Page 3 of 3

Re: United Kingdom's historcial all time greats.

Posted: 03 Jan 2016, 06:38
by Ezzard
Tuan_Jim wrote:
FrozenMixedVegtables wrote:
Tuan_Jim wrote:
Doesn't surprise me in the slightest. You only need to read the OP to get an idea of the IQ and breadth of boxing knowledge of the common Calzaghe fan. Ask them when the super-middleweight division began, that'll give you a laugh.
I've seen it all mate :lol:

It was that bad that at one time Ken was chatting to a couple of fans that recognised him and a C celeb called Stato walked past and got a massive cheer from the crowd. This Stato twat done gambling advising on a couple of popular football shows in the UK years back. This was his only fame. It proves that most boxing fans that go to fights are really football fans.
That's always been my impression, at the fights.
It's changed a lot. Boxing fans used to be knowledgeable. Still are but those types are harder to find.

No doubt everyone and their grandma's dog thinks they know everything about football.

But i remember being about 12-13 going to the chip shops with mates and discussing how Frank Bruno was going to be the world champ...it was a foregone conclusion to us. The owner told us how there was no way Bruno would beat Larry Holmes. the way he spoke impressed me. he was just a chip shop owner but spoke so well on the subject of boxing.

Not long after I was introduced to my uncles collection of The Ring from back in the 50s and 60s. Read almost a decade's worth over the course of the month.

Re: United Kingdom's historcial all time greats.

Posted: 03 Jan 2016, 07:40
by Tuan_Jim
Bodyshot3 wrote:
Only in the WBO division, not the real world championship division. Hence the world not giving much of a toss about him. There's a lot of 90s boxers who opted to fight for WBO titles and seem miffed now by their lack of veneration from boxing fans.
That's being a tad harsh on Duke Tuan, some of the WBO fights were against folk like Canizales and Benavides and were not against roadsweepers.
Duke also held the IBF title at flyweight. Let's cut the guy a break...he was actually very, very good indeed.

I stand corrected on the three weight achievement....although it is still an achievement Duke should be proud about.
You're right, probably a bit too harsh on my part.

Re: United Kingdom's historcial all time greats.

Posted: 03 Jan 2016, 11:30
by keithmoonhangover
Tuan_Jim wrote:He's making a prize fool of himself across a number of threads. He seems young and very new to boxing. His opinions all seem to be based on skimming Boxrec records and reading Wikipedia.
:roll:

What do you base your opinion of Deontay Wilder carrying too much bulk on? Wikipedia? Skimming Boxrec? If you're wrong, at least be man enough to admit it.

Re: United Kingdom's historcial all time greats.

Posted: 03 Jan 2016, 12:23
by Tuan_Jim
keithmoonhangover wrote:
Tuan_Jim wrote:He's making a prize fool of himself across a number of threads. He seems young and very new to boxing. His opinions all seem to be based on skimming Boxrec records and reading Wikipedia.
:roll:

What do you base your opinion of Deontay Wilder carrying too much bulk on? Wikipedia? Skimming Boxrec? If you're wrong, at least be man enough to admit it.
If you don't think Wilder's top heavy then eye sight can be added to your many other problems. 90% of his bulk is deposited on one third of his body.

Coming out with your 'be a man' spiel sounds ultra tragic in light of your cringe-worthy skirting of the BOWE SIGNED TO FIGHT LEWIS thread.

Re: United Kingdom's historcial all time greats.

Posted: 03 Jan 2016, 13:39
by keithmoonhangover
Tuan_Jim wrote:
keithmoonhangover wrote:
Tuan_Jim wrote:He's making a prize fool of himself across a number of threads. He seems young and very new to boxing. His opinions all seem to be based on skimming Boxrec records and reading Wikipedia.
:roll:

What do you base your opinion of Deontay Wilder carrying too much bulk on? Wikipedia? Skimming Boxrec? If you're wrong, at least be man enough to admit it.
If you don't think Wilder's top heavy then eye sight can be added to your many other problems. 90% of his bulk is deposited on one third of his body.

Coming out with your 'be a man' spiel sounds ultra tragic in light of your cringe-worthy skirting of the BOWE SIGNED TO FIGHT LEWIS thread.
Wilder's carrying too much bulk. :lol: :lol:

Re: United Kingdom's historcial all time greats.

Posted: 03 Jan 2016, 13:57
by banjo
Stevieb8006 wrote:It's tough when there's little footage of Jim Driscoll, Jimmy Wilde etc.

Conteh and honeyghan are always overlooked in these type of threads
Conteh was superb at his peak, sadly brittle hands and his playboy lifestyle had him retired by the age of 30. His 15 round schooling of the tough Yaqui Lopez with one hand because his other was broken makes a mockery of fighters who pull out with similar ailments.

Re: United Kingdom's historcial all time greats.

Posted: 03 Jan 2016, 16:08
by witherspoon
dr_devious wrote:I've seen enough of Hatton, Naz and Honeyghan to know that Lloyd isn't better than the other two, neither of whom would have been clowned by their divisions version of Marlon Starling. Seriously doubt that Winstone was better than Naz too
Naz got himself owned by Barrera, who probably rates higher than Starling p4p.

But neither guys list of wins includes a boxer as good as Marlon Starling, with the arguable exception of Kostya Tszyu, who was passed his best.

Re: United Kingdom's historcial all time greats.

Posted: 08 Jan 2016, 17:27
by dalcumly
Anybody who can beat Sugar Ray Robinson for the middleweight title has to be up there - Randolph Turpin.
Next , the best 'boxer' since the war, Ken Buchanan. Lennox Lewis and Calzaghe , yes. Unfortunately , Hamed also, arrogant little so and so.

Re: United Kingdom's historcial all time greats.

Posted: 11 Jan 2016, 15:13
by Bodyshot3
Anybody who can beat Sugar Ray Robinson for the middleweight title has to be up there - Randolph Turpin.
Next , the best 'boxer' since the war, Ken Buchanan. Lennox Lewis and Calzaghe , yes. Unfortunately , Hamed also, arrogant little so and so.
I'd agree, Turpin was really exceptional and it is worth noting that his seismic win over the Sugar Man really was not the whole story.

RT beat the presumably way bigger Don Cockell for the British/Commonwealth Light-Heavyweight titles, beat the outstanding Charles Humez to become a 2-time European middle king and went back to the states and gave Carl Olson a good 15-round fight in an effort to win the crown back.

There's also perhaps the key matter of the hard era Randy boxed-in and where he hailed from. We are talking about a pioneering 'coloured' fighter, from the English provinces who had to take his show on the road and win fights away from home.

Back when Randy was fighting his skin colour mattered (to others) and his hometwon of Leamington Spa was hardly a boxing hotbed. Randy did get his share of fights in nearby Coventry and Birmingham but by and and large he was a travelling fighter, forced to box in London.

The Turpin brothers - starting with his brother Dick - were the guys who got black boxing up and running in the UK and they did it despite plenty of prejudice and from humble beginnings. Just my opinion...but Randy beat lots of opponents in and out of the ring other than Robinson!