BoxRec

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 06:38**

expe wrote:
CiganoBoxer wrote:Anyone else love seeing pain in the hearts of the Tyson Fury hater brigade when they read these negative comments on him ?
I personally love it

Finn got it right when he said that they don't understand boxing. Complaining that the fight wasn't entertaining, and? No one's calling it fight of the year, the only other realistic contender wasn't exactly involved in a couple of barnburners himself.

As for the other candidates suggested.

Postol - Since when is beating Lucas Matthyse better than beating Wladimir Klitschko?

Golovkin - Looked good as usual but Murray, Monroe and Lemieux isn't exactly fighter of the year opposition.

Alvarez - Beat Kirkland and Cotto. Kirkland has never lived up to the hype around him and Cotto's been on the slide for years now, good year for him but not FOTY.

Frampton - Getting laughable now, looked superb against Avalos, then down twice in the first round against an unproven Gonzalez and looked far from his best in the rest of the fight. Wasn't even Irish fighter of the year.

DeGale - Beat Dirrell, but made it hard for himself after a great start, then a similar performance against a shot Bute. Didn't beat Dirrell in his backyard either as claimed, he beat him in an empty arena in Boston, 650 miles from Dirrell's hometown, it's the equivalent of an American coming over here and beating Lee Haskins in the Shetland Islands.

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 06:48**

expe wrote:
CiganoBoxer wrote:Anyone else love seeing pain in the hearts of the Tyson Fury hater brigade when they read these negative comments on him ?
I personally love it

Finn got it right when he said that they don't understand boxing. Complaining that the fight wasn't entertaining, and? No one's calling it fight of the year, the only other realistic contender wasn't exactly involved in a couple of barnburners himself.

As for the other candidates suggested.

Postol - Since when is beating Lucas Matthyse better than beating Wladimir Klitschko?

Golovkin - Looked good as usual but Murray, Monroe and Lemieux isn't exactly fighter of the year opposition.

Alvarez - Beat Kirkland and Cotto. Kirkland has never lived up to the hype around him and Cotto's been on the slide for years now, good year for him but not FOTY.

Frampton - Getting laughable now, looked superb against Avalos, then down twice in the first round against an unproven Gonzalez and looked far from his best in the rest of the fight. Wasn't even Irish fighter of the year.

DeGale - Beat Dirrell, but made it hard for himself after a great start, then a similar performance against a shot Bute. Didn't beat Dirrell in his backyard either as claimed, he beat him in an empty arena in Boston, 650 miles from Dirrell's hometown, it's the equivalent of an American coming over here and beating Lee Haskins in the Shetland Islands.

Read my last comment back to finn,according to u and finn its the art of hitting and not getting hit right? So shouldnt floyd mayweather of won it the last quarter of a century? And dirrell is a yank is he not? So when,say callum smith fights for a world title against a yank in the 02 is this not classed as smith getting home advantage? I understand boxing alot pal what i dont understand is how fury won foty when he only had two fights in 2015 and ok one was against klitsckho but was that fight worthy of him winning foty? Imo NO. Its a forum were ppl discuss topics right? Like i said david haye went to valuev's base and stripped him.of his title against the odds according u,finn and the likes of haye should of been foty that year then

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 06:55**

ShadrachSimmo wrote:I have no problem with Fury whatsoever I've taken to liking him the last few years he's good for heavyweight boxing.

But fighter of the year? Would they have given the award to Wlad if he had won? Probably not there are more deserving fighters.

Exactly i was thinking this before,but oscar de la hoya isnt a fan of wlad and he is the owner of the ring magazine so there is not a chance in hell wlad would ever pick up foty. To me FIGHTER OF THE YEAR is someone who has had the most fights at a decent level came thru them been involved in good fights,and showed of their boxing ability in the process not that garbage i seen in november,well done to fury for sticking to his game plan that night btw and im not hating on him i just dont hink he was foty,nowt wrong in this is ther?

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 08:10**

thechump wrote:To me FIGHTER OF THE YEAR is someone who has had the most fights at a decent level came thru them been involved in good fights,

Could be that in some years, but clearly this year The Ring selected the fighter who had the biggest impact on the sport. A different criterion to that preferred by you.

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 09:05**

Would have gone with Gonzalez personally, two top wins and helped bring "the little men" back to HBO. Fury had the better single win though

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 09:18**

Nightmare Roy wrote:
Finn wrote:
thechump wrote: A fvckin men,this is a joke no wonder boxing is losing its appeal to the general public. I cant believe ppl think he was the ring magazine fighter of the year,id love to hear their reason as to why he is
Sounds like 2 posters on here don't actually understand boxing!
Yeah that's a classic Tyson only won because Vlad did less? That's pretty much how boxing works isn't it?

