BoxRec

stujones wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 15:23

Jackson328 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 14:56 In years to come people will look at Groves beating Eubank, compare their respective records going into the fight and assume it was just another day at the office for Groves (which it was in truth) without seeing that Eubank was a favourite with the bookies and most respected pundits were tipping him to win.

I feel sorry for Calzaghe sometimes when I recall his schooling of Lacy, most people had him knocked out or easily outpointed going into the fight yet now its generally accepted that Lacy was hugely overhyped. You can pick holes in absolutely anyones resume throughout history in reality.

Buster Douglas was just a bum who got lucky against an unmotivated Tyson who hadn't trained etc but he fought like a beast that night as a rank outsider. Almost three decades later I have yet to meet anyone who thought Tyson would lose that fight.

Probably don't believe me...but I called Douglas vs Tyson....

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 15:02 Fury - Klitschko is definitely the best example in recent memory, with the amount of people who claim it was a ‘masterclass’ of boxing from Fury when in reality he barely squeaked a decision and hardly landed any punches all night.

Jackson328 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 16:38

stujones wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 15:23

Jackson328 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 14:56 In years to come people will look at Groves beating Eubank, compare their respective records going into the fight and assume it was just another day at the office for Groves (which it was in truth) without seeing that Eubank was a favourite with the bookies and most respected pundits were tipping him to win.

I feel sorry for Calzaghe sometimes when I recall his schooling of Lacy, most people had him knocked out or easily outpointed going into the fight yet now its generally accepted that Lacy was hugely overhyped. You can pick holes in absolutely anyones resume throughout history in reality.

Buster Douglas was just a bum who got lucky against an unmotivated Tyson who hadn't trained etc but he fought like a beast that night as a rank outsider. Almost three decades later I have yet to meet anyone who thought Tyson would lose that fight.

Probably don't believe me...but I called Douglas vs Tyson....

ffs now I've met two in one night!

Got no reason to disbelieve you though Stu and tobyh but you get my general drift? Douglas was a no-hoper to 99% of the boxing world yet the revisionists now say Tyson was ripe to be picked.

btw I backed Honeyghan to beat Don Curry at 1-6 but no-one believes me now, I should have kept that betting slip and thats another example, people after the event claimed that Curry was tight at the weight and hadn't trained right, Honeyghan butted him etc etc

mickey1975 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 16:50

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 15:02 Fury - Klitschko is definitely the best example in recent memory, with the amount of people who claim it was a ‘masterclass’ of boxing from Fury when in reality he barely squeaked a decision and hardly landed any punches all night.

Master plan is more apt. He'd have got ko'ed if he'd have stood there.

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 16:52

Jackson328 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 16:38

stujones wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 15:23

Probably don't believe me...but I called Douglas vs Tyson....

ffs now I've met two in one night!

Got no reason to disbelieve you though Stu and tobyh but you get my general drift? Douglas was a no-hoper to 99% of the boxing world yet the revisionists now say Tyson was ripe to be picked.

btw I backed Honeyghan to beat Don Curry at 1-6 but no-one believes me now, I should have kept that betting slip and thats another example, people after the event claimed that Curry was tight at the weight and hadn't trained right, Honeyghan butted him etc etc

I bet we’ve all picked the underdog plenty of times, but we forget about it when they get knocked out

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 16:54

mickey1975 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 16:50

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 15:02 Fury - Klitschko is definitely the best example in recent memory, with the amount of people who claim it was a ‘masterclass’ of boxing from Fury when in reality he barely squeaked a decision and hardly landed any punches all night.

Master plan is more apt. He'd have got ko'ed if he'd have stood there.

That’s true. No doubting it was a brilliant tactic and saw Fury pull off a huge result, but just saying that it wasn’t a schooling like sometimes claimed. It was a close fight that went right down to the wire, not a Mayweather-esq defensive domination.

mickey1975 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 17:35

Boxerbeetle wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 16:54

mickey1975 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 16:50

Master plan is more apt. He'd have got ko'ed if he'd have stood there.

That’s true. No doubting it was a brilliant tactic and saw Fury pull off a huge result, but just saying that it wasn’t a schooling like sometimes claimed. It was a close fight that went right down to the wire, not a Mayweather-esq defensive domination.

The feints were a lot more technical than most admit.

