BoxRec

5burowz wrote:

Lackeos wrote:Ideally, people would just ignore this troll's bait and not bump this thread. I wouldn't even be posting to say this if the thread wasn't already on top.

Wlad would get destroyed if he came up in the 90's.

Awww poor widdy guy! Did big bad Wlad win again and ruin your night?

5burowz wrote:

Lackeos wrote:Ideally, people would just ignore this troll's bait and not bump this thread. I wouldn't even be posting to say this if the thread wasn't already on top.

Wlad would get destroyed if he came up in the 90's.

I believe the same thing. No way does he beat the likes of Holyfield, Bowe, Tyson, and Lewis. But, gotta give the guy credit for being as dominate as he has been.

Hopefully Anthony Joshua can change the tone of the division.

5burowz wrote:

Lackeos wrote:Ideally, people would just ignore this troll's bait and not bump this thread. I wouldn't even be posting to say this if the thread wasn't already on top.

Wlad would get destroyed if he came up in the 90's.

Yup.... A 45 yr old Foreman, a chiny Moorer and Morrison would school Wlad

Impractical Poster wrote:

5burowz wrote:

Lackeos wrote:Ideally, people would just ignore this troll's bait and not bump this thread. I wouldn't even be posting to say this if the thread wasn't already on top.

Wlad would get destroyed if he came up in the 90's.

I believe the same thing. No way does he beat the likes of Holyfield, Bowe, Tyson, and Lewis. But, gotta give the guy credit for being as dominate as he has been.

Hopefully Anthony Joshua can change the tone of the division.

In my opinion, all those would be 50/50 fights.

Also Bowe had a very short peak. Who knows frankly. I could see Wlad getting beat by all of them, but I could also see wlad beating them all as well.....

Garbage / trash. Just about sums up this topic.

Shannon Briggs came up in the 90's.

I was never impressed with Pulev. He looked sad against old Thompson. In against Klitschko this guy looked like a novice of 20 bouts against pork & beaners. Throwing aimless punches in the air, walking in wide open and hands down. Whatever that was it wasn't boxing. He seemed to be hoping to land one lucky punch. Missed several opportunities to land heavy to the body. Looked like he had no idea what a left-hook is. He needs to hire a real coach who knows boxing, not wrestling or ballroom dancing. But even then. He has no chin. First good crack and down he goes. Bermane Stiverne would mop the floor with him.

reggaereggae wrote:
In my opinion, all those would be 50/50 fights.

Also Bowe had a very short peak. Who knows frankly. I could see Wlad getting beat by all of them, but I could also see wlad beating them all as well.....

I would have favored them. Bowe had a better jab. Holyfield had trouble with big guys with a jab, but he was technically better than Wlad. If Tyson got inside, game over. Lewis landed cleanly on big brother Vitali at the end of his career. Those same shots would have put Wlad out, IMO.

Of course, this is all speculation. Just how I feel. They were all much more fluid boxers than Wlad.

Cap wrote:I was never impressed with Pulev. He looked sad against old Thompson. In against Klitschko this guy looked like a novice of 20 bouts against pork & beaners. Throwing aimless punches in the air, walking in wide open and hands down. Whatever that was it wasn't boxing. He seemed to be hoping to land one lucky punch. Missed several opportunities to land heavy to the body. Looked like he had no idea what a left-hook is. He needs to hire a real coach who knows boxing, not wrestling or ballroom dancing. But even then. He has no chin. First good crack and down he goes. Bermane Stiverne would mop the floor with him.

What a terribly humorous post. Aside from Wlad, Pulev was down (as far as I know) once as an amateur, and tripped once as a pro. Bermane Stiverne wouldn't mop the floor with him, or any top twenty fighter not named Arreola. Stop trying to belittle Wlad's dominance with your asinine statements.

Blodhemn wrote:He beat Thompson because he's better than Tony. Pulev is a smart fighter who usually starts slow and dominates towards the finish, by design. He had to try the opposite against Wlad, had some success but ultimately paid for it as Wlad was in top form.

Be honest, no-one thought Pulev looked like a world beater vs Thompson. Which is why the boxing world met Pulev-Klitschko with a collective shrug of the shoulders . . Pulev was a step above the likes of Pianeta, Wach, and Leapai but while be a dependable "win in workman-like fashion guy" never gave the impression he was anything special.

Klitschko had to fight somebody. At least Pulev was smart enough not to pay all the licencing fees. 8)

Pulev did show he did not have a lot of versatility and no left hand whatsoever.

Cap wrote:I was never impressed with Pulev. He looked sad against old Thompson. In against Klitschko this guy looked like a novice of 20 bouts against pork & beaners. Throwing aimless punches in the air, walking in wide open and hands down. Whatever that was it wasn't boxing. He seemed to be hoping to land one lucky punch. Missed several opportunities to land heavy to the body. Looked like he had no idea what a left-hook is. He needs to hire a real coach who knows boxing, not wrestling or ballroom dancing. But even then. He has no chin. First good crack and down he goes. Bermane Stiverne would mop the floor with him.