So I don't understand boxing because I don't agree with you? Ok. I'm not a Tyson fan, I think he's a clumsy oaf who spent his entire career being protected. Now I'll accept beating Vlad for the titles was an amazing achievement & fair play to him for his success

But it's Rings "Fighter" of the year. Not boxer. Not achievement. Not tactician. But fighter, Tyson Fury has not had a fight this year, great or otherwise. If Rings want to change it to Achievement of the year then fair enough then I say give him the award. But the word "fighter" has certain connotations in this sport & giving it to Tyson because he did just enough in a boring fight where neither engaged or looked like they wanted to be there is a joke.

Also people are talking like Fury gave some amazing display of hitting without being hit like he was Roy Jones Jr in his prime or something. He didn't. Have you seen the punch stats for the fight from both guys? Just laughable & yet we're meant to accept he's "fighter" of the year because a few guys on here have suddenly decided they like him now & anyone who doesn't isn't a boxing fan.

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 09:22**

It is a bit ridiculous that someone who landed less than 100 punches over 12 rounds gets an award for 'Fighter of the Year'. Fury had a great win, but it was not a great performance at all.

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 09:23**

It was a monumental achievement by Fury and nice to see this recognised.

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 09:34**

Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015!

Yeah, sounds right that one. Well deserved.

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 09:41**

Well done Tyson!

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 09:57**

moogie101 wrote:I assume the ones who agree with this are doing so purely out of patriotism?

Whilst beating Vlad was certainly a great achievement he did very little & really only won because Vlad did even less.

Far better boxers did far more & managed to do it in exciting fights. Calling him the fighter of the year is a joke.

so winning the undisputed heavy weight belt from a fighter that had been dominate for a decade is a joke .....

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 10:11**

Boxerbeetle wrote:It is a bit ridiculous that someone who landed less than 100 punches over 12 rounds gets an award for 'Fighter of the Year'. Fury had a great win, but it was not a great performance at all.

It really was a great performance.

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 10:32**

Boxerbeetle wrote:It is a bit ridiculous that someone who landed less than 100 punches over 12 rounds gets an award for 'Fighter of the Year'. Fury had a great win, but it was not a great performance at all.

You better watch it,if u dont agree with him getting this award you will be accussed of nit knowing anything about boxing,just sayin

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 10:34**

I agree there are a few people on here that dont understand boxing but its the ones that think he deserves this award that havent got a clue about boxing

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 10:38**

stevedoc wrote:
moogie101 wrote:I assume the ones who agree with this are doing so purely out of patriotism?

Whilst beating Vlad was certainly a great achievement he did very little & really only won because Vlad did even less.

Far better boxers did far more & managed to do it in exciting fights. Calling him the fighter of the year is a joke.
so winning the undisputed heavy weight belt from a fighter that had been dominate for a decade is a joke .....

Can you not read or just constantly looking to argue?

I stated quite clearly it was a "great achievement" to win the titles, but I have an issue with him being called fighter of the year. I think my main issue is with the word "fighter". But I can't keep saying the same thing over & again, maybe I could have your carer's details see if they can explain it to you in a way you might understand. Perhaps a picture book?

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 11:09**

moogie101 wrote:
stevedoc wrote:
moogie101 wrote:I assume the ones who agree with this are doing so purely out of patriotism?

Whilst beating Vlad was certainly a great achievement he did very little & really only won because Vlad did even less.

Far better boxers did far more & managed to do it in exciting fights. Calling him the fighter of the year is a joke.
so winning the undisputed heavy weight belt from a fighter that had been dominate for a decade is a joke .....
Can you not read or just constantly looking to argue?

I stated quite clearly it was a "great achievement" to win the titles, but I have an issue with him being called fighter of the year. I think my main issue is with the word "fighter". But I can't keep saying the same thing over & again, maybe I could have your carer's details see if they can explain it to you in a way you might understand. Perhaps a picture book?

Totally agree with you

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 12:05**

The way I see it is this, nobody myself included gave him a chance, he went to Germany and schooled the undisputed champion who had dominated for over a decade. It would be like Billy Joe Saunders going to Kasashstan and putting it on GGG, that's how big of an upset it was.

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 12:21**

moogie101 wrote:
stevedoc wrote:
moogie101 wrote:I assume the ones who agree with this are doing so purely out of patriotism?

