BoxRec

people should never use height as an excuse. Marciano, Tyson were short heavyweight. yes their skills excelled in other areas, but had they bean average fighters it would have nothing to do with their height.

Hammer is a much smaller fat dude with no punch. While think that he is ok as an opponent, we all know what the outcome is going to be. I would much rather see Fury in with someone who at least could punch. Price would have been great, big domestic fight and 'do or die' for Price.

hhaehre wrote:Hammer is a much smaller fat dude with no punch. While think that he is ok as an opponent, we all know what the outcome is going to be. I would much rather see Fury in with someone who at least could punch. Price would have been great, big domestic fight and 'do or die' for Price.

Price doesn't deserve it.

Horse wrote:

hhaehre wrote:Hammer is a much smaller fat dude with no punch. While think that he is ok as an opponent, we all know what the outcome is going to be. I would much rather see Fury in with someone who at least could punch. Price would have been great, big domestic fight and 'do or die' for Price.

Price doesn't deserve it.

Doesn't he though? Is Prices record much different to Hammers? Has he fought at much higher level?

it's a fight a lot of us would still like to see.

Fury would be very confident of a comfortable win. How many fights fall into that category but give him the payday the Price fight would. because make no mistake, this would still sell well over here.

It also has that interesting factor with prices power, you just never know.
Tyson does get tagged and he's never been clocked by someone as heavy handed.
Tyson should win it comfortably, just like he will the Hammer fight, but Price brings more unknowns to the table, with his height and power, along with a bigger payday.

davie wrote:Doesn't he though? Is Prices record much different to Hammers? Has he fought at much higher level?

it's a fight a lot of us would still like to see.

Fury would be very confident of a comfortable win. How many fights fall into that category but give him the payday the Price fight would. because make no mistake, this would still sell well over here.

It also has that interesting factor with prices power, you just never know.
Tyson does get tagged and he's never been clocked by someone as heavy handed.
Tyson should win it comfortably, just like he will the Hammer fight, but Price brings more unknowns to the table, with his height and power, along with a bigger payday.

Price needs to beat someone half decent first, he brings no credibility into the fight. He should fight someone like Johnson and see if he can win that.

Hammer has a better record than Price and deserves the opportunity more.

Thanks for the replies to my question

mullenman wrote:I know this fight is booked but!!!

wlad is having problems with jennings signing for his april fight in america
if they offered the fight to tyson he would take it in a second

IF, and that's a big 'if', Jennings' people can't make the fight happen for some odd reason then the Klitschko camp made it clear that they would take the fight against Shannon Briggs, just for money sake.

Fury should be fighting:

Thompson (old but still tough and he's a decent-sized man)
Wach (closer to his size, slow but a very strong and durable boxer)
Ustinov (to whom he owes a fight after chickening out the morning of their scheduled fight)
Browne (smaller than Fury but still a big, strong man who can punch)

Hammer is too short, he doesn't have enough reach and doesn't punch hard at all. He has no chance of winning whatsoever.

Freedom2013 wrote:Fury should be fighting:

Thompson (old but still tough and he's a decent-sized man)
Wach (closer to his size, slow but a very strong and durable boxer)
Ustinov (to whom he owes a fight after chickening out the morning of their scheduled fight)
Browne (smaller than Fury but still a big, strong man who can punch)

Hammer is too short, he doesn't have enough reach and doesn't punch hard at all. He has no chance of winning whatsoever.

They've never looked at facing a puncher, apart from Haye who was bringing enough money to retire comfortably on, which is what will lead to them taking a risk with Fury.

It's a shame because Tyson would take the fights I think. Mind you, his reaction to Ustinov of all people ( he really isn't that good ) being in shape was a little strange.

USA is the priority number one for Wladi with the WBC belt, the right track is step one vs Jenning in the states and take Stiverne/Wilder maybe also in the states.

Freedom2013 wrote:Browne (smaller than Fury but still a big, strong man who can punch)

Everyone is smaller than Fury.

Stop being silly.

Horse wrote:

Freedom2013 wrote:Browne (smaller than Fury but still a big, strong man who can punch)

Everyone is smaller than Fury.

Stop being silly.

at least someone else has a brain

Horse wrote:

Freedom2013 wrote:Browne (smaller than Fury but still a big, strong man who can punch)

Everyone is smaller than Fury.

Stop being silly.

exactly !

