BoxRec

DrDuke wrote: ↑25 Apr 2022, 15:58

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑25 Apr 2022, 15:41 At a certain point, size means nothing. If Whyte was better than Fury, he would won. He is not very good, so he lost.

At a certain point, when a fighter is a sh!thouse. A more or less decent boxer can take an advantage of such features like height, reach and reasonably superior weight. It's a part of skillset to use anthropometrics.

Fury exactly took an advantage of his height and reach against Whyte, although he indeed surpasses Whyte not only with this skill.

David Price is a good example of not having such abilities.

oogiebe wrote: ↑25 Apr 2022, 15:59

DrDuke wrote: ↑25 Apr 2022, 15:58

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑25 Apr 2022, 15:41 At a certain point, size means nothing. If Whyte was better than Fury, he would won. He is not very good, so he lost.

At a certain point, when a fighter is a sh!thouse. A more or less decent boxer can take an advantage of such features like height, reach and reasonably superior weight. It's a part of skillset to use anthropometrics.

Fury exactly took an advantage of his height and reach against Whyte, although he indeed surpasses Whyte not only with this skill.

David Price is a good example of not having such abilities.

If fury were 6'4" he'd still have beaten whyte.

HomicideHenry wrote: ↑25 Apr 2022, 13:44

Controversial wrote: ↑25 Apr 2022, 04:53 Fury again showed just how well he can use his size and how much of an advantage it can be. Whyte is 6'4" and 18 stone so would have been a giant in most eras yet he couldn't get near Fury and was made to look useless. Whyte may not be the greatest fighter in the world but he is strong and tough but it meant nothing as Fury was too big, fast and awkward.

The key operative word in what you wrote was, "just how well he can use his size," because size alone means very little. Fury is dangerous to any heavyweight in boxing history because of the athleticism and skill and conditioning that goes along with the size that he has.

As for Margaret Thatcher constantly bringing up opponents from over a decade ago, like Steve Cunningham, for me it is a bit asinine to do so because Tyson Fury today is far and away better than the version that fought Cunningham--- and by Fury's own admission back then he threw away all science and therefore the fight became more competitive than it should have been.

Such logic is like the numbskulls who kept bringing up Wladimir Klitschko's losses to Lamon Brewster and Corrie Sanders when he was world champion and was certainly far and away better than he was when he fought those guys.

Furthermore how Fury fought early on in his career, versus how he fought in the middle of his career, versus how he fights now--- the man has made at least four or five changes to his style. It's like pretending that he always fought the same way, never improving never adding more tools to the tool chest, etc.

Billy Tully wrote: ↑25 Apr 2022, 05:35 I have little doubt that Joe Louis would have KOd Whyte without issue.

Carrying all that extra heft does not enhance chin or talent. And it certainly doesn't speed you up.

I can certainly agree with you there. Whyte should have came in 220-230. Why so many heavyweights feel they need to come in heavy to face Fury kind of perplexes me when it's going to take every bit of conditioning, speed, and skills you have to remotely make a difference.

That is why I say Usyk is the only person out there who remotely stands a chance because he has that old school conditioning and legitimate warrior mentality of perpetually staying in great condition to be able to do whatever you need to do the entire distance. To be as effective in the last round as you are in the first round.

But ultimately size will be the difference in that fight because both Tyson Fury and Usyk are world class tacticians and stylists--- so the Ukrainian definitely has a hurdle to climb over. Don't get me wrong it will be competitive but I think Fury basically controls the entire fight and any risks made by Usyk will only result in him getting busted up if not knocked out.

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 10:52 Homicide henry wrote "Such logic is like the numbskulls who kept bringing up Wladimir Klitschko's losses to Lamon Brewster and Corrie Sanders when he was world champion and was certainly far and away better than he was when he fought those guys."

Oh yes, those numbskulls who don't think Klitschko magically improved in his 30s. They probably think his success had something to with competition sucking.
Always amazing the things people will say so that their guy doesn't look bad.

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 11:07

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 10:52 Homicide henry wrote "Such logic is like the numbskulls who kept bringing up Wladimir Klitschko's losses to Lamon Brewster and Corrie Sanders when he was world champion and was certainly far and away better than he was when he fought those guys."

Oh yes, those numbskulls who don't think Klitschko magically improved in his 30s. They probably think his success had something to with competition sucking.
Always amazing the things people will say so that their guy doesn't look bad.

The thing is, numbskulls are wrong with a suggestion, that successfully applying different tactics can't be viewed as an improvement. Also, with a suggestion, that the likes of Povetkin, Haye and Chagaev are worse the the likes of Brewster, Sanders and Puritty.

