BoxRec

Kalan wrote:Damned straight... Frazier got the crap knocked out of him in that 71 fight...

If Ali wasn't such a light hitter the effect would have been the same as George Foreman hitting Lil' Joe... Povetkin blasted Perez and Takam out and they had NEVER been stopped in their lives -- and were one HELL of a lot bigger and stronger than fat little Joe Frazier -- who looked like a basketball vs Foreman he bounced off the floor so much.. Wilder is big, tall, monster puncher but couldn't put Duhaupas down... Povetkin put him down for the count and then some... He iced the mother.

Ali was one of the fastest-handed heavyweights ever - no way is Povetkin landing on Frazier as often as Ali did. Frazier of '71 was in much better shape than he was when he lost to Foreman. A prime Frazier is a far more formidable opponent than anyone Povetkin has ever beaten. Frazier had a very good chin - it took a monster puncher like Foreman to stop him. Povetkin has good pop, but not in the same league as Foreman.

Whoever said Povetkin isn't a great fighter is a complete idiot. Povetkin is a former gold medalist and his sole defeat comes from an ATG, Klitschko. Dude is a great fighter, and I'd wager he'd hold his own in any era.

Who has Povetkin beaten that was a top ten heavyweight besides Ruslan Chagaev which was 5 years ago? His win by KO over Carlos Takam was good, but are there any other big wins that he had in recent years? His win over Rahman does not count because Rahman was not in great shape and past his prime. I honestly don't think Povetkin could beat any top ten heavyweight right now.

RScarf1 wrote:Who has Povetkin beaten that was a top ten heavyweight besides Ruslan Chagaev which was 5 years ago? His win by KO over Carlos Takam was good, but are there any other big wins that he had in recent years? His win over Rahman does not count because Rahman was not in great shape and past his prime. I honestly don't think Povetkin could beat any top ten heavyweight right now.

Chris Byrd
Eddie Chambers
Ruslan Chagaev
Carlos Takam

The case you are making against Povetkin you could make against any one. If you look at the heavyweight resumes Povetkin is only currently eclipsed by Wladimir.

Lennox wrote:Razor suffered a bit with health issues so it depends a bit. I think there was a time when Tyson was #1 Ruddock was #2 Bowe #3 and Holyfield #4. Tyson considered Ruddock the next best.

Prime Ruddock beats Povetkin. The usual RR that we saw after the Tyson defeats it's more 50-50.

There was never a single day when those were any credible rankings.

MachoTime wrote:Povetkin vs. Joe Frazier ?

I'm not sure if you're serious, but I'm going to make the mistake of treating this question seriously, even though you seem to be trolling or joking.

Joe Frazier is a top 15, possibly top 10 heavyweight of all-time. He beat Oscar Bonavena twice, George Chuvalo, Buster Mathis, Jerry Quarry twice, Jimmy Ellis twice, Bob Foster, prime Muhammad Ali, and Joe Bugner. Although the styles match-up favors the puncher Povetkin over the swarmer Frazier, Frazier is in a completely different class. Frazier in his prime would be 100% to beat any fighter of Povetkin's caliber, regardless of style; which is precisely why he's 10-0 against fighters of approximately Povetkin's caliber.

RScarf1 wrote:Who has Povetkin beaten that was a top ten heavyweight besides Ruslan Chagaev which was 5 years ago? His win by KO over Carlos Takam was good, but are there any other big wins that he had in recent years? His win over Rahman does not count because Rahman was not in great shape and past his prime. I honestly don't think Povetkin could beat any top ten heavyweight right now.

Just take a look at BoxRec top-10: do you honestly think that Povetkin wouldn't beat Glazkov, Hammer, Browne and Martin? I'd also favor him to beat Pulev and Parker, Wilder and Ortiz are 50/50 fights IMO. I think AJ, Tyson Fury and even current version of Wlad would beat Povetkin, but all three should be very disciplined in the ring (and in Fury's case very disciplined in training since we know Wlad and AJ always train hard) to beat him.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Lennox wrote:Razor suffered a bit with health issues so it depends a bit. I think there was a time when Tyson was #1 Ruddock was #2 Bowe #3 and Holyfield #4. Tyson considered Ruddock the next best.