Freedom2013 wrote:Fury should be fighting:

Thompson (old but still tough and he's a decent-sized man)
Wach (closer to his size, slow but a very strong and durable boxer)
Ustinov (to whom he owes a fight after chickening out the morning of their scheduled fight)
Browne (smaller than Fury but still a big, strong man who can punch)

Hammer is too short, he doesn't have enough reach and doesn't punch hard at all. He has no chance of winning whatsoever.

I (personally) would of loved to of seen Fury/Thompson immediately after the Price fights. But since then Thompson's novelty has worn off. I hate to say that cus Thompson truly is one of the best heavyweights in the world, even at his advanced age.

Wach... I see no real merit with him facing Fury, other than for the fact they are similar in size. But then again, there's alot of people Fury's size. Why not Kali Meehan? Why not David Price? Why not Alexander Ustinov? Size alone can't be the reason for having a fight. That may of worked as a selling point in the "White Hope" era of Jack Johnson, but not today.

Browne... as much as I like him, is just not in the same stratosphere as Fury... He's a true Commonwealth fighter, and has not proved yet that he can even beat the top level European fighters... I'm sorry but the win over Towers doesn't prove he can beat Wach, Spilzka, Gerber, Joshua, etc. and neither does a win over a fat, slow, old, James Toney... I think the goal for Browne is to set his own course, he's only going to fight who he wants to, and get himself into a position against Klitschko. Like many others before him, he will of taken a simple, easy route and then he will be blown out in two-five rounds and collect the highest paycheck of his career and probably retire.

As for Hammer being 'too short'... Problem is, the majority are going to be much smaller and lighter than Fury anyways... so you can't necessarily use that as an 'excuse' or a 'reason' why someone will lose... I'd argue the man who had the best success against Fury was also his smallest opponent (Cunningham)... it really does all come down to skills and abilities. I personally, just don't think Hammer is anywhere in the skill set as Fury... and it surprises me that he's ranked that high by so many organisations outside the EBU.

lillywhite14 wrote:

Freedom2013 wrote:Fury should be fighting:

Thompson (old but still tough and he's a decent-sized man)
Wach (closer to his size, slow but a very strong and durable boxer)
Ustinov (to whom he owes a fight after chickening out the morning of their scheduled fight)
Browne (smaller than Fury but still a big, strong man who can punch)

Hammer is too short, he doesn't have enough reach and doesn't punch hard at all. He has no chance of winning whatsoever.

They've never looked at facing a puncher, apart from Haye who was bringing enough money to retire comfortably on, which is what will lead to them taking a risk with Fury.

It's a shame because Tyson would take the fights I think. Mind you, his reaction to Ustinov of all people ( he really isn't that good ) being in shape was a little strange.

I think the Ustinov thing was down to them being lied to, seemed like they had been told he'd been brought in on short notice and hadn't trained much, then they found out he'd had a full training camp for the last 8 weeks with some top quality sparring. Understandably they were a bit pissed off about it.

The 'best heavyweight in the world' would get off the couch after six weeks sitting down on the piss and smash a prime, focused Ustinov and the likes to bits. He really isn't very good at all.

Being annoyed because you've been told an opponent is out of shape yet he turns up prepared to fight is embarassing in my opinion.

Regarding Hammer, it's all been said. But somebody answer me this. How would Hammer get on against Price? I have never been sold on Price and only seen Hammer twice but I think Price would knock him spark out. Hammer was atrocious against Airich, a guy who half decent heavyweights will knock out within 3/4 rounds usually. I even think a prime, fit, focused Sexton would give Hammer all he could handle.

It's a shame to see Fury opting for zeo risk fights, and it will only continue. I want to see him tested and in with someone wh might pose a problem to him ( there are plenty out there who will )
Even Wach would be interesting. Never going to be stopped by Fury, decent size, can bang a bit. At least it offers a bit of intrigue. The days of watching Bruno beat up hopelessly overmatched opponents should be long gone.

Didn't Wach knock-out Hammer in 6 rounds? What has Hammer done since to elevate him so far above the big Polish heavyweight? I'd rather see Wach fight Fury than little No-Guns Hammer. Is this boxing or "Wait-Around-Til-U-Get-Ur-Shot" on BBC1, an Irish TV production brought to you by Guinness and Sunlight Soap. Make these sods fight or ban them from promotions.

Cap wrote:Didn't Wach knock-out Hammer in 6 rounds? What has Hammer done since to elevate him so far above the big Polish heavyweight? I'd rather see Wach fight Fury than little No-Guns Hammer. Is this boxing or "Wait-Around-Til-U-Get-Ur-Shot" on BBC1, an Irish TV production brought to you by Guinness and Sunlight Soap. Make these sods fight or ban them from promotions.

