BoxRec

Haven't had time to watch it myself, but his team have now posted up this interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SZSTzToGGLY

crusader wrote:I'd still favor Clev against all but a few light heavyweights, at least if he's not shattered by such a hard loss. I think it's an issue of Kovalev being especially good, not of Clev being unable to cut it at world level. Campillo was coming off what should have been a title win over Cloud, and he was arguably beaten more convincingly by Kovalev than Clev was, and Murat and Bellew are mixing it at world level and Clev beat each of them fairly.

I'd like to see him continue, at least if his heart is in it.

Don't really get this. Cleverly never really had anything going for him as a fighter. Brawler with no power or real effectiveness offensively (or defensively). Basically the boxing equivalent of a fat girl with no tits. I don't see him beating anyone in Boxrec's top ten apart from Bellew (no idea why he's there though) and maybe Fonfara, but Fonfara isn't very good.

Fair play to Nathan very honest but shows he's not a fighter or champion by heart. A real fighter says 'I'll be back soon, I want a rematch etc' Nathan knows his out of his depth

MachoMan09 wrote:

danconnollyeire wrote:Fair play to Nathan very honest but shows he's not a fighter or champion by heart. A real fighter says 'I'll be back soon, I want a rematch etc' Nathan knows his out of his depth

Just because a lot of boxers either are or pretend to be irrational and non-objective doesn't mean it's a mandatory requirement.

I never said said that, I said Nathan doesn't come across as someone with a true fighters spirit

danconnollyeire wrote:

MachoMan09 wrote:

danconnollyeire wrote:Fair play to Nathan very honest but shows he's not a fighter or champion by heart. A real fighter says 'I'll be back soon, I want a rematch etc' Nathan knows his out of his depth

Just because a lot of boxers either are or pretend to be irrational and non-objective doesn't mean it's a mandatory requirement.

I never said said that, I said Nathan doesn't come across as someone with a true fighters spirit

He is very downbeat at the moment look what he says when/if he comes back then you can see if he is for real, but as we all know he doesn't need boxing and after being a world champion, it's up to him to decide if he thinks he can get to that level again.

Basically the boxing equivalent of a fat girl with no tits.

That's the harshest critique of a boxer I've ever heard !

columbo wrote:

Anzi wrote:unusual for a fighter after such a defeat to give an interview like this, he was honest about his loss.

Reminded me a lot of the interview Price done recently aswell.

both done by tris dixon at boxing news, who clearly has the respect of the boxers and they are willing to open up to him, even in their most difficult times.

MachoMan09 wrote:You are implying that he's not a real fighter.

No, not by heart. He's an extremely skillful athlete which is why he has got to where he is. He doesn't have the same mind set as someone like Froch

JimJim2009 wrote:Basically the boxing equivalent of a fat girl with no tits.

That's the harshest critique of a boxer I've ever heard !

Is a fat girl with no tits worse than an ugly bird with a poor body?

veriton wrote:

columbo wrote:

Anzi wrote:unusual for a fighter after such a defeat to give an interview like this, he was honest about his loss.

Reminded me a lot of the interview Price done recently aswell.

both done by tris dixon at boxing news, who clearly has the respect of the boxers and they are willing to open up to him, even in their most difficult times.

Yeah good stuff from Tris!

MachoMan09 wrote:You are implying that he's not a real fighter.

I think he is saying he doesn't have the 'winning mentality' and the unshakeable self belief which comes with it. Clev seems to have given up a bit.

forcefraser wrote:

JimJim2009 wrote:Basically the boxing equivalent of a fat girl with no tits.

That's the harshest critique of a boxer I've ever heard !

Is a fat girl with no tits worse than an ugly bird with a poor body?

Find out yourself you virg!
Lol!

columbo wrote:

Anzi wrote:unusual for a fighter after such a defeat to give an interview like this, he was honest about his loss.

Reminded me a lot of the interview Price done recently aswell.

And me - the only difference being that Cleverly was almost immediately after his fight and he was still full of emotion whilst Price had time to reflect on his fight.

I may be wrong, but I don't see either Price or Cleverly operationg at world level again (they might have a "comeback" against much lower opposition but then fizzle out).

I take one Cleverley for your ten Bellews

Riddick Blowe wrote:
Don't really get this. Cleverly never really had anything going for him as a fighter. Brawler with no power or real effectiveness offensively (or defensively). Basically the boxing equivalent of a fat girl with no tits. I don't see him beating anyone in Boxrec's top ten apart from Bellew (no idea why he's there though) and maybe Fonfara, but Fonfara isn't very good.

A brawler with no power and not real effective defensively..... depends on the definition and the level, but Calzaghe and Froch have both had those things put against them, they ended up pretty good champions.

I think had Calzaghe who fought Reid, faced Kovalev....might have been curtains for Joe also. Lets not be too harsh on Clev - he's proven himself as belonging in the top 10 at least. He just fought a huge puncher.

