BoxRec

moogie101 wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:
Work rate? Have you seen the punch count for Fury/Klitschko?

So you've only watched one of his fights then? Also, he was still working even in that fight with constant movement. Fury has a great work rate for a big man

The way you talk him up I feel like we're talking about different fighters.

Genuinely can't see how someone who's watched a few of Fury's fights could come away describing him in such glowing terms but you're clearly a fan of his & fair play to you.

I'm not actually. Just see he clearly has talent. You don't beat wlad without it. Certainly not out boxing him. Gold medalist and that.

Stevieb8006 wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote: Good enough to bamboozle the linear champ of eleven years yes.

Who else has made wlad look so helpless (big punch withstanding)?

Linear champ of 11 years? 11 years ago Wladimir Klitschko had been left in tatters by Lamon Brewster. He didn't win the lineal title till he beat Povetkin in 2013. Is it 2024 already?

Oh I see, your trolling me. Fury beat the guy that's been considered top dog for eons. Fact. Name me one other that's come close to out boxing him please? Tell me a boxer that's won more than three rounds on the spin vs wlad since his last loss

Pointing out to you that you had added nine years onto Klitschko's lineal claim is 'trolling you'?

I honestly don't understand how your brain works.

mimmy123 wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:
Linear champ of 11 years? 11 years ago Wladimir Klitschko had been left in tatters by Lamon Brewster. He didn't win the lineal title till he beat Povetkin in 2013. Is it 2024 already?

Oh I see, your trolling me. Fury beat the guy that's been considered top dog for eons. Fact. Name me one other that's come close to out boxing him please? Tell me a boxer that's won more than three rounds on the spin vs wlad since his last loss

I dont think you can use the argument that no one has had a chanc ewith klit for 11 years. time catches up on us all im affraid. Klit was so bad in that fight. Fury deserved to win. My concern is Fury couldnt knock out a old guy who was past his best on the night.

Well that's a sensible point, yes I agree. But ultimately no one else has managed to do it or looked like they potentially would. I put to you my previous question. What fighter has won three rounds on the spin vs wlad since his last defeat before fury?

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:
Linear champ of 11 years? 11 years ago Wladimir Klitschko had been left in tatters by Lamon Brewster. He didn't win the lineal title till he beat Povetkin in 2013. Is it 2024 already?

Oh I see, your trolling me. Fury beat the guy that's been considered top dog for eons. Fact. Name me one other that's come close to out boxing him please? Tell me a boxer that's won more than three rounds on the spin vs wlad since his last loss

Pointing out to you that you had added nine years onto Klitschko's lineal claim is 'trolling you'?

I honestly don't understand how your brain works.

Fine then. You seem to be spoiling for a fight with me and I just don't indulge such nonsense online. Ultimately you haven't answered my question because you can't to fit your argument. Therefore you have your view and won't let facts get in the way. Good day to you.

mimmy123 wrote:A win is a win but it does not mean a great deal unless he defends it for 10 years which is very very doubtful.

It does not mean a great deal unless he defends it for 10 years. WHAT. THE. FECK. ARE. YOU. TALKING. ABOUT.

Excuse the shouting but that is enough for me to disregard most of what you have to say. That has literally no logic whatsoever. His win does not mean much unless he defends it for 10 years?! I am literally speechless.

What the living fcuk has ten years got to do with anything?

So if he fights, and knocks out in the first round, AJ, Deontay, Klit in a rematch, Parker, Povetkin and a couple other ten ten guys, it still does not mean a great deal unless he defends for ten years?

smh

Stevieb8006 wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote: Oh I see, your trolling me. Fury beat the guy that's been considered top dog for eons. Fact. Name me one other that's come close to out boxing him please? Tell me a boxer that's won more than three rounds on the spin vs wlad since his last loss

Pointing out to you that you had added nine years onto Klitschko's lineal claim is 'trolling you'?

I honestly don't understand how your brain works.

Fine then. You seem to be spoiling for a fight with me and I just don't indulge such nonsense online. Ultimately you haven't answered my question because you can't to fit your argument. Therefore you have your view and won't let facts get in the way. Good day to you.

Again, I'm pointing out to you that you had added nine years onto Klitschko's lineal claim, which you seem keen to avoid discussing.

As far as your question about 'who has won three rounds in a row' versus Klitschko, my guess would be no one, which puts Tyson Fury in the glorious position of being officially better than Tony Thompson, Marius Wach and yes, that's right, even Francesco Pianeta!!!

Makes you wonder how anyone can dare question his brilliance!

