Page 4 of 7
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 16:57
by CharlesListon
I'd forget about Chisora in the rematch, he was just on one of his shit days when he wanted to be anyone else, or anywhere else other than Derek Chisora in a boxing ring.
There is no doubt in my mind that Fury has less power than Haye and I think I did say I wouldn't be amazed if Haye did indeed spark Fury.
I just think that this version of Haye is a shadow of prime Haye. Last night proved nothing. The Aussie was not much better than a punch-bag. We can't tell anything about his power, his timing, fitness or his shoulder because the Aussie was so gash.
In his prime, Haye would have done Fury. If they had fought when they were meant to, Haye would have done him. But Fury has improved. Not sure Haye has.
The one thing I do know for certain, is if Haye and Fury called me and asked me to go for a pint, I'd be going for a drink with Tyson. Haye's turned into a bell end. I liked him when he turned over. Think he's a tool now.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 16:58
by Rexob
Fury is just coming into his prime years and Haye is past his, he's heavier, slower and been out of action for nearly 4 years, it doesn't look good for Haye if they do meet, he's always got the power but I think Fury's team will get the tactics right like they did against the big Klit and just nullify anything that Haye can give?
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 17:03
by CharlesListon
Rexob wrote:Fury is just coming into his prime years and Haye is past his, he's heavier, slower and been out of action for nearly 4 years, it doesn't look good for Haye if they do meet, he's always got the power but I think Fury's team will get the tactics right like they did against the big Klit and just nullify anything that Haye can give?
Yes. Its about the here and now.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 17:05
by CharlesListon
I still think Ortiz would do him though.
And think Klit will do him in the rematch. But then Klit will retire and Fury will box on.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 17:09
by rd350lc
CharlesListon wrote:I'd forget about Chisora in the rematch, he was just on one of his poo days when he wanted to be anyone else, or anywhere else other than Derek Chisora in a boxing ring.
There is no doubt in my mind that Fury has less power than Haye and I think I did say I wouldn't be amazed if Haye did indeed spark Fury.
I just think that this version of Haye is a shadow of prime Haye. Last night proved nothing. The Aussie was not much better than a punch-bag. We can't tell anything about his power, his timing, fitness or his shoulder because the Aussie was so gash.
In his prime, Haye would have done Fury. If they had fought when they were meant to, Haye would have done him. But Fury has improved. Not sure Haye has.
The one thing I do know for certain, is if Haye and Fury called me and asked me to go for a pint, I'd be going for a drink with Tyson. Haye's turned into a bell end. I liked him when he turned over. Think he's a tool now.
and I suppose you would have a better night with Fury as you could get wasted on drinks that he just helped himself to

Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 17:11
by Boxerbeetle
rd350lc wrote:CharlesListon wrote:I'd forget about Chisora in the rematch, he was just on one of his poo days when he wanted to be anyone else, or anywhere else other than Derek Chisora in a boxing ring.
There is no doubt in my mind that Fury has less power than Haye and I think I did say I wouldn't be amazed if Haye did indeed spark Fury.
I just think that this version of Haye is a shadow of prime Haye. Last night proved nothing. The Aussie was not much better than a punch-bag. We can't tell anything about his power, his timing, fitness or his shoulder because the Aussie was so gash.
In his prime, Haye would have done Fury. If they had fought when they were meant to, Haye would have done him. But Fury has improved. Not sure Haye has.
The one thing I do know for certain, is if Haye and Fury called me and asked me to go for a pint, I'd be going for a drink with Tyson. Haye's turned into a bell end. I liked him when he turned over. Think he's a tool now.
and I suppose you would have a better night with Fury as you could get wasted on drinks that he just helped himself to

And he'd also make you a sandwich afterwards

Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 17:13
by CharlesListon
Boxerbeetle wrote:rd350lc wrote:CharlesListon wrote:I'd forget about Chisora in the rematch, he was just on one of his poo days when he wanted to be anyone else, or anywhere else other than Derek Chisora in a boxing ring.
There is no doubt in my mind that Fury has less power than Haye and I think I did say I wouldn't be amazed if Haye did indeed spark Fury.
I just think that this version of Haye is a shadow of prime Haye. Last night proved nothing. The Aussie was not much better than a punch-bag. We can't tell anything about his power, his timing, fitness or his shoulder because the Aussie was so gash.
In his prime, Haye would have done Fury. If they had fought when they were meant to, Haye would have done him. But Fury has improved. Not sure Haye has.
The one thing I do know for certain, is if Haye and Fury called me and asked me to go for a pint, I'd be going for a drink with Tyson. Haye's turned into a bell end. I liked him when he turned over. Think he's a tool now.
and I suppose you would have a better night with Fury as you could get wasted on drinks that he just helped himself to