How did I know this post was leading towards a mention of Stiverne?

dempseyfire wrote:

Blodhemn wrote:He beat Thompson because he's better than Tony. Pulev is a smart fighter who usually starts slow and dominates towards the finish, by design. He had to try the opposite against Wlad, had some success but ultimately paid for it as Wlad was in top form.

Be honest, no-one thought Pulev looked like a world beater vs Thompson. Which is why the boxing world met Pulev-Klitschko with a collective shrug of the shoulders . . Pulev was a step above the likes of Pianeta, Wach, and Leapai but while be a dependable "win in workman-like fashion guy" never gave the impression he was anything special.

From what I remember, Pulev beat Thompson 9-3 in terms of rounds. That's pretty dominant.

dempseyfire wrote:

Blodhemn wrote:He beat Thompson because he's better than Tony. Pulev is a smart fighter who usually starts slow and dominates towards the finish, by design. He had to try the opposite against Wlad, had some success but ultimately paid for it as Wlad was in top form.

Be honest, no-one thought Pulev looked like a world beater vs Thompson. Which is why the boxing world met Pulev-Klitschko with a collective shrug of the shoulders . . Pulev was a step above the likes of Pianeta, Wach, and Leapai but while be a dependable "win in workman-like fashion guy" never gave the impression he was anything special.

Wait what? How is what I said not being honest? That's exactly how Pulev goes about his fights.. vs Ustinov, Dimitrenko, Thompson... start slow, then dominate down the stretch. Where did I say Pulev was special? He's solid, but clearly not special, which is ok since few fighters are.

Blodhemn wrote:

Cap wrote:I was never impressed with Pulev. He looked sad against old Thompson. In against Klitschko this guy looked like a novice of 20 bouts against pork & beaners. Throwing aimless punches in the air, walking in wide open and hands down. Whatever that was it wasn't boxing. He seemed to be hoping to land one lucky punch. Missed several opportunities to land heavy to the body. Looked like he had no idea what a left-hook is. He needs to hire a real coach who knows boxing, not wrestling or ballroom dancing. But even then. He has no chin. First good crack and down he goes. Bermane Stiverne would mop the floor with him.

How did I know this post was leading towards a mention of Stiverne?

What with the poster being Canadian? Shocked me to see Stiverne mentioned I must say.

Honestly, some people really spout a load of prejudicial crap!

Yeah.. lets just say it's a common occurrence.

Stiverne has fought only two decent opponents in Austin and Arreola, and the former, a Wlad destruction victim, gave him a boxing lesson for several rounds. He's a decent fighter but he's got his share of flaws and I'd give around 15 HWs a good chance of beating him.

I bet Stiverne is a better hockey player than Pulev :)

Boy, if this Pulev guy was the best heavyweight contender out there, as many of you have insisted for months (you know who you are) then Wlad is going to reign past the age of 50. Maybe 60.
I didn't think it was possible but this fraud actually made Leapai look competent.
Who's next?

pulevs defense is bad but overall pulev is a good fighter. he has good punching technique and accuracy and is built tall and massive. he was an amateur legend, but I think he never learned to fight defensively (a little bit like riddick bowe who also stopped everything with his head- although bowe was a better fighter and harder puncher overall) because he is so big and strong.

for a man of his size pulev really has a good offensive arsenal but he fought a fighter who is even bigger and stronger. against most guys pulevs offensive skill is enough but he needs better defense to beat the top guys.

I don't think pulev had that bad of a fight. he blocked many of wlads jabs and landed some good rights himself but he couldn't defend or take those massive left hooks.

dominik wrote:pulevs defense is bad but overall pulev is a good fighter. he has good punching technique and accuracy and is built tall and massive. he was an amateur legend, but I think he never learned to fight defensively (a little bit like riddick bowe who also stopped everything with his head- although bowe was a better fighter and harder puncher overall) because he is so big and strong.

for a man of his size pulev really has a good offensive arsenal but he fought a fighter who is even bigger and stronger. against most guys pulevs offensive skill is enough but he needs better defense to beat the top guys.

I don't think pulev had that bad of a fight. he blocked many of wlads jabs and landed some good rights himself but he couldn't defend or take those massive left hooks.

So what you're saying is that except for being bounced off the canvas several times and getting KO'd in short order, Pulev had a pretty good night?

I think you should also stop short from calling Puley an "amateur legend."
Isn't this the same guy who was easily smacked around by the lazy Cuban, Solis.
My friend, Teofilo Stevenson was an "amateur legend." Pulev was no Stevenson.

I'm not saying Stiverne beats Klitschko, but he should put up a better fight than that poor sod Pulev did, and he'd whip the Bulgarian if that's the best he's got. Pulev looked bad against Thompson and looked like a pathetic amateur against Klitschko. This is without question the absolute worst era in heavyweight boxing since Corbett fought Jackson. Klitschko is looking like a candidate for Greatest of All Time fighting the dreggs that pass for boxers these days.

Pulev vs Wepner

Discuss.

The Great John L wrote:Pulev vs Wepner

Discuss.

I might go with Chuck by a narrow decision in a 10 round fight unless he gets badly cut early.