Prime Ruddock beats Povetkin. The usual RR that we saw after the Tyson defeats it's more 50-50.

There was never a single day when those were any credible rankings.

When Ruddock beat Dokes. The heavyweight situation was a bit of a mess after Tyson got beat by Douglas, the world saw that as a slip up, Douglas got beat by Holyfield, no one thought Holyfield would beat Tyson he was 33-1 on when the fight was first scheduled. Bowe was still on the way up when Ruddock anhilated Dokes who had given Holyfield a tough fight. Bowe probably took over the #2 spot pretty quickly though a fought a lot a good fighters waiting for his shot. It was clear Holyfield was not going to be good enough to hold on to the title, he had three awful defences as champion first time round. I think Tyson, Bowe and Ruddock would have beaten the 1991 Holyfield. Very subjective though and argueing with mythical fights is a bit pointless.

In the last few years, Povetkin has not had any big win except for Takam. I think that Joshua, Wilder, Ortiz, Pulev, and Parker all beat Povetkin. Fury and Klitschko beat him too. Maybe Povetkin could beat one of the contenders in the lower top ten, but he has to prove it.

You're nuts... Takam beat Parker anywhere but New Zealand... Povetkin controlled Takam easily and knocked him TF out -- and would obviously brutalize the technically challenged Parker the same way.. Ruddock couldn't box and wasn't even as good as Parker -- Povetkin would destroy him.

Lennox wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

Lennox wrote:Razor suffered a bit with health issues so it depends a bit. I think there was a time when Tyson was #1 Ruddock was #2 Bowe #3 and Holyfield #4. Tyson considered Ruddock the next best.

Prime Ruddock beats Povetkin. The usual RR that we saw after the Tyson defeats it's more 50-50.

There was never a single day when those were any credible rankings.

When Ruddock beat Dokes. The heavyweight situation was a bit of a mess after Tyson got beat by Douglas, the world saw that as a slip up, Douglas got beat by Holyfield, no one thought Holyfield would beat Tyson he was 33-1 on when the fight was first scheduled. Bowe was still on the way up when Ruddock anhilated Dokes who had given Holyfield a tough fight. Bowe probably took over the #2 spot pretty quickly though a fought a lot a good fighters waiting for his shot. It was clear Holyfield was not going to be good enough to hold on to the title, he had three awful defences as champion first time round. I think Tyson, Bowe and Ruddock would have beaten the 1991 Holyfield. Very subjective though and argueing with mythical fights is a bit pointless.

I guess you weren't around then because many had Holyfield beating Tyson.. As for Ruddock beating Holyfiled? That's just dumb. Ruddock had very low level skills like Morrison. There's Neanderthal swingers and there's guy who learn their craft -- like Douglas and Holyfield... Buster didn't seem interested in what he was doing for most of his fights -- but his dad, Billy Douglas, taught him technique from the time he was 3 so he knew how to box if he ever wanted to.. He had the same early tutoring as Floyd Mayweather had, he was just a lot bigger and not as ambitious.. But he saw a lot of flaws in Tyson in the Tucker fight ... and told everybody he could beat him easy.

Douglas let the air out of Tyson.. It wasn't a lucky punch like Rahman did Lewis.. Douglas was bigger, taller, faster, stronger, more skilled, and he boxed Tyson's ass off before knocking him out.. Tyson wasn't scary after that.. Holyfield was never impressed with Tyson to begin with.. Before Tyson-Douglas he called Tyson "one-dimensional" a guy who didn't jab.. didn't slip punches well.. and fought a bunch of old men, Light Heavyweights, and slowpokes who couldn't get out of their own way.. Holyfield knew he was great, and had good skills, and knew Tyson couldn't stay with him

Kalan wrote:

Lennox wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote: There was never a single day when those were any credible rankings.