Sklar wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 04:15 Haye v Bellew was a dire affair from first bell to the end. That they'll sell it again proves two things: people have short memories and not much on of a weekend.

ewenhay wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 15:49

dirk2686 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 06:23 [quote=jamamb post_id

Lewis Tyson has changed over the years as well. It was genuinely close to a 50/50 fight at the time, (I believe the prices were similar to GGG Canelo) but I think people these days treat it like Lewis in his prime vs a total she

It was Lewis v a shell. It's not a myth. Everyone knew Tyson had nothing left by that point other than a punchers chance

keirw wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 07:44 It sometimes doesn't take very long for the change to take place.

I listened to Wlad vs Fury on the radio and Bunce scored the fight to Wlad. Yet in a newspaper column a few days later he was lavishing praise on Fury for a great performance as if he considered it a masterclass all along.

TheLeprechaun wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 21:33

keirw wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 07:44 It sometimes doesn't take very long for the change to take place.

I listened to Wlad vs Fury on the radio and Bunce scored the fight to Wlad. Yet in a newspaper column a few days later he was lavishing praise on Fury for a great performance as if he considered it a masterclass all along.

I think thats the fight that annoys me the most. Both fighters did nothing and it goes down as the worst heavyweight title fight I've ever watched. Fury was extremely disappointing after all his talk of destroying Wlad and he went in and did whatever he could to make it a tedious affair. Extremely lucky to get that decision away from home fighting like that. It was nowhere near a master class. The Furys are terrible for boxing if you ask me. They have one intention when they fight - stink the place out at all costs. Do everything they can to sell the fight beforehand but come into the ring and fight a safety first boring fight for 12 rounds. Bellew is quite similar.

jamamb wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 21:37 yep, its why i cant warm to the furys at all as boxers. there fights are making nothing happen other than just the slightest tad more than the opponent.

vs parker, wlad, chisora 2.....all just dreadful fights. im not gonna deny they have skill but i was once a fan of tysons (in some real fun ones) but deffo not anymore.

mickey1975 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 18:00 I was going to say that... Dirk believes Wlad simply couldn't be bothered throwing punches that night!

mickey1975 wrote: ↑24 Feb 2018, 03:28

TheLeprechaun wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 21:33

keirw wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 07:44 It sometimes doesn't take very long for the change to take place.

I listened to Wlad vs Fury on the radio and Bunce scored the fight to Wlad. Yet in a newspaper column a few days later he was lavishing praise on Fury for a great performance as if he considered it a masterclass all along.

I think thats the fight that annoys me the most. Both fighters did nothing and it goes down as the worst heavyweight title fight I've ever watched. Fury was extremely disappointing after all his talk of destroying Wlad and he went in and did whatever he could to make it a tedious affair. Extremely lucky to get that decision away from home fighting like that. It was nowhere near a master class. The Furys are terrible for boxing if you ask me. They have one intention when they fight - stink the place out at all costs. Do everything they can to sell the fight beforehand but come into the ring and fight a safety first boring fight for 12 rounds. Bellew is quite similar.

Did you score the fight to Wlad because it was in Dussledorf, then? I wasn't aware that was in the criteria.

Nightmare Roy wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 20:49

ewenhay wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 15:49

dirk2686 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 06:23 [quote=jamamb post_id

Lewis Tyson has changed over the years as well. It was genuinely close to a 50/50 fight at the time, (I believe the prices were similar to GGG Canelo) but I think people these days treat it like Lewis in his prime vs a total she

It was Lewis v a shell. It's not a myth. Everyone knew Tyson had nothing left by that point other than a punchers chance

Tyson was shot to poo, everyone knew Lewis would win.

dookus wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 08:46

keirw wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 07:44 It sometimes doesn't take very long for the change to take place.

I listened to Wlad vs Fury on the radio and Bunce scored the fight to Wlad. Yet in a newspaper column a few days later he was lavishing praise on Fury for a great performance as if he considered it a masterclass all along.

Bunce is a windbag with all the integrity of a feral cat

dirk2686 wrote: ↑24 Feb 2018, 05:55

mickey1975 wrote: ↑23 Feb 2018, 18:00 I was going to say that... Dirk believes Wlad simply couldn't be bothered throwing punches that night!

No I don't - but I recognise every fighter will have good and bad nights and in a rematch I believe Wlad would have forced the action far more. It's not like he was that far from winning the first fight anyway and he was absolutely terrible.