Though I agree that Wach is superior to Hammer
When they fought Wach had already had 22 previous bouts.Where as Hammer had only had 8 bouts.
The experience factor was great.
I would still pick Wach in a rematch with Hammer but in a much closer bout.

Wach, Ustinov, and Price may not be ranked as highly as Hammer, but at least they're taller. Also, Julius Long may not be ranked as highly as Wach, Ustinov, and Price, but at least he's taller.

Fury vs Julius Long, 2015. The fight to define an otherwise pointless career, because height.

Lackeos wrote:Wach, Ustinov, and Price may not be ranked as highly as Hammer, but at least they're taller. Also, Julius Long may not be ranked as highly as Wach, Ustinov, and Price, but at least he's taller.

Fury vs Julius Long, 2015. The fight to define an otherwise pointless career, because height.

You know that rankings don't equate to ability and they are limited in what they suggest about how two specific boxers will match up? I'd also take Wach to beat Hammer again, Price to knock him out, and give Ustinov a good chance of beating him. Each of those boxers is significantly better than Long (Ustinov and Wach easily stopped him) and I think they possess enough ability in combination with their size to stand a better chance than Hammer of being competitive with Fury, preparing him for Wlad, and/or making him work hard; Hammer hasn't shown size, power, speed, durability, physical strength, workrate, stamina, or skills to an extent that I think he'll be useful for anything other than staying busy for a bit.

As I said earlier, Fury could've just sat on his title shot so I don't have problems with him fighting Hammer in this context, but there are many fighters who I think would be more competitive and more closely approximate Wlad regardless of their rankings.

hammer barely beat KJ.........that should say where hes at compared to fury

crusader wrote:

Lackeos wrote:Wach, Ustinov, and Price may not be ranked as highly as Hammer, but at least they're taller. Also, Julius Long may not be ranked as highly as Wach, Ustinov, and Price, but at least he's taller.

Fury vs Julius Long, 2015. The fight to define an otherwise pointless career, because height.

You know that rankings don't equate to ability and they are limited in what they suggest about how two specific boxers will match up? I'd also take Wach to beat Hammer again, Price to knock him out, and give Ustinov a good chance of beating him. Each of those boxers is significantly better than Long (Ustinov and Wach easily stopped him) and I think they possess enough ability in combination with their size to stand a better chance than Hammer of being competitive with Fury, preparing him for Wlad, and/or making him work hard; Hammer hasn't shown size, power, speed, durability, physical strength, workrate, stamina, or skills to an extent that I think he'll be useful for anything other than staying busy for a bit.

As I said earlier, Fury could've just sat on his title shot so I don't have problems with him fighting Hammer in this context, but there are many fighters who I think would be more competitive and more closely approximate Wlad regardless of their rankings.

I think Lackeos is doing a bit of the old Reductio ad absurdum bringing up Julius Long - he only mentions Long because everyone going on about how Hammer is supposedly short. For my money he's a very respectable opponent - quite active, unbeaten for four years, ranked #11 by boxrec. A better opponent than Brown even (Hammer beat Kevin Johnson, who eats Australian heavyweights for breakfast).

I know what he intended and I was showing how the boxers differ aside from height. If it were simply about facing someone who was tall Long would be a fine choice and people may have been throwing his name around, but obviously ability is being considered to some extent. I also think height is relevant given that there is a good chance Fury's bout immediately after Hammer will be against someone who is 6'6" and not 6'1"-6'3" as his three best opponents (Chisora, Johnson, Cunningham), the ones whose defeats at his hands have probably done the most for his reputation as a fighter, are. In fact, who is Fury's best opponent who stands over 6'3"?

I think Hammer is the epitome of someone who is better on paper than in the ring. Sure, he's active, he hasn't lost for years, and he's ranked near the top ten by BoxRec and even higher by some sanctioning bodies, yet when I see him fight I see someone who is very limited and tailor-made for Fury to handle without problems. I also think many other HWs, including several ranked below him by BoxRec, would beat him and to me him winning a lackluster UD over a mediocre opponent who was shortly after destroyed in four by Joseph Parker is reflective of why he probably won't pose a threat to most contenders. As I mentioned before, I think Hammer would lose to Wach again and be knocked out by Price.

I thought the Johnson fight was much closer than the cards suggested by the way, with the wide scores being another case of Hammer looking better on paper than in action. It's not a bad fight considering that Fury could've reasonably not taken a fight given his mandatory status, but I think some people are too quick to look at someone only on paper and make certain judgments on that.