When Ruddock beat Dokes. The heavyweight situation was a bit of a mess after Tyson got beat by Douglas, the world saw that as a slip up, Douglas got beat by Holyfield, no one thought Holyfield would beat Tyson he was 33-1 on when the fight was first scheduled. Bowe was still on the way up when Ruddock anhilated Dokes who had given Holyfield a tough fight. Bowe probably took over the #2 spot pretty quickly though a fought a lot a good fighters waiting for his shot. It was clear Holyfield was not going to be good enough to hold on to the title, he had three awful defences as champion first time round. I think Tyson, Bowe and Ruddock would have beaten the 1991 Holyfield. Very subjective though and argueing with mythical fights is a bit pointless.

I guess you weren't around then because many had Holyfield beating Tyson.. As for Ruddock beating Holyfiled? That's just dumb. Ruddock had very low level skills like Morrison. There's Neanderthal swingers and there's guy who learn their craft -- like Douglas and Holyfield... Buster didn't seem interested in what he was doing for most of his fights -- but his dad, Billy Douglas, taught him technique from the time he was 3 so he knew how to box if he ever wanted to.. He had the same early tutoring as Floyd Mayweather had, he was just a lot bigger and not as ambitious.. But he saw a lot of flaws in Tyson in the Tucker fight ... and told everybody he could beat him easy.

Douglas let the air out of Tyson.. It wasn't a lucky punch like Rahman did Lewis.. Douglas was bigger, taller, faster, stronger, more skilled, and he boxed Tyson's ass off before knocking him out.. Tyson wasn't scary after that.. Holyfield was never impressed with Tyson to begin with.. Before Tyson-Douglas he called Tyson "one-dimensional" a guy who didn't jab.. didn't slip punches well.. and fought a bunch of old men, Light Heavyweights, and slowpokes who couldn't get out of their own way.. Holyfield knew he was great, and had good skills, and knew Tyson couldn't stay with him

First Fight. I recall Tyson being about a 17 to 1 favorite over Holyfield. It was Holyfield who had been in more wars than Tyson at that time.

RScarf1 wrote:In the last few years, Povetkin has not had any big win except for Takam. I think that Joshua, Wilder, Ortiz, Pulev, and Parker all beat Povetkin. Fury and Klitschko beat him too. Maybe Povetkin could beat one of the contenders in the lower top ten, but he has to prove it.

I'd take Povetkin over Parker (could hardly deal with Ruiz's pressure), Pulev, and the Ortiz I've seen in his last two fights. Wilder would be 50/50, and I'd favour AJ.

I don't really see why AP should be singled out for his resume; even just counting his post-Wlad fights, it's at least around the same level as the top fighters not named Klitschko:

AP
Duhaupas
Wach
Perez
Takam
Charr

These were all stoppages, and only Takam was competitive. He also has pre-Wlad wins over Chambers, Chagaev, Huck, Boswell, Byrd, and Wawrzyk (Wilder's next opponent)

Ortiz
Scott
Thompson
Jennings
Allen

Looked good against Jennings and Thompson, but very lackluster against Scot and Allen.

AJ
Whyte
Molina
Breazeale
Martin
Johnson

Easily stopped all his opponents. Quite arguably hasn't fought a legit top 10 opponent, but has looked the part and I expect him to beat Wlad.

Parker
Takam
Ruiz
Dimitrenko
Meehan

Many had Parker losing to Ruiz

Wilder
Stiverne
Duhaupas
Molina
Szpilka
Scott
Arreola

Wilder has been active, but not too impressive IMO. He looked class against Stiverne, but was hurt by Molina and given problems by Szpilka. He fought shot Arreola last time, and his next fight is against a guy Povetkin wrecked about four years ago.