Billy Tully wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 12:43

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 11:07

Ambling Alp II wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 10:52 Homicide henry wrote "Such logic is like the numbskulls who kept bringing up Wladimir Klitschko's losses to Lamon Brewster and Corrie Sanders when he was world champion and was certainly far and away better than he was when he fought those guys."

Oh yes, those numbskulls who don't think Klitschko magically improved in his 30s. They probably think his success had something to with competition sucking.
Always amazing the things people will say so that their guy doesn't look bad.

The thing is, numbskulls are wrong with a suggestion, that successfully applying different tactics can't be viewed as an improvement. Also, with a suggestion, that the likes of Povetkin, Haye and Chagaev are worse the the likes of Brewster, Sanders and Puritty.

Wlad developed a different safety-first style but the Sanders and Brewster who beat him would beat him any time. Styles make fights and Haye, Povetkin and Chagaev, and ibragimov for that matter, are different styles to Sanders and Brewster. Haye, Chag and Ibragimov trying to win by potshotting was never going to work and Povetkin, well... the referee let Wlad initiate 300+ illegal holds that night.

There's no way Wlad 2 doesn't get in trouble at some point in a 12 rounder against Sanders with his aggression, hand speed, huge power, long reach and two-fisted attacks. Sanders is always going to liquidate him.

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 12:54

Billy Tully wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 12:43

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 11:07

The thing is, numbskulls are wrong with a suggestion, that successfully applying different tactics can't be viewed as an improvement. Also, with a suggestion, that the likes of Povetkin, Haye and Chagaev are worse the the likes of Brewster, Sanders and Puritty.

Wlad developed a different safety-first style but the Sanders and Brewster who beat him would beat him any time. Styles make fights and Haye, Povetkin and Chagaev, and ibragimov for that matter, are different styles to Sanders and Brewster. Haye, Chag and Ibragimov trying to win by potshotting was never going to work and Povetkin, well... the referee let Wlad initiate 300+ illegal holds that night.

There's no way Wlad 2 doesn't get in trouble at some point in a 12 rounder against Sanders with his aggression, hand speed, huge power, long reach and two-fisted attacks. Sanders is always going to liquidate him.

Sanders wins Wlad in 12-rounder... Sanders in a f*cking 12-rounder... Oh dear... His chances are only in the first 4 rounds FFS.

Sanders used a puncher's chance against Klit. Yes, he would always have a one, but always no more than that. And Brewster was even worse.

'Styles make fights' can work in opposite direction. It's possible to say, that Povetkin, Haye and Chagaev would KO the pre-Steward Klit. In reality they all lost. It's possible to say, that the pre-Steward Klit would win Sanders and Brewster with neutralizing their puncher's chances. In reality nobody saw Klit being outboxed by anybody, except Fury.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:06

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 12:54

Billy Tully wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 12:43

Wlad developed a different safety-first style but the Sanders and Brewster who beat him would beat him any time. Styles make fights and Haye, Povetkin and Chagaev, and ibragimov for that matter, are different styles to Sanders and Brewster. Haye, Chag and Ibragimov trying to win by potshotting was never going to work and Povetkin, well... the referee let Wlad initiate 300+ illegal holds that night.

There's no way Wlad 2 doesn't get in trouble at some point in a 12 rounder against Sanders with his aggression, hand speed, huge power, long reach and two-fisted attacks. Sanders is always going to liquidate him.

Sanders wins Wlad in 12-rounder... Sanders in a f*cking 12-rounder... Oh dear... His chances are only in the first 4 rounds FFS.

Sanders used a puncher's chance against Klit. Yes, he would always have a one, but always no more than that. And Brewster was even worse.

'Styles make fights' can work in opposite direction. It's possible to say, that Povetkin, Haye and Chagaev would KO the pre-Steward Klit. In reality they all lost. It's possible to say, that the pre-Steward Klit would win Sanders and Brewster with neutralizing their puncher's chances. In reality nobody saw Klit being outboxed by anybody, except Fury.

He didn't really get outboxed by Fury either. He stared real hard, and Fury boxed a wee bit which was enough to win a staring contest. There wasn't too much Boxing to be seen in that "fight"

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:13 Outboxing a guy that simply doesn't fight back is only so impressive though. It's one of the worst fights of all time, and really isn't as impressive an achievement as it should be. That'll forever be my opinion of that fight.

Both fighters came out looking lesser, nobody came out of that fight looking better than they went in.

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:17

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:13 Outboxing a guy that simply doesn't fight back is only so impressive though. It's one of the worst fights of all time, and really isn't as impressive an achievement as it should be. That'll forever be my opinion of that fight.

Both fighters came out looking lesser, nobody came out of that fight looking better than they went in.

