BoxRec

Unless London is extortionate for that as well. Bang on quality at cheap prices. Get in with the Asians and it goes down even more.

Boxerbeetle wrote:
Are you still living in 1950 or something? When combined with your 'does Canelo bat left-handed' thread, it certainly seems that you are.

No mate I'm just a normal middle aged bloke with 2 kids and if I had a choice of living next door to a bloke who made homophobic comments once in a while or a guy who was a weed dealer I'd choose the former.

Do you live above a brothel in Amsterdam ?

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:
Are you still living in 1950 or something? When combined with your 'does Canelo bat left-handed' thread, it certainly seems that you are.

No mate I'm just a normal middle aged bloke with 2 kids and if I had a choice of living next door to a bloke who made homophobic comments once in a while or a guy who was a weed dealer I'd choose the former.

Do you live above a brothel in Amsterdam ?

Give me the Weed dealer EVERY. TIME!

gilgamesh wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:

Boxerbeetle wrote:
Are you still living in 1950 or something? When combined with your 'does Canelo bat left-handed' thread, it certainly seems that you are.

No mate I'm just a normal middle aged bloke with 2 kids and if I had a choice of living next door to a bloke who made homophobic comments once in a while or a guy who was a weed dealer I'd choose the former.

Do you live above a brothel in Amsterdam ?

Give me the Weed dealer EVERY. TIME!

I'd happily share an apartment above a brothel in Amsterdam with a weed dealer. That's what I'd call living the dream

Boxerbeetle wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:
No mate I'm just a normal middle aged bloke with 2 kids and if I had a choice of living next door to a bloke who made homophobic comments once in a while or a guy who was a weed dealer I'd choose the former.

Do you live above a brothel in Amsterdam ?

Give me the Weed dealer EVERY. TIME!

I'd happily share an apartment above a brothel in Amsterdam with a weed dealer. That's what I'd call living the dream

Boxerbeetle wrote: I'd happily share an apartment above a brothel in Amsterdam with a weed dealer. That's what I'd call living the dream

fornicate it. If I promise not to kill the vibe with my boring 1950s outlook can I move in with you guys.

CaptainSpacerod wrote:In terms of AJ v Tyson it's not really about popularity per se it's more brand recognition and clever marketing.

AJ has Eddie Hearn and Sky's colossal marketing machine to promote him whereas Tyson has Mick Hennessey and IFL.

AJ has been in trouble with the police for drug offences and has reportedly been an absent father yet Tyson as a good father and family man who's never been in trouble with the law is perceived by the wider public as a villain whereas AJ is the humble good guy.

Tyson went to the undisputed champ's backyard and sensationally upset the odds whereas AJ beat a diminished Wlad yet AJ gets all the plaudits whereas Tyson's achievement went pretty much unheralded.

The point I'm trying to make is that had Tyson been looked after by Hearn and Sky he'd be the good guy selling out arenas with 10million Twitter followers and if AJ had suffered the misfortune of signing up with Mick Hen he'd be the outsider villified in the media for his mistakes in life.

You're completely wrong.

AJ sells so well because he is explosive and in fights that end in brutal, vicious, conclusive violence... that is what gets the viewers. Casuals lap it up.

Sadly, Tyson Fury's performances have never been so spectacular nor exciting. And I'm no hater. I would love to see Tyson box the head off Joshua. Fury has the profile though not the level of exposure that Joshua gets through Sky.

Tyson v AJ would explode on Sky, piss on all records.

I'm not getting involved in this nonsense, but while reading through this crap, I came across an error made earlier which I'd like to correct. Tony Sibson wasn't a gypsy/traveller. The London press thought he was when he appeared for a photo shoot and his daft manager thought it would be a good idea for him to pose on a horse. The horse bolted by the way with Tony hanging on for dear life.

mickey1975 wrote:Tyson v AJ would explode on Sky, piss on all records.

It wouldn't beat May-Mac, no chance in hell and AJ-Haye would sell better than AJ-Fury.

keithmoonhangover wrote:

mickey1975 wrote:Tyson v AJ would explode on Sky, piss on all records.