Pulev
Chisora
Ustinov
Dimitrenko
Thompson

Note that only one of these wins happened in the last 3.5 years, and two of them occured more than 4 years ago.

Kalan wrote:You're nuts... Takam beat Parker anywhere but New Zealand... Povetkin controlled Takam easily and knocked him TF out -- and would obviously brutalize the technically challenged Parker the same way.. Ruddock couldn't box and wasn't even as good as Parker -- Povetkin would destroy him.

You're right that Takam arguably could have won against Parker and that Povetkin knocked Takam out, but Parker is younger and faster than Povetkin right now. I know that Parker barely beat a pudgy Andy Ruiz on the scorecards, but I thought Parker won. By the time Povetkin fights a contender, he will either be 38 or close to it. I know it may sound outlandish, but I honestly do not think that Povetkin can beat Parker with unbiased and impartial judges. Ruddock's losses were mostly to the upper echelon. Ruddock beat former world champions Mike Weaver, James "Bonecrusher" Smith, and Michael Dokes. Ruddock's best years were from 1986-1991. Povetkin would have had no chance against that version of Ruddock.

Kalan wrote:You're nuts... Takam beat Parker anywhere but New Zealand... Povetkin controlled Takam easily and knocked him TF out -- and would obviously brutalize the technically challenged Parker the same way.. Ruddock couldn't box and wasn't even as good as Parker -- Povetkin would destroy him.

The vast majority of people had Parker beating Takam in a close fight. Scoring the fight live I had it 116-113 to Parker, but I could see it closer - anything from 116-112 Parker to 115-113 Takam would be reasonable. Parker would have been unlucky to have dropped a decision in that fight.

Povetkin vs Takam was actually a very close fight until the stoppage - as evidenced by the fact all judges had it even after eight rounds.

That said, I'd favour Povetkin to beat Parker if they were to fight now.

Kalan wrote:

Lennox wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote: There was never a single day when those were any credible rankings.

When Ruddock beat Dokes. The heavyweight situation was a bit of a mess after Tyson got beat by Douglas, the world saw that as a slip up, Douglas got beat by Holyfield, no one thought Holyfield would beat Tyson he was 33-1 on when the fight was first scheduled. Bowe was still on the way up when Ruddock anhilated Dokes who had given Holyfield a tough fight. Bowe probably took over the #2 spot pretty quickly though a fought a lot a good fighters waiting for his shot. It was clear Holyfield was not going to be good enough to hold on to the title, he had three awful defences as champion first time round. I think Tyson, Bowe and Ruddock would have beaten the 1991 Holyfield. Very subjective though and argueing with mythical fights is a bit pointless.

I guess you weren't around then because many had Holyfield beating Tyson.. As for Ruddock beating Holyfiled? That's just dumb. Ruddock had very low level skills like Morrison. There's Neanderthal swingers and there's guy who learn their craft -- like Douglas and Holyfield... Buster didn't seem interested in what he was doing for most of his fights -- but his dad, Billy Douglas, taught him technique from the time he was 3 so he knew how to box if he ever wanted to.. He had the same early tutoring as Floyd Mayweather had, he was just a lot bigger and not as ambitious.. But he saw a lot of flaws in Tyson in the Tucker fight ... and told everybody he could beat him easy.

Douglas let the air out of Tyson.. It wasn't a lucky punch like Rahman did Lewis.. Douglas was bigger, taller, faster, stronger, more skilled, and he boxed Tyson's ass off before knocking him out.. Tyson wasn't scary after that.. Holyfield was never impressed with Tyson to begin with.. Before Tyson-Douglas he called Tyson "one-dimensional" a guy who didn't jab.. didn't slip punches well.. and fought a bunch of old men, Light Heavyweights, and slowpokes who couldn't get out of their own way.. Holyfield knew he was great, and had good skills, and knew Tyson couldn't stay with him