Stevieb8006 wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote: Oh I see, your trolling me. Fury beat the guy that's been considered top dog for eons. Fact. Name me one other that's come close to out boxing him please? Tell me a boxer that's won more than three rounds on the spin vs wlad since his last loss

Pointing out to you that you had added nine years onto Klitschko's lineal claim is 'trolling you'?

I honestly don't understand how your brain works.

Fine then. You seem to be spoiling for a fight with me and I just don't indulge such nonsense online. Ultimately you haven't answered my question because you can't to fit your argument. Therefore you have your view and won't let facts get in the way. Good day to you.

You haven't added 9 years onto his reign as lineal champion anyway. Klitschko won the IBF title in 2006, then became lineal champion in 2008/2009, depending on whether you count the Ibragimov or Chagaev fight as the fight he won it in. God knows where this nonsense about Povetkin has come from, to be expected from Jim though.

expe wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:
Pointing out to you that you had added nine years onto Klitschko's lineal claim is 'trolling you'?

I honestly don't understand how your brain works.

Fine then. You seem to be spoiling for a fight with me and I just don't indulge such nonsense online. Ultimately you haven't answered my question because you can't to fit your argument. Therefore you have your view and won't let facts get in the way. Good day to you.

You haven't added 9 years onto his reign as lineal champion anyway. Klitschko won the IBF title in 2006, then became lineal champion in 2008/2009, depending on whether you count the Ibragimov or Chagaev fight as the fight he won it in. God knows where this nonsense about Povetkin has come from, to be expected from Jim though.

Jesus Christ there was an enormous debate about this right here on the Brit forum not long ago and it was clarified that he won it versus Povetkin in 2013. Lots of corroborating press. I can't be bothered to go through the whole thing again but Vitali had supposedly won the lineal title in 2004 v Sanders and so Wlad could hardly win it from Chagaev in 09 while his brother who held it was simultaneously active.

Just look into it yourself, apparently Povetkin was the lineal contest and everyone here seemed to be in agreement. Nothing to do with me.

Love seeing the hatred in the hearts of the Fury hater brigade , you know he's doing right when you see threads like these

Tuan_Jim wrote:

expe wrote: You haven't added 9 years onto his reign as lineal champion anyway. Klitschko won the IBF title in 2006, then became lineal champion in 2008/2009, depending on whether you count the Ibragimov or Chagaev fight as the fight he won it in. God knows where this nonsense about Povetkin has come from, to be expected from Jim though.

Jesus Christ there was an enormous debate about this right here on the Brit forum not long ago and it was clarified that he won it versus Povetkin in 2013. Lots of corroborating press. I can't be bothered to go through the whole thing again but Vitali had supposedly won the lineal title in 2004 v Sanders and so Wlad could hardly win it from Chagaev in 09 while his brother who held it was simultaneously active.

Just look into it yourself, apparently Povetkin was the lineal contest and everyone here seemed to be in agreement. Nothing to do with me.

The only conclusion I drew from that exhausting debate was that lineal titles are made-up, stupid & pointless.

CiganoBoxer wrote:Love seeing the hatred in the hearts of the Fury hater brigade , you know he's doing right when you see threads like these

The catch-all "hater" charge really has retarded a generation of young people's ability to engage in debate, hasn't it.

Anything can happen in boxing I accept that. But if Fury is this ultra talented 7 foot giant with great footwork and finesse he should have stopped that old man.

I remember several years ago when Danny Williams who imo was never a world class fighter knocked out the most fearsome man in boxing for over 100 years. But as the argument goes time catches us all up.

If Fury face Klit again nothing will change Fury will beat him again and again. Klit has nothing left except a cash register to build his pension pot.

CiganoBoxer wrote:Love seeing the hatred in the hearts of the Fury hater brigade , you know he's doing right when you see threads like these

Where are all these haters people go on about, ive not seen one on Boxrec to date.

Boxerbeetle wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:

expe wrote: You haven't added 9 years onto his reign as lineal champion anyway. Klitschko won the IBF title in 2006, then became lineal champion in 2008/2009, depending on whether you count the Ibragimov or Chagaev fight as the fight he won it in. God knows where this nonsense about Povetkin has come from, to be expected from Jim though.

Jesus Christ there was an enormous debate about this right here on the Brit forum not long ago and it was clarified that he won it versus Povetkin in 2013. Lots of corroborating press. I can't be bothered to go through the whole thing again but Vitali had supposedly won the lineal title in 2004 v Sanders and so Wlad could hardly win it from Chagaev in 09 while his brother who held it was simultaneously active.

Just look into it yourself, apparently Povetkin was the lineal contest and everyone here seemed to be in agreement. Nothing to do with me.

The only conclusion I drew from that exhausting debate was that lineal titles are made-up, stupid & pointless.