It wouldn't beat May-Mac, no chance in hell and AJ-Haye would sell better than AJ-Fury.

Disagree, Jim, strongly.

mickey1975 wrote:

keithmoonhangover wrote:

mickey1975 wrote:Tyson v AJ would explode on Sky, piss on all records.

It wouldn't beat May-Mac, no chance in hell and AJ-Haye would sell better than AJ-Fury.

Disagree, Jim, strongly.

Meant that to Dalculmy.

What the issue is here is that the Fury's are massively unreliable, hughie fury has absolutely no public profile - even a lot of us hardcore boxing fans aren't that interested in him as he has done very little since his initial decent career start.

Then you have Joseph Parker who also has very little profile in Britain outside the hardcore fans. Yes he is decent but he is probably less of a name over here than Hughie.

Hughies career for what ever reasons has lacked enough momentum to keep anyone interested.

Let's be honest if this was Whyte v Parker it would be selling. Maybe not PPV but casuals and hardcore fans would be interested in going and watching.

liamlion wrote:

CaptainSpacerod wrote:In terms of AJ v Tyson it's not really about popularity per se it's more brand recognition and clever marketing.

AJ has Eddie Hearn and Sky's colossal marketing machine to promote him whereas Tyson has Mick Hennessey and IFL.

AJ has been in trouble with the police for drug offences and has reportedly been an absent father yet Tyson as a good father and family man who's never been in trouble with the law is perceived by the wider public as a villain whereas AJ is the humble good guy.

Tyson went to the undisputed champ's backyard and sensationally upset the odds whereas AJ beat a diminished Wlad yet AJ gets all the plaudits whereas Tyson's achievement went pretty much unheralded.

The point I'm trying to make is that had Tyson been looked after by Hearn and Sky he'd be the good guy selling out arenas with 10million Twitter followers and if AJ had suffered the misfortune of signing up with Mick Hen he'd be the outsider villified in the media for his mistakes in life.

You're completely wrong.

AJ sells so well because he is explosive and in fights that end in brutal, vicious, conclusive violence... that is what gets the viewers. Casuals lap it up.

Sadly, Tyson Fury's performances have never been so spectacular nor exciting. And I'm no hater. I would love to see Tyson box the head off Joshua. Fury has the profile though not the level of exposure that Joshua gets through Sky.

The issue with Tyson is he says and does stupid bloody things which has estranged his public support. He's still high profile and with the right dance partners can sell fights.

I'm a Tyson fan but the whole "I'm prejudiced because I'm a gypsy" bollocks that they believe is just nonsense, yes there is an element of that, be he's prejudiced because he doesn't know when to keep his opinions and beliefs to himself many of which are offensive to a lot of people and that is a fact. If he kept his mouth shut when it came to politics, religion and homosexuality he would be on TV shows, chat shows all sorts, he would have loads of public support.

Not one person gives a fornicate about a TV, sports or Film celebrities opinions on serious topics. Not unless they are particularly knowledgeable about a particular topic or respected as an expert or intellect. So why has Tyson got it in his head we want to hear him chatting shit constantly, save that for your friends and family.

You don't see Ricky Hatton telling people his views on women's rights and gay marriage. He cracks jokes and used to bash people, AJ he could hate all white people for I care but he keeps it to himself so it wouldn't bloody bother me.

I'm sure Tyson is a very nice fella but he's made himself an outcast.

Finn wrote:
I'm sure Tyson is a very nice fella but he's made himself an outcast.

He's a piece of sh*t, and possibly the worst Heavyweight Champion of all time. Especially if you're talking about "Lineal" Champions.

gilgamesh wrote:

Finn wrote:
I'm sure Tyson is a very nice fella but he's made himself an outcast.

He's a piece of sh*t, and possibly the worst Heavyweight Champion of all time. Especially if you're talking about "Lineal" Champions.

WORST????