I think your getting the times confused. There was a fight scheduled between Holyfield and Tyson that ended up being the Bert Cooper defence. Tyson was 33-1 and no one gave Holyfield a sniff. No one gave Buster a chance, but that night he was awesome and Tyson was not, Buster never fought liked that before or again. They can mouth off all they like all fighters say they see flaws, Carl the truth, Spinks, Tbbs, Bruno all said the same. You are right that Tyson was not so scary afterwards, but take the pair of Tyson wins off Evanders record and it's pretty speckled. Holyfield was a win some lose some warrior and that's a fact because his record is there to see, he lost 10 fights and drew twice. Strange that everyone marks down John Ruiz yet Ruiz did pretty good if Evander's resume is lauded. Some fighters peak and after a loss they are not the same, Tyson was awesome up to the Douglas fight, they had to make stuff up to sell fights, I was in Vegas when he fought Bruno in 89 and you could buy tickets in the KFC, they had to take him to Japan because the fights were so one sided they became boring. So the Tyson that knew he couldn't stay with him was from a different period.

Lennox wrote:

Kalan wrote:

Lennox wrote:When Ruddock beat Dokes. The heavyweight situation was a bit of a mess after Tyson got beat by Douglas, the world saw that as a slip up, Douglas got beat by Holyfield, no one thought Holyfield would beat Tyson he was 33-1 on when the fight was first scheduled. Bowe was still on the way up when Ruddock anhilated Dokes who had given Holyfield a tough fight. Bowe probably took over the #2 spot pretty quickly though a fought a lot a good fighters waiting for his shot. It was clear Holyfield was not going to be good enough to hold on to the title, he had three awful defences as champion first time round. I think Tyson, Bowe and Ruddock would have beaten the 1991 Holyfield. Very subjective though and argueing with mythical fights is a bit pointless.

I guess you weren't around then because many had Holyfield beating Tyson.. As for Ruddock beating Holyfiled? That's just dumb. Ruddock had very low level skills like Morrison. There's Neanderthal swingers and there's guy who learn their craft -- like Douglas and Holyfield... Buster didn't seem interested in what he was doing for most of his fights -- but his dad, Billy Douglas, taught him technique from the time he was 3 so he knew how to box if he ever wanted to.. He had the same early tutoring as Floyd Mayweather had, he was just a lot bigger and not as ambitious.. But he saw a lot of flaws in Tyson in the Tucker fight ... and told everybody he could beat him easy.

Douglas let the air out of Tyson.. It wasn't a lucky punch like Rahman did Lewis.. Douglas was bigger, taller, faster, stronger, more skilled, and he boxed Tyson's ass off before knocking him out.. Tyson wasn't scary after that.. Holyfield was never impressed with Tyson to begin with.. Before Tyson-Douglas he called Tyson "one-dimensional" a guy who didn't jab.. didn't slip punches well.. and fought a bunch of old men, Light Heavyweights, and slowpokes who couldn't get out of their own way.. Holyfield knew he was great, and had good skills, and knew Tyson couldn't stay with him

I think your getting the times confused. There was a fight scheduled between Holyfield and Tyson that ended up being the Bert Cooper defence. Tyson was 33-1 and no one gave Holyfield a sniff. No one gave Buster a chance, but that night he was awesome and Tyson was not, Buster never fought liked that before or again. They can mouth off all they like all fighters say they see flaws, Carl the truth, Spinks, Tbbs, Bruno all said the same. You are right that Tyson was not so scary afterwards, but take the pair of Tyson wins off Evanders record and it's pretty speckled. Holyfield was a win some lose some warrior and that's a fact because his record is there to see, he lost 10 fights and drew twice. Strange that everyone marks down John Ruiz yet Ruiz did pretty good if Evander's resume is lauded. Some fighters peak and after a loss they are not the same, Tyson was awesome up to the Douglas fight, they had to make stuff up to sell fights, I was in Vegas when he fought Bruno in 89 and you could buy tickets in the KFC, they had to take him to Japan because the fights were so one sided they became boring. So the Tyson that knew he couldn't stay with him was from a different period.