Riddick Blowe wrote:

crusader wrote:I'd still favor Clev against all but a few light heavyweights, at least if he's not shattered by such a hard loss. I think it's an issue of Kovalev being especially good, not of Clev being unable to cut it at world level. Campillo was coming off what should have been a title win over Cloud, and he was arguably beaten more convincingly by Kovalev than Clev was, and Murat and Bellew are mixing it at world level and Clev beat each of them fairly.

I'd like to see him continue, at least if his heart is in it.

Don't really get this. Cleverly never really had anything going for him as a fighter. Brawler with no power or real effectiveness offensively (or defensively). Basically the boxing equivalent of a fat girl with no tits. I don't see him beating anyone in Boxrec's top ten apart from Bellew (no idea why he's there though) and maybe Fonfara, but Fonfara isn't very good.

He's got a high work rate, good speed and stamina, and at least a decent chin. That enabled him to easily sweep through British level, beat Euro level opponents comfortably, and fairly defeat opponents like Bellew and Murat, who were then or were recently ranked in the top 10 by credible sources .

Within BoxRec's top 10, I could see him beating Bellew (already did), Fonfara (decent power, slow, easy to hit, was losing after 6 rounds to Karpency), Alvarez (promising but green; had more problems with Hawk than Cleverly did), Cloud (easy to hit, not very fast, fights in spots and thus can be outworked, heavy hands but needs to wear opponents down), and maybe Bute (struggles with busy opponents and the very competitive fight with Grachev suggests to me that he's not the same since Froch). I'd also favor Cleverly over several guys just outside BoxRec's top 10, such as Enzo, Chilemba, and Braehmer, though I think the latter would be very dangerous.

To me, being among the best 2 or 3 in one's division isn't a precondition for being world class; there are still gradations within that level. Clev is not an elite fighter, but I think he's comfortably among the 10 best at 175, at least until seeing if he's regressed due to the loss.

bottom line is that Nathan cleverly is a poor mans Clinton woods

danconnollyeire wrote:Fair play to Nathan very honest but shows he's not a fighter or champion by heart. A real fighter says 'I'll be back soon, I want a rematch etc' Nathan knows his out of his depth

thats just utter crap. clev might not be the best fighter in the world, but the guy has been a fighter since he was a child. plenty of great fighters have made negative comments after a defeat, but that doesnt mean they are not real fighters. anyone who gets in the ring, never mind gets to world level, is a fighter. by your definition there must only be a very small number of " real " fighters out there. by your logic , the great roberto duran is not a real fighter cos he packed it in against srl.
being a pro fighter ,especially at high level, is no cakewalk. thats why its called the hardest game. takes years of hard graft, physical and mental stress , and thats just before the fights.

stujones wrote:
A brawler with no power and not real effective defensively..... depends on the definition and the level, but Calzaghe and Froch have both had those things put against them, they ended up pretty good champions.

Froch and Calzaghe were routinely stopping guys, and easily, at the level Cleverly has operated. Their power was only found wanting at the highest level, and even then they could still command respect with their power: think Calzaghe stopping Kessler in his tracks with a body shot, Froch turning Abraham into a shell for 12 rounds. Crucially they had other tools to win: Froch's iron chin, unbeatable heart, top stamina, good jab, effective combination punching, good punch artillery and underrated ringcraft. Calzaghe with all those plus volume punching, speed, and a better defence and better movement than Froch.

Cleverly will never be half the fighter those two were/are. Night and day. And for people saying you don't need to be top 3 to be considered world class, Clinton Woods was a good example of a solid top 10 guy, and I seriously don't think Cleverly would have beaten him.

Cleverly's current rating of 18 on Boxrec seems about right to me.

Do you think Froch would have beaten Cleverly had they fought, RB?

SNG wrote:Do you think Froch would have beaten Cleverly had they fought, RB?

Why do you goad me so, DD?

Riddick Blowe wrote:

SNG wrote:Do you think Froch would have beaten Cleverly had they fought, RB?

Why do you goad me so, DD?

I'm not goading you, I'm asking you a serious question. Do you think Froch has the boxing ability or power to have moved up and beaten him when he was champion?

SNG wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

SNG wrote:Do you think Froch would have beaten Cleverly had they fought, RB?

Why do you goad me so, DD?

I'm not goading you, I'm asking you a serious question. Do you think Froch has the boxing ability or power to have moved up and beaten him when he was champion?

You are being disingenuous.

DMA1987 wrote: You are being disingenuous.

Oh, I am, am I? And how's that exactly?

SNG wrote:

Riddick Blowe wrote:

SNG wrote:Do you think Froch would have beaten Cleverly had they fought, RB?

Why do you goad me so, DD?

I'm not goading you, I'm asking you a serious question. Do you think Froch has the boxing ability or power to have moved up and beaten him when he was champion?

Give over! How could you read my post and not know if I would pick Froch over Cleverly? Did you think the 7lb weight difference is enough to sway my opinion?