I think they are in an era such as this. The lineal title should in all honesty be declared vacant and allowed to remain so for as long as it takes for someone to clean up the division. I think when we're looking at fights such as Vitali/Sanders, Wlad/Ibrag, or Chag, or Pov, it's painfully clear that the lineal title dissolved with Lennox Lewis.

Dixonian wrote:

mimmy123 wrote:

grub wrote:Bonecrusher Smith...he fought a who's who, but generally lost to them (a disinterested Witherspoon aside).

Frank Bruno...popular without a doubt, but who did he actually beat? Fury's beating of Wlad tops anything Bruno did.

I wouldnt say Bruno was the worse, indeed he didnt give much effort in the return to Tyson. Thats was a poor show I agree on that. Bruno deserved better imo just a shame there was a clause to fight Tyson after McCall. im sure Bruno would have defended at least once.

I actually watched Bruno-Tyson II recently and thought it wasn't actually as bad an effort as is commonly believed. Perhaps that's just because of the gun shy title challengers we've had in recent years making it look good.

I think that's it tbh.

Boxerbeetle wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:

expe wrote: You haven't added 9 years onto his reign as lineal champion anyway. Klitschko won the IBF title in 2006, then became lineal champion in 2008/2009, depending on whether you count the Ibragimov or Chagaev fight as the fight he won it in. God knows where this nonsense about Povetkin has come from, to be expected from Jim though.

Jesus Christ there was an enormous debate about this right here on the Brit forum not long ago and it was clarified that he won it versus Povetkin in 2013. Lots of corroborating press. I can't be bothered to go through the whole thing again but Vitali had supposedly won the lineal title in 2004 v Sanders and so Wlad could hardly win it from Chagaev in 09 while his brother who held it was simultaneously active.

Just look into it yourself, apparently Povetkin was the lineal contest and everyone here seemed to be in agreement. Nothing to do with me.

The only conclusion I drew from that exhausting debate was that lineal titles are made-up, stupid & pointless.

Vitali v Sanders wasn't for the lineal title, it was for the Ring belt, the two aren't the same. Even if it was, he retired a fight later so it became vacant, allowing Wlad to win it against Ibragimov/Chagaev.

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote:He's got great footwork and movement.

Are you serious?

Fury is odds on to beat wilder and i agree with the bookies.

I think you'll find you're in the minority if you think wilder beats fury.

mimmy123 wrote:Anything can happen in boxing I accept that. But if Fury is this ultra talented 7 foot giant with great footwork and finesse he should have stopped that old man.

I remember several years ago when Danny Williams who imo was never a world class fighter knocked out the most fearsome man in boxing for over 100 years. But as the argument goes time catches us all up.

If Fury face Klit again nothing will change Fury will beat him again and again. Klit has nothing left except a cash register to build his pension pot.

that fearsome old man wasn't a world champ at the time when Williams beat him. Let alone linear. And hadn't been for a long, long time. He'd had spells in prison, years of hard living and had looked vulnerable for many years, wlad hasn't. And is the consummate clean living pro.

Maybe fury should have stopped him. Maybe he COULD have stopped him, but given the easy night he was having chose to play it safe. After all wlads a very hard puncher.

You just seem really angry fury won and is champ. The "when did wlad become linear" point isn't really relevant as he's been seen as the top dog for years and years.

expe wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:
Jesus Christ there was an enormous debate about this right here on the Brit forum not long ago and it was clarified that he won it versus Povetkin in 2013. Lots of corroborating press. I can't be bothered to go through the whole thing again but Vitali had supposedly won the lineal title in 2004 v Sanders and so Wlad could hardly win it from Chagaev in 09 while his brother who held it was simultaneously active.

Just look into it yourself, apparently Povetkin was the lineal contest and everyone here seemed to be in agreement. Nothing to do with me.

The only conclusion I drew from that exhausting debate was that lineal titles are made-up, stupid & pointless.

Vitali v Sanders wasn't for the lineal title, it was for the Ring belt, the two aren't the same. Even if it was, he retired a fight later so it became vacant, allowing Wlad to win it against Ibragimov/Chagaev.

I'm sorry but you are confusing your personal opinion with the facts.

There was a debate about Klit/Sanders being lineal. There was such furore over Lewis/Klit that Klit/Sanders fit a tidy continuation of the lineal chain. Opinion was divided. Personally I thought it was too horrible a match up to be for the lineal title. Some said Wlad/Chagaev was for vacant lineal. Others said Vitali was still lineal. His claim bolstered by the fact he was always a harder man than Wlad. Fight so anti-climatic it remained hazy. Ultimately Wlad/Povetkin became the fight to decide the lineal title, with the retirement of Vitali for the first time solidifying the claim. This was all far more thoroughly researched in the old thread led by Steveo, I can't be bothered to get much into it anymore, it's tedious. If people want to believe Wladimir Klitschko has been lineal champ since 1996 then so be it, why not, reality seems to be such a nonobjective thing in 2016 anyway.