Interesting point about Holyfield v Ruiz.

Ruiz is quite rightly looked down upon, yet he performed far better against Evander than the much more formidable Lennox Lewis just a few months earlier.

Favor Povetkin over everyone except Klitschko. Other than Klitschko, I think Povetkin's biggest threat is probably Joshua. Wilder is for sure getting the hell knocked out of him if he steps in the ring with Povetkin.

Ruddock by early KO, inside 3 rounds.

Who is the best opponent Ruddock stopped that quickly? Plenty of non-descript fighters went past that too,

Ruddock made a career out of the 2 defeats by mike tyson,povetkin all day long

thechump wrote:Ruddock made a career out of the 2 defeats by mike tyson,povetkin all day long

My thoughts entirely.

I remember when he was scheduled to fight Lennox Lewis & folk were bigging him up & making him the big favourite over Lewis because he went 19 rounds with Tyson!

You can't hype up someone off the back of defeats, especially in low skilled one punch at a time fights like his 2 bouts with Tyson.

Syntax Error wrote:

thechump wrote:Ruddock made a career out of the 2 defeats by mike tyson,povetkin all day long

My thoughts entirely.

I remember when he was scheduled to fight Lennox Lewis & folk were bigging him up & making him the big favourite over Lewis because he went 19 rounds with Tyson!

You can't hype up someone off the back of defeats, especially in low skilled one punch at a time fights like his 2 bouts with Tyson.

Exactly and tyson was poor in both fights,i remember sky before the halloween showdown with lewis billing him as going 19 rounds with the worlds most deadliest man haha. When you look back,after say the spinks fight tyson wasnt all that,and previous to spinks the heavyweight division was there for taking similar to the division now,joshua,imo,has the world at his feet,if he wants to rule for a decade or so he should keep his feet on the ground and use tyson as an example of how not to do it. Just my opinion

thechump wrote:Ruddock made a career out of the 2 defeats by mike tyson,povetkin all day long

I don't know how well you are aquainted with the heavyweights before 1990 but Ruddock absolutely anhiliated Mike Dokes, plus he stopped Bonecrusher. He also beat Mike Weaver and a host of decent top 30 heavies. Now you may think so what or that's no much but if you study boxing you realise that pretty much all the heavyweights have ever done is avoid top 50 fighters. Not many heavyweights have ever beaten FIVE top 50 opponents. Probably less than 10 heavyweights have beaten FIVE top 10 opponents active within the last 10 years. I am talking about a true top 10 opponent not an ABC one. Ruddock struggled with Asthma, that caused the Jaco loss, there was another he nearly lost as he could not breathe but I don't remember which one. FWIW I thought he looked good v Tyson. Tyson said it was his hardest opponent up to that point.

Lennox wrote:

thechump wrote:Ruddock made a career out of the 2 defeats by mike tyson,povetkin all day long

I don't know how well you are aquainted with the heavyweights before 1990 but Ruddock absolutely anhiliated Mike Dokes, plus he stopped Bonecrusher. He also beat Mike Weaver and a host of decent top 30 heavies. Now you may think so what or that's no much but if you study boxing you realise that pretty much all the heavyweights have ever done is avoid top 50 fighters. Not many heavyweights have ever beaten FIVE top 50 opponents. Probably less than 10 heavyweights have beaten FIVE top 10 opponents active within the last 10 years. I am talking about a true top 10 opponent not an ABC one. Ruddock struggled with Asthma, that caused the Jaco loss, there was another he nearly lost as he could not breathe but I don't remember which one. FWIW I thought he looked good v Tyson. Tyson said it was his hardest opponent up to that point.

My point is after the tyson fights he made millions on the fact he went 19 rounds with mike tyson am i right or wrong?