It depends on the circumstaces. If that guy was known as a ballet dancer or tennis player, than yes. If he was universally recognized as an undisputed heavyweight champion in the sport of boxing, than it's different, isn't it?

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:13 Outboxing a guy that simply doesn't fight back is only so impressive though. It's one of the worst fights of all time, and really isn't as impressive an achievement as it should be. That'll forever be my opinion of that fight.

Both fighters came out looking lesser, nobody came out of that fight looking better than they went in.

Fury was actually smart to "retire" for a few years after that. Give people a chance to forget how awful that fight was, and only leave them with the memory that he's the Champion.

To his credit he's been more exciting since he's come back. It'd be impossible not to be.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:20

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:17

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:13 Outboxing a guy that simply doesn't fight back is only so impressive though. It's one of the worst fights of all time, and really isn't as impressive an achievement as it should be. That'll forever be my opinion of that fight.

Both fighters came out looking lesser, nobody came out of that fight looking better than they went in.

It depends on the circumstaces. If that guy was known as a ballet dancer or tennis player, than yes. If he was universally recognized as an undisputed heavyweight champion in the sport of boxing, than it's different, isn't it?

If Fury had beaten him in a fight, then yes it'd be different. He won a staring contest though. So it really wasn't impressive at all.

He "outboxed" Wlad. By at one point leaning in the corner, both arms outstretched on the top ropes...Wlad looked at him, didn't throw a punch.

That's the story of the fight to me. Wlad just f*cking looking at an open target.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:25 It's definitely been better for the sport overall that Fury won that fight, and became Champion that day. So I'm not upset by the result as time goes on, but I'll never be impressed by it.

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:29

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:25 It's definitely been better for the sport overall that Fury won that fight, and became Champion that day. So I'm not upset by the result as time goes on, but I'll never be impressed by it.

I'll be always impressed by it, because it was the first time ever, when I was watching live, how someone was winning a round after round against Klit. I've become a fan of Fury since that majestic moment.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:30

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:29

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:25 It's definitely been better for the sport overall that Fury won that fight, and became Champion that day. So I'm not upset by the result as time goes on, but I'll never be impressed by it.

I'll be always impressed by it, because it was the first time ever, when I was watching live, how someone was winning a round after round against Klit. I've become a fan of Fury since that majestic moment.

Corrie Sanders won every round against Klit. Way, way, way, way more impressively too.

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:33

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:30

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:29

I'll be always impressed by it, because it was the first time ever, when I was watching live, how someone was winning a round after round against Klit. I've become a fan of Fury since that majestic moment.

Corrie Sanders won every round against Klit. Way, way, way, way more impressively too.

By that moment Klit obviously wasn't that important, so I wasn't giving much f*ck about him, that's why for me it's not that cool, although I have to admit, it was more spectacular.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:35

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:33

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:30

Corrie Sanders won every round against Klit. Way, way, way, way more impressively too.

By that moment Klit obviously wasn't that important, so I wasn't giving much f*ck about him, that's why for me it's not that cool, although I have to admit, it was more spectacular.

He was the #1 contender, and considered the "Heir Apparent" to Lennox Lewis. So he was a pretty big deal still at the time. He was the WBO Heavyweight Champion too, but back then nobody gave a f*ck about the WBO...which is something they should've kept up

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:37

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:35

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:33

By that moment Klit obviously wasn't that important, so I wasn't giving much f*ck about him, that's why for me it's not that cool, although I have to admit, it was more spectacular.

He was the #1 contender, and considered the "Heir Apparent" to Lennox Lewis. So he was a pretty big deal still at the time. He was the WBO Heavyweight Champion too, but back then nobody gave a f*ck about the WBO...which is something they should've kept up

Yes, he wasn't totally meaningless, but obviously people started to hate him massively only after he started to defend the major championship time after time in the lackluster fashion.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:39

DrDuke wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:37

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:35

He was the #1 contender, and considered the "Heir Apparent" to Lennox Lewis. So he was a pretty big deal still at the time. He was the WBO Heavyweight Champion too, but back then nobody gave a f*ck about the WBO...which is something they should've kept up

Yes, he wasn't totally meaningless, but obviously people started to hate him massively only after he started to defend the major championship time after time in the lackluster fashion.

I loved Wlad as Champ. He KO'd the majority of his opponents. I didn't consider him boring for the most part. Tactical, sure, but not boring.

That being said he was actually more exciting to watch in 2004 on back because he was more vulnerable, and also more aggressive, but obviously the adjustments he made were necessary for the long term success he had so I can't fault him for it.

gilgamesh wrote: ↑27 Apr 2022, 13:50 I always liked Wlad. I don't recall ever rooting against him. He always came across to me as a really intelligent, and likable person aside from being a good fighter.