Stevieb8006 wrote:. The "when did wlad become linear" point isn't really relevant as he's been seen as the top dog for years and years.

You brought it up.

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote:. The "when did wlad become linear" point isn't really relevant as he's been seen as the top dog for years and years.

You brought it up.

Ok. I'll edit my original post from linear to "generally regarded as the no.1". And there in lies the problem with boxing in 2016.

Stevieb8006 wrote:

Tuan_Jim wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote:. The "when did wlad become linear" point isn't really relevant as he's been seen as the top dog for years and years.

You brought it up.

Ok. I'll edit my original post from linear to "generally regarded as the no.1". And there in lies the problem with boxing in 2016.

Don't bother, you'll still be wrong. No one regarded Wladimir as no.1 eleven years ago when Lamon Brewster had whacked him, let alone after he was having to climb off the floor multiple times to grope his way past DaVaryll Williamson and Sam Peter.

The need to embellish Wladimir Klitschko's credentials is one of the more curious idiosyncrasies of boxing fans.

Stevieb8006 wrote:

mimmy123 wrote:Anything can happen in boxing I accept that. But if Fury is this ultra talented 7 foot giant with great footwork and finesse he should have stopped that old man.

I remember several years ago when Danny Williams who imo was never a world class fighter knocked out the most fearsome man in boxing for over 100 years. But as the argument goes time catches us all up.

If Fury face Klit again nothing will change Fury will beat him again and again. Klit has nothing left except a cash register to build his pension pot.

that fearsome old man wasn't a world champ at the time when Williams beat him. Let alone linear. And hadn't been for a long, long time. He'd had spells in prison, years of hard living and had looked vulnerable for many years, wlad hasn't. And is the consummate clean living pro.

Maybe fury should have stopped him. Maybe he COULD have stopped him, but given the easy night he was having chose to play it safe. After all wlads a very hard puncher.

You just seem really angry fury won and is champ. The "when did wlad become linear" point isn't really relevant as he's been seen as the top dog for years and years.

It makes no difference in my life who is world champion, so saying im angry is way off the truth. No I just dont think the Fury propaganda is winning thats all. There are 1 or 2 posters on here that think he's dogs bollox but they are no richer themsleves. I'm not angry Fury won, im not glad im not bothered to be honest. I am just a realist I suppose. Fury beat a world champion, thats a fact. Fury is world heavyweight champion, thats another fact. He won a world title fair and square, thats the 3rd fact, he also beat a world champion who didnt throw any punches until round 11 thats a fact. Not fury's fault, that is another fact. Fury wont be champion too long, im sure that is almost a fact.

mimmy123 wrote:

Stevieb8006 wrote:

mimmy123 wrote:Anything can happen in boxing I accept that. But if Fury is this ultra talented 7 foot giant with great footwork and finesse he should have stopped that old man.

I remember several years ago when Danny Williams who imo was never a world class fighter knocked out the most fearsome man in boxing for over 100 years. But as the argument goes time catches us all up.

If Fury face Klit again nothing will change Fury will beat him again and again. Klit has nothing left except a cash register to build his pension pot.

that fearsome old man wasn't a world champ at the time when Williams beat him. Let alone linear. And hadn't been for a long, long time. He'd had spells in prison, years of hard living and had looked vulnerable for many years, wlad hasn't. And is the consummate clean living pro.

Maybe fury should have stopped him. Maybe he COULD have stopped him, but given the easy night he was having chose to play it safe. After all wlads a very hard puncher.

You just seem really angry fury won and is champ. The "when did wlad become linear" point isn't really relevant as he's been seen as the top dog for years and years.

It makes no difference in my life who is world champion, so saying im angry is way off the truth. No I just dont think the Fury propaganda is winning thats all. There are 1 or 2 posters on here that think he's dogs bollox but they are no richer themsleves. I'm not angry Fury won, im not glad im not bothered to be honest. I am just a realist I suppose. Fury beat a world champion, thats a fact. Fury is world heavyweight champion, thats another fact. He won a world title fair and square, thats the 3rd fact, he also beat a world champion who didnt throw any punches until round 11 thats a fact. Not fury's fault, that is another fact. Fury wont be champion too long, im sure that is almost a fact.

Fair enough. I would debate that wlad was inactive because of what fury was doing tho. Time will tell.

Troll of the highest order and not even one with any logical argument.

If not the case, should think more about what you post as it is how you come across