Whilst beating Vlad was certainly a great achievement he did very little & really only won because Vlad did even less.

Far better boxers did far more & managed to do it in exciting fights. Calling him the fighter of the year is a joke.
so winning the undisputed heavy weight belt from a fighter that had been dominate for a decade is a joke .....
Can you not read or just constantly looking to argue?

I stated quite clearly it was a "great achievement" to win the titles, but I have an issue with him being called fighter of the year. I think my main issue is with the word "fighter". But I can't keep saying the same thing over & again, maybe I could have your carer's details see if they can explain it to you in a way you might understand. Perhaps a picture book?

If you wasn't such a brain dead idiot you would realise that fighter is just a term for boxer, or should it go to cage fighter ir maybe a soldier? Pricks like you should f@ck off from this site you can't have a discussion you just try to insult when someone else has a different opion than you .anyways I haven't got time for this bollox as I'm packing to go to the Caribbean tonight and tomorrow I'll be lying in my hammock drinking a cold beer and you'll still be a unimportant weasel

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 12:33**

moogie101 wrote:I assume the ones who agree with this are doing so purely out of patriotism?

Whilst beating Vlad was certainly a great achievement he did very little & really only won because Vlad did even less.

Far better boxers did far more & managed to do it in exciting fights. Calling him the fighter of the year is a joke.

Fair point. I was actually congratulating him as I was glad to see him getting judged on boxing and not his personal beliefs but what you say is totally correct.

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 12:40**

stevedoc wrote:
moogie101 wrote:
stevedoc wrote:
so winning the undisputed heavy weight belt from a fighter that had been dominate for a decade is a joke .....
Can you not read or just constantly looking to argue?

I stated quite clearly it was a "great achievement" to win the titles, but I have an issue with him being called fighter of the year. I think my main issue is with the word "fighter". But I can't keep saying the same thing over & again, maybe I could have your carer's details see if they can explain it to you in a way you might understand. Perhaps a picture book?
If you wasn't such a brain dead idiot you would realise that fighter is just a term for boxer, or should it go to cage fighter ir maybe a soldier? Pricks like you should f@ck off from this site you can't have a discussion you just try to insult when someone else has a different opion than you .anyways I haven't got time for this bollox as I'm packing to go to the Caribbean tonight and tomorrow I'll be lying in my hammock drinking a cold beer and you'll still be a unimportant weasel

Thats not very nice is it steve? As far as i can see people think anyone who disagrees with fury winning this award doesnt know boxing,is this not the same way as you just said moogie is doing? Disagreeing with you? Then u insult him by name calling,he said if you dont understand he will draw you a picture. Fighter of the year means he was the fighter am i right? It doesnt say fighter who upsets the divison or done what people didnt think he would do,and tbh he isnt the best heavyweight in the division and when he faces deontay wilder or ruiz people will see this,his tactics in germany wont work on deontay

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 12:45**

thechump wrote:
stevedoc wrote:
moogie101 wrote:
Can you not read or just constantly looking to argue?

I stated quite clearly it was a "great achievement" to win the titles, but I have an issue with him being called fighter of the year. I think my main issue is with the word "fighter". But I can't keep saying the same thing over & again, maybe I could have your carer's details see if they can explain it to you in a way you might understand. Perhaps a picture book?
If you wasn't such a brain dead idiot you would realise that fighter is just a term for boxer, or should it go to cage fighter ir maybe a soldier? Pricks like you should f@ck off from this site you can't have a discussion you just try to insult when someone else has a different opion than you .anyways I haven't got time for this bollox as I'm packing to go to the Caribbean tonight and tomorrow I'll be lying in my hammock drinking a cold beer and you'll still be a unimportant weasel
Thats not very nice is it steve? As far as i can see people think anyone who disagrees with fury winning this award doesnt know boxing,is this not the same way as you just said moogie is doing? Disagreeing with you? Then u insult him by name calling,he said if you dont understand he will draw you a picture. Fighter of the year means he was the fighter am i right? It doesnt say fighter who upsets the divison or done what people didnt think he would do,and tbh he isnt the best heavyweight in the division and when he faces deontay wilder or ruiz people will see this,his tactics in germany wont work on deontay

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 12:48**

thechump wrote:
stevedoc wrote:
moogie101 wrote:
Can you not read or just constantly looking to argue?