And he'd also make you a sandwich afterwards

I'm not sure I'd be up for the sandwich. I'd be straight to the Sun with my story.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 17:14
by rd350lc
Boxerbeetle wrote:rd350lc wrote:CharlesListon wrote:I'd forget about Chisora in the rematch, he was just on one of his poo days when he wanted to be anyone else, or anywhere else other than Derek Chisora in a boxing ring.
There is no doubt in my mind that Fury has less power than Haye and I think I did say I wouldn't be amazed if Haye did indeed spark Fury.
I just think that this version of Haye is a shadow of prime Haye. Last night proved nothing. The Aussie was not much better than a punch-bag. We can't tell anything about his power, his timing, fitness or his shoulder because the Aussie was so gash.
In his prime, Haye would have done Fury. If they had fought when they were meant to, Haye would have done him. But Fury has improved. Not sure Haye has.
The one thing I do know for certain, is if Haye and Fury called me and asked me to go for a pint, I'd be going for a drink with Tyson. Haye's turned into a bell end. I liked him when he turned over. Think he's a tool now.
and I suppose you would have a better night with Fury as you could get wasted on drinks that he just helped himself to

And he'd also make you a sandwich afterwards

BOOM ,BOOM

Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 17:15
by Rexob
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 17:31
by davie
FrozenMixedVegtables wrote:thechump wrote:At the end if the day playing up to pantomine antics or not that was effin embarrassing,wilder just had a fight and was being interviewed why did this clown have to do all this? effing idiot, wilder will splat him like an annoying fly
Wilder is shockingly bad at boxing for a world champion . Fury would embarrass Wilder. Give him an absolute schooling. You get mongs saying Wilder is athletic and Fury is ungainly when Fury is a far better mover than Wilder. Wilder has garbage footwork and he's clumsy as hell. He's nothing more than a windmill with a hard punch. People probably think he's a good boxer because he has the black and slick look. Fvckin idiots.
If you watch the stoppage vs Duhaupas, his feet leave the ground in every one of the last 4 shots he throws, it's painful to watch, I remember notice how his technique went awol when he had the mighty A-force hurt
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 17:47
by WildWaylon
thechump wrote:At the end if the day playing up to pantomine antics or not that was effin embarrassing,wilder just had a fight and was being interviewed why did this clown have to do all this? effing idiot, wilder will splat him like an annoying fly
I am with you on this, Fury needs to grow up and his fans need to stop making excuses for him. Pantomime, WWE no, my words for him are that hes disgusting and a disgrace. I really do hope Klitschko knocks the c**t out next time. Wilder would do a job on him if he gets the chance.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 17:53
by CharlesListon
WildWaylon wrote:thechump wrote:At the end if the day playing up to pantomine antics or not that was effin embarrassing,wilder just had a fight and was being interviewed why did this clown have to do all this? effing idiot, wilder will splat him like an annoying fly
I am with you on this, Fury needs to grow up and his fans need to stop making excuses for him. Pantomime, WWE no, my words for him are that hes disgusting and a disgrace. I really do hope Klitschko knocks the c**t out next time. Wilder would do a job on him if he gets the chance.
Whose that trip trapping over my bridge? :P :P :P :P
![[icon_e_biggrin.gif] :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 17:56
by jamesmcdonnell
I think both Fury and Wilder have pretty shocking technique, and if it wasn't for their size, they'd not be where they are. Granted both men move well for big men, and are quick, but the punching technique of both is very amateurish.
I'd give Wilder a good chance against Fury, as wild as he is, he has genuine power, and he throws a lot of punches, and aggressive.
Fury would need different tactics to those he used against Klit to prevail.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 18:16
by keithmoonhangover
jamesmcdonnell wrote:I think both Fury and Wilder have pretty shocking technique, and if it wasn't for their size, they'd not be where they are. Granted both men move well for big men, and are quick, but the punching technique of both is very amateurish.
I'd give Wilder a good chance against Fury, as wild as he is, he has genuine power, and he throws a lot of punches, and aggressive.
Fury would need different tactics to those he used against Klit to prevail.
I agree with all of that. I have noticed and I don't know if you have. Wilder does this thing now and again, which I think is subconscious, where he straightens on of his legs and looks off balance. This isn't when he has been punched, just when he's moving about and sometimes before he gets into position.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 18:16
by reggaereggae
Dusted Peyote wrote:WildWaylon wrote: I am with you on this, Fury needs to grow up and his fans need to stop making excuses for him. Pantomime, WWE no, my words for him are that hes disgusting and a disgrace. I really do hope Klitschko knocks the c**t out next time. Wilder would do a job on him if he gets the chance.
Well said.
Wilder is no perfect role model himself... smashing up a mentally ill Charlie Z and making comments about Fury's wife are not that cool
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 18:19
by CharlesListon
keithmoonhangover wrote:jamesmcdonnell wrote:I think both Fury and Wilder have pretty shocking technique, and if it wasn't for their size, they'd not be where they are. Granted both men move well for big men, and are quick, but the punching technique of both is very amateurish.
I'd give Wilder a good chance against Fury, as wild as he is, he has genuine power, and he throws a lot of punches, and aggressive.
Fury would need different tactics to those he used against Klit to prevail.
I agree with all of that. I have noticed and I don't know if you have. Wilder does this thing now and again, which I think is subconscious, where he straightens on of his legs and looks off balance. This isn't when he has been punched, just when he's moving about and sometimes before he gets into position.
Its actually hard being a tall hw. Its harder to control your limbs unless you opt for the robotic style. I can't explain it any better than that.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 18:34
by lefty
palooka wrote:lefty wrote:Now there's rumours all over twitter that not only did security have to seperate them but that Froch basically legged it aswell! Now I don't know whether to believe that or not lol. To be fair though, whatever the circumstances, Fury is a lot bigger than Froch.

