.

Wlad's last loss was a decade ago, a shadow of what he was to become under the guidance of Steward and, most of all he has been taking on all comers.

Aside from the loss to Brewster, a decade ago, Wlad was a kid for his other 2 losses with the Sanders loss coming 11 years ago, back then Wlad was younger than Fury and what, 18 months older than Joshua is now? And lets not forget that was a loss to Sander who, at one point, was regarded as being one of the top Heavyweights on the planet...I guess that's average for you...

It's the same old double standard that has been applied to the Klitschko brothers through out there career.

Boxing Prospect wrote:been taking on all comers.

Hmm. At best I guess we can say that one of the factors that could be used to call Wlad great is beyond his control, even if we buy the 'new and improved Wlad!' thing and I have lost count of the number of times I have posted in threads about him.

Let's put the focus back on a guy who has the potential to be what Wlad never was

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Boxing Prospect wrote:been taking on all comers.

Hmm. At best I guess we can say that one of the factors that could be used to call Wlad great is beyond his control, even if we buy the 'new and improved Wlad!' thing and I have lost count of the number of times I have posted in threads about him.

Let's put the focus back on a guy who has the potential to be what Wlad never was

Based on? He hasnt fought anyone as of yet to tell.

columbo wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Boxing Prospect wrote:been taking on all comers.

Hmm. At best I guess we can say that one of the factors that could be used to call Wlad great is beyond his control, even if we buy the 'new and improved Wlad!' thing and I have lost count of the number of times I have posted in threads about him.

Let's put the focus back on a guy who has the potential to be what Wlad never was

Based on? He hasnt fought anyone as of yet to tell.

Based on the fact he won a Gold medal like..oh wait a minute...

columbo wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

Boxing Prospect wrote:been taking on all comers.

Hmm. At best I guess we can say that one of the factors that could be used to call Wlad great is beyond his control, even if we buy the 'new and improved Wlad!' thing and I have lost count of the number of times I have posted in threads about him.

Let's put the focus back on a guy who has the potential to be what Wlad never was

Based on? He hasnt fought anyone as of yet to tell.

I said 'potential'...you know, what you call something promising when it hasn't been realised yet. That's what that word means.

Na that's fair enough mate but you need to be objective.

columbo wrote:Na that's fair enough mate but you need to be objective.

You suggested that I would still think Joshua is great if he had the same career achievements as Wlad, but based on nothing discernable I have actually said about anything. Me not thinking Wlad is great does not mean I am not objective.

Well you came up with your own subjective interpretation of what would make Joshua great vs what Wlad is.

columbo wrote:Well you came up with your own subjective interpretation of what would make Joshua great vs what Wlad is.

I already said that if Joshua had the same career achievements as Wlad he wouldn't be great either. I really don't understand what you're trying to say.

Hughie Fury

Riddick Blowe wrote:

columbo wrote: I bet though that if Joshua goes on to hold 3 of the 4 belts like Wlad does and yet has done it against the same kind of calibre of opposition you'll be labelling him as a 'great' even though you think Wlad is shite :OhYes:

Wlad isn't great for a number of reasons, average-quality opponents, and losses to average-quality opponents, being chief among them.

If Joshua develops to be a dominant heavyweight, beating more convincingly the same sub-standard foes as Wlad has been, with no embarrassing losses to any of them, showing better skills along the way (which is always feasible when you're talking about jab 'n' Grabimir and looks the case even now), and maybe beating a couple of threatening rivals himself instead of having to rely on a big brother to do it for him, he might end up with a claim to greatness.

That's a few ways he can end up different to Wlad. If however he gets splattered three times and knocked down 10 times in his career, has to resort to holding even against the dross he is forced to face, is reduced to punch artillery limited to a left jab and an occasional straight right, and all the while boring his audience to suicide, no, he won't be great.

oh no you didn't!!!

Wlads resume decimates his brothers. Vitali doesnt have a win even close to a Haye, or Povetkin, or soon to be Pulev. The best person Vitali faced was a recent Great in LL , which is also his own greatest performance, in a losing effort.

he has proven a far greater champion than Vitali in the ring, the only reason big bro gets more kudos is for having a better chin.

Sklar wrote:

JWP wrote:Damien Wills would have zero interest seeing as he won a million dollars on a scratch card a couple of weeks back.

Didn't know that. Good on him.

Like most ghetto affletes he'll poss that up the wall quickly on jewellery, clothes and Crystal

reggaereggae wrote:

Sklar wrote:

JWP wrote:Damien Wills would have zero interest seeing as he won a million dollars on a scratch card a couple of weeks back.

Didn't know that. Good on him.

Like most ghetto affletes he'll poss that up the wall quickly on jewellery, clothes and Crystal

Yeah, and he'll waste the rest

palooka wrote:

reggaereggae wrote:
Like most ghetto affletes he'll poss that up the wall quickly on jewellery, clothes and Crystal

Yeah, and he'll waste the rest

Spending money on jewellery is a waste. He should buy a house. The number of boxers/NFL/NBA players who earn ridiculous money and go broke is amazing to me.

I read that David James went broke, and remember the chav lottery guy who pissed £7m up the wall. Nuts.

I bet Broner goes broke. And once Maywether's retired, with the amount of money he spends, on cars, planes, jewellery, gambling he may go broke if he doesn't get a pod income stream .

Would like to see zack page in there. Would be tricky and a real statement if he cracks him out of there.

oh no you didn't!!!

Wlads resume decimates his brothers. Vitali doesnt have a win even close to a Haye, or Povetkin, or soon to be Pulev. The best person Vitali faced was a recent Great in LL , which is also his own greatest performance, in a losing effort.

he has proven a far greater champion than Vitali in the ring, the only reason big bro gets more kudos is for having a better chin.[/quote]

He beat guys his brother could not....purity and sanders who wlad wanted nothing to do with after the first fight. You never heard him calling for a rematch. Also owns good wins over arrolea, hide, chisora, charr and beat peter, solis and gomez when they were relevant.
With all that being said wlad does have a great resume I just feel that having to get his big brother to beat sanders up instead of trying himself is a huge stain on his legacy.

Wlad's lost only three times (once when he was just 22) and he avenged one of those defeats. Do most fighters avenge any of their losses or multiple losses?

As for Joshua, I don't really see anything particularly special yet. Not to say that he isn't good and won't have a lot of success, but some people are jumping the gun.