I stated quite clearly it was a "great achievement" to win the titles, but I have an issue with him being called fighter of the year. I think my main issue is with the word "fighter". But I can't keep saying the same thing over & again, maybe I could have your carer's details see if they can explain it to you in a way you might understand. Perhaps a picture book?
If you wasn't such a brain dead idiot you would realise that fighter is just a term for boxer, or should it go to cage fighter ir maybe a soldier? Pricks like you should f@ck off from this site you can't have a discussion you just try to insult when someone else has a different opion than you .anyways I haven't got time for this bollox as I'm packing to go to the Caribbean tonight and tomorrow I'll be lying in my hammock drinking a cold beer and you'll still be a unimportant weasel
Thats not very nice is it steve? As far as i can see people think anyone who disagrees with fury winning this award doesnt know boxing,is this not the same way as you just said moogie is doing? Disagreeing with you? Then u insult him by name calling,he said if you dont understand he will draw you a picture. Fighter of the year means he was the fighter am i right? It doesnt say fighter who upsets the divison or done what people didnt think he would do,and tbh he isnt the best heavyweight in the division and when he faces deontay wilder or ruiz people will see this,his tactics in germany wont work on deontay

did i start the insults? no i didn't! i guess asking for carers details wasn't an insult ?

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 12:51**

stevedoc wrote:
moogie101 wrote:
stevedoc wrote:
so winning the undisputed heavy weight belt from a fighter that had been dominate for a decade is a joke .....
Can you not read or just constantly looking to argue?

I stated quite clearly it was a "great achievement" to win the titles, but I have an issue with him being called fighter of the year. I think my main issue is with the word "fighter". But I can't keep saying the same thing over & again, maybe I could have your carer's details see if they can explain it to you in a way you might understand. Perhaps a picture book?
If you wasn't such a brain dead idiot you would realise that fighter is just a term for boxer, or should it go to cage fighter ir maybe a soldier? Pricks like you should f@ck off from this site you can't have a discussion you just try to insult when someone else has a different opion than you .anyways I haven't got time for this bollox as I'm packing to go to the Caribbean tonight and tomorrow I'll be lying in my hammock drinking a cold beer and you'll still be a unimportant weasel

Blah blah blah. You started the insults because apparently you know better than anyone else & then you get upset that people didn't agree with you & I replied in kind. Get over yourself. People like you are what ruins forums, prepared to have a pop & then when someone has a go back you have a little cry about it. Clearly touched a nerve.

The argument I'm making about the term "fighter" is clearly lost on you & yet I'm the brain-dead idiot?

Anyway enjoy your made up holiday, hope the imaginary sun doesn't burn you too much. This unimportant weasel is looking forward to my postcard, no doubt hand drawn with wax crayons.

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 12:52**

stevedoc wrote:
thechump wrote:
stevedoc wrote:
If you wasn't such a brain dead idiot you would realise that fighter is just a term for boxer, or should it go to cage fighter ir maybe a soldier? Pricks like you should f@ck off from this site you can't have a discussion you just try to insult when someone else has a different opion than you .anyways I haven't got time for this bollox as I'm packing to go to the Caribbean tonight and tomorrow I'll be lying in my hammock drinking a cold beer and you'll still be a unimportant weasel
Thats not very nice is it steve? As far as i can see people think anyone who disagrees with fury winning this award doesnt know boxing,is this not the same way as you just said moogie is doing? Disagreeing with you? Then u insult him by name calling,he said if you dont understand he will draw you a picture. Fighter of the year means he was the fighter am i right? It doesnt say fighter who upsets the divison or done what people didnt think he would do,and tbh he isnt the best heavyweight in the division and when he faces deontay wilder or ruiz people will see this,his tactics in germany wont work on deontay
did i start the insults? no i didn't! i guess asking for carers details wasn't an insult ?

I thought you were meant to be packing?

Posted: **12 Jan 2016, 12:54**

moogie101 wrote:
stevedoc wrote:
thechump wrote: Thats not very nice is it steve? As far as i can see people think anyone who disagrees with fury winning this award doesnt know boxing,is this not the same way as you just said moogie is doing? Disagreeing with you? Then u insult him by name calling,he said if you dont understand he will draw you a picture. Fighter of the year means he was the fighter am i right? It doesnt say fighter who upsets the divison or done what people didnt think he would do,and tbh he isnt the best heavyweight in the division and when he faces deontay wilder or ruiz people will see this,his tactics in germany wont work on deontay
did i start the insults? no i didn't! i guess asking for carers details wasn't an insult ?
I thought you were meant to be packing?

all done only need a few pairs of shorts and t-shirts

BoxRec

Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !

Re: Tyson Fury RING magazine fighter of the year 2015 !