glad to see you back pal.
I can't see Froch legging it, he's game enough. I can remember reading about Jason Rowland squaring up to Clifton Mitchell over something or other - some people are just game to the core.
Thanks mate! Yeah I agree, it does seem a bit bizarre that. Just going on what people were saying though, no idea if it's bollocks or not lol.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 18:41
by lefty
keithmoonhangover wrote:palooka wrote:lefty wrote:Now there's rumours all over twitter that not only did security have to seperate them but that Froch basically legged it aswell! Now I don't know whether to believe that or not lol. To be fair though, whatever the circumstances, Fury is a lot bigger than Froch.

glad to see you back pal.
I can't see Froch legging it, he's game enough. I can remember reading about Jason Rowland squaring up to Clifton Mitchell over something or other - some people are just game to the core.
Yeah, like palooka said welcome back mate.

I was going to have a break from posting on here, but now you're back on, I might stay.
Cheers mate. Hope you're doing ok!

Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 18:45
by jamesmcdonnell
CharlesListon wrote:keithmoonhangover wrote:jamesmcdonnell wrote:I think both Fury and Wilder have pretty shocking technique, and if it wasn't for their size, they'd not be where they are. Granted both men move well for big men, and are quick, but the punching technique of both is very amateurish.
I'd give Wilder a good chance against Fury, as wild as he is, he has genuine power, and he throws a lot of punches, and aggressive.
Fury would need different tactics to those he used against Klit to prevail.
I agree with all of that. I have noticed and I don't know if you have. Wilder does this thing now and again, which I think is subconscious, where he straightens on of his legs and looks off balance. This isn't when he has been punched, just when he's moving about and sometimes before he gets into position.
Its actually hard being a tall hw. Its harder to control your limbs unless you opt for the robotic style. I can't explain it any better than that.
Yes, that's one of the things that constantly amazes me, that people cannot see the disadvantages of being so big. Higher centre of gravity, longer levers, it all generates inertia, and forces that have to be compensated for, and requires better footwork to maintain balance.
I'd say Fury is better on his feet than Wilder, who does look off balance a lot of the time, I've not watched Wilder closely enough to notice the thing with his leg, but It's not surprising, he's pretty gangly, and rocks around when throwing his shots.
Lennox Lewis was pretty coordinated for a man of 6 foot 5, but he was hardly Wayne Sleep out there.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 18:53
by rhino222
did fury call wilder 'bumsquad'.........lol.....

Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 17 Jan 2016, 19:15
by CharlesListon
jamesmcdonnell wrote:CharlesListon wrote:keithmoonhangover wrote:
I agree with all of that. I have noticed and I don't know if you have. Wilder does this thing now and again, which I think is subconscious, where he straightens on of his legs and looks off balance. This isn't when he has been punched, just when he's moving about and sometimes before he gets into position.
Its actually hard being a tall hw. Its harder to control your limbs unless you opt for the robotic style. I can't explain it any better than that.
Yes, that's one of the things that constantly amazes me, that people cannot see the disadvantages of being so big. Higher centre of gravity, longer levers, it all generates inertia, and forces that have to be compensated for, and requires better footwork to maintain balance.
I'd say Fury is better on his feet than Wilder, who does look off balance a lot of the time, I've not watched Wilder closely enough to notice the thing with his leg, but It's not surprising, he's pretty gangly, and rocks around when throwing his shots.
Lennox Lewis was pretty coordinated for a man of 6 foot 5, but he was hardly Wayne Sleep out there.
Amen to that. Not wishing to sound like a troll or arrogant but its obvious that some posters have never actually boxed, or been involved with boxing.They are of course still entitled to their opinions, some of which are valuable and there are some seriously knowledgeable posters on here.
Tyson (Mike) was so proportionate that he was going to be a nightmare, there was nothing wasted with him. I'd rather be his build than Fury's build. It's so easy to look like an oaf or clumsy at that height.
Ali was perfectly proportioned. From a distance you'd never have known he was 6'3''ish.
There we go, I did it.
Tyson Fury compared to Ali in a few easy steps.
GOAT
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 18 Jan 2016, 03:18
by mickey1975
He should have been arrested for what he did to Charlie Z.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 18 Jan 2016, 04:20
by coneye
He should have been arrested for what he did to Charlie Z.
Correct , if what Charlie , said to his daughter was that bad he travels to bash him , he should of just called the police and let them deal with it ,, after all Charlie is obviously not a full shilling a bit retarded ... What i could'nt help but laugh about was he did'nt ko Charlie ha ha
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 18 Jan 2016, 09:30
by jamesmcdonnell
CharlesListon wrote:jamesmcdonnell wrote:CharlesListon wrote:
Its actually hard being a tall hw. Its harder to control your limbs unless you opt for the robotic style. I can't explain it any better than that.
Yes, that's one of the things that constantly amazes me, that people cannot see the disadvantages of being so big. Higher centre of gravity, longer levers, it all generates inertia, and forces that have to be compensated for, and requires better footwork to maintain balance.
I'd say Fury is better on his feet than Wilder, who does look off balance a lot of the time, I've not watched Wilder closely enough to notice the thing with his leg, but It's not surprising, he's pretty gangly, and rocks around when throwing his shots.
Lennox Lewis was pretty coordinated for a man of 6 foot 5, but he was hardly Wayne Sleep out there.
Amen to that. Not wishing to sound like a troll or arrogant but its obvious that some posters have never actually boxed, or been involved with boxing.They are of course still entitled to their opinions, some of which are valuable and there are some seriously knowledgeable posters on here.
Tyson (Mike) was so proportionate that he was going to be a nightmare, there was nothing wasted with him. I'd rather be his build than Fury's build. It's so easy to look like an oaf or clumsy at that height.
Ali was perfectly proportioned. From a distance you'd never have known he was 6'3''ish.
There we go, I did it.
Tyson Fury compared to Ali in a few easy steps.
GOAT
I only boxed as a kid, so can't claim any great insight, but surely it's blindingly obvious that in general big gangly blokes won't be as mobile or agile as shorter, stockier more regularly proportioned ones.
Funny I was thinking about Tyson - was watching a video of him at 16, and it was scary, the power in his frame was quite incredible, and the speed, though his overall career was rather a letdown in some respects, I still say the younger Tyson would have given anyone trouble, even the very best. I can well see the likes of Ali having to overcome some very sticky early moments before he was able to establish distance and a rhythm, as Mike was very hard to hit at his best and lightning quick.
Anyone who would pick Wlad or Fury to beat Mike is mad in my book, he'd have dipped under the jab, and been on them like white on rice. They'd have been bludgeoned senseless on the inside very quickly indeed.
I'd have picked a peak Tyson over any version of Lewis too, it's just that peak Tyson didn't last very long before it went downhill.
Re: Tyson Fury
Posted: 18 Jan 2016, 09:38
by cutsman
jamesmcdonnell wrote:CharlesListon wrote:jamesmcdonnell wrote:
Yes, that's one of the things that constantly amazes me, that people cannot see the disadvantages of being so big. Higher centre of gravity, longer levers, it all generates inertia, and forces that have to be compensated for, and requires better footwork to maintain balance.
I'd say Fury is better on his feet than Wilder, who does look off balance a lot of the time, I've not watched Wilder closely enough to notice the thing with his leg, but It's not surprising, he's pretty gangly, and rocks around when throwing his shots.
Lennox Lewis was pretty coordinated for a man of 6 foot 5, but he was hardly Wayne Sleep out there.
Amen to that. Not wishing to sound like a troll or arrogant but its obvious that some posters have never actually boxed, or been involved with boxing.They are of course still entitled to their opinions, some of which are valuable and there are some seriously knowledgeable posters on here.
Tyson (Mike) was so proportionate that he was going to be a nightmare, there was nothing wasted with him. I'd rather be his build than Fury's build. It's so easy to look like an oaf or clumsy at that height.
Ali was perfectly proportioned. From a distance you'd never have known he was 6'3''ish.
There we go, I did it.
Tyson Fury compared to Ali in a few easy steps.
GOAT
I only boxed as a kid, so can't claim any great insight, but surely it's blindingly obvious that in general big gangly blokes won't be as mobile or agile as shorter, stockier more regularly proportioned ones...
I'm sure Usain Bolt, at 6ft 5 would disagree