LMAO

HomicideHenry wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:
He's a piece of sh*t, and possibly the worst Heavyweight Champion of all time. Especially if you're talking about "Lineal" Champions.

WORST????

LMAO

Yeah that's right. Worst.

gilgamesh wrote:

HomicideHenry wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:
He's a piece of sh*t, and possibly the worst Heavyweight Champion of all time. Especially if you're talking about "Lineal" Champions.

WORST????

LMAO

Yeah that's right. Worst.

Oh come on... Leon Spinks should have never been World Champion... Samuel Peter? Sergei Liakohvich? Sultan Ibragimov? Shannon Briggs? Hasim Rahman? Etc etc etc.

HomicideHenry wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:

HomicideHenry wrote:
WORST????

LMAO

Yeah that's right. Worst.

Oh come on... Leon Spinks should have never been World Champion... Samuel Peter? Sergei Liakohvich? Sultan Ibragimov? Shannon Briggs? Hasim Rahman? Etc etc etc.

There have been some weak paper titleholders indeed. Fury takes the cake when it comes to Lineal Heavyweight Champions. He eats the cake too...fatass that he is.

Prime Briggs would knock Fury out. Prime Rahman would knock Fury out.

He'd probably outbox Liakhovich and Ibragimov...nobody even gives a sh*t about those guys.

Sam Peter vs Fury would be 50/50 to me, but Fury would probably win that.

Leon Spinks beat Muhammad Ali in 1978's Ring Magazine Fight of the Year. That's more impressive than anything Tyson Fury will ever accomplish.

gilgamesh wrote:

HomicideHenry wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:
Yeah that's right. Worst.

Oh come on... Leon Spinks should have never been World Champion... Samuel Peter? Sergei Liakohvich? Sultan Ibragimov? Shannon Briggs? Hasim Rahman? Etc etc etc.

There have been some weak paper titleholders indeed. Fury takes the cake when it comes to Lineal Heavyweight Champions. He eats the cake too...fatass that he is.

Prime Briggs would knock Fury out. Prime Rahman would knock Fury out.

He'd probably outbox Liakhovich and Ibragimov...nobody even gives a sh*t about those guys.

Sam Peter vs Fury would be 50/50 to me, but Fury would probably win that.

Leon Spinks beat Muhammad Ali in 1978's Ring Magazine Fight of the Year. That's more impressive than anything Tyson Fury will ever accomplish.

Fury was RING MAGAZINES Fighter of the Year... And LMFAOOOOO the two Ali-Spinks fights were every bit as boring and Ali was far and away more run down, shot, etc than KLITSCHKO. So you know 1978 had to be an extremely piss poor year if Spinks won fight of the year.

gilgamesh wrote:

HomicideHenry wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:
He's a piece of sh*t, and possibly the worst Heavyweight Champion of all time. Especially if you're talking about "Lineal" Champions.

WORST????

LMAO

Yeah that's right. Worst.

Well Buster my Douglas!

mickey1975 wrote:Tyson v AJ would explode on Sky, piss on all records.

Correct, because it's a Joshua fight, it would be promoted properly, and it would be sold as 'watch Tyson get beaten up.'

If Fury took that fight was beaten up, its game over. His comeback would be selling like this Hughie fight.

I think the poster who said that the average person in the UK has no idea who either fighter is accurately summed up why the fight is having trouble selling.

HomicideHenry wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:

Finn wrote:
I'm sure Tyson is a very nice fella but he's made himself an outcast.

He's a piece of sh*t, and possibly the worst Heavyweight Champion of all time. Especially if you're talking about "Lineal" Champions.

WORST????

LMAO

More worst than charles martin?

dirk2686 wrote:

mickey1975 wrote:Tyson v AJ would explode on Sky, piss on all records.

Correct, because it's a Joshua fight, it would be promoted properly, and it would be sold as 'watch Tyson get beaten up.'

If Fury took that fight was beaten up, its game over. His comeback would be selling like this Hughie fight.

It would do 5 times the Pulev fight. Surely Tyson has something to do with it? Tyson would sell the arse off it.