Yuri ROMANOV spoiler

Post Reply
REAL_DEAL
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5026
Joined: 09 Jul 2003, 06:42

Yuri ROMANOV spoiler

Post by REAL_DEAL »

OFFICIAL RESULT - Romanov Beat CONWAY 78-76

yes conway lasted the distance,
steve689
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9655
Joined: 20 Jan 2003, 13:50

Post by steve689 »

Missed the fight but it sounds closer than i expected it to be, i liked Romanov after the Vanzie fight. How did he look against Conway?
REAL_DEAL
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 5026
Joined: 09 Jul 2003, 06:42

Post by REAL_DEAL »

not on yet, sky programme starts at 10pm
bennie
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15244
Joined: 15 Nov 2002, 09:53

Post by bennie »

They didn't show the fight. Not even a clip. Seems strange. I suppose they're just concentrating on the "Fight Skool" products.
knockout
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3868
Joined: 11 Jun 2003, 10:00

Post by knockout »

apparently Romanov got quite a bad cut from a clash of heads... maybe it put him off... maybe he wasnt motivated,,, but i was certainly expecting a stoppage... or were Murray and Vanzie more shot than we actually realise????
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27488
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Post by stujones »

Knockout, it may be a little bit of both. I too was very impressed with Ramanov's previous outings here. However, he was shown on Ringside (must be a 6 months to a year ago) fighting on the same card as three other east europeans (Maloney promoting) and he was a tad dissapointing there.

While I think Vanzie did enough to beat Earl he was far from convincing, and really seemed exhausted in a slow paced fight. Vanzie looked a faded fighter.

Murray too has hardly looked the same fighter since the Ramanov defeat.

Both a definately on the slide, I think Ramanov can still go places (what is he 21), but I do also believe his victories flatter him a tad.
steve689
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 9655
Joined: 20 Jan 2003, 13:50

Post by steve689 »

stujones wrote:Knockout, it may be a little bit of both. I too was very impressed with Ramanov's previous outings here. However, he was shown on Ringside (must be a 6 months to a year ago) fighting on the same card as three other east europeans (Maloney promoting) and he was a tad dissapointing there.

While I think Vanzie did enough to beat Earl he was far from convincing, and really seemed exhausted in a slow paced fight. Vanzie looked a faded fighter.

Murray too has hardly looked the same fighter since the Ramanov defeat.

Both a definately on the slide, I think Ramanov can still go places (what is he 21), but I do also believe his victories flatter him a tad.
Good point Stu, i thought Vanzie won too but i have never been impressed with Earl in any match i have ever seen him in, he's just ready to be beaten IMO.
bennie
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 15244
Joined: 15 Nov 2002, 09:53

Post by bennie »

knockout wrote:apparently Romanov got quite a bad cut from a clash of heads... maybe it put him off... maybe he wasnt motivated,,, but i was certainly expecting a stoppage... or were Murray and Vanzie more shot than we actually realise????
Conway ain't a bad fighter. He was the first to really expose Alex Arthur's leaky defence and is far more comfortable at lightweight than he is at super-feather. He had been training for a British lightweight title fight on the Gomez-Arthur bill, but champion Graham Earl pulled out injured.
So Conway was in good shape, and put in a decent effort. As you point out Knockout, the bad cut Romanov suffered probably discouraged him a bit, but Conway deserves credit for a good losing performance.
stujones
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 27488
Joined: 29 Aug 2003, 15:08

Post by stujones »

bennie wrote:
knockout wrote:apparently Romanov got quite a bad cut from a clash of heads... maybe it put him off... maybe he wasnt motivated,,, but i was certainly expecting a stoppage... or were Murray and Vanzie more shot than we actually realise????
Conway ain't a bad fighter. He was the first to really expose Alex Arthur's leaky defence and is far more comfortable at lightweight than he is at super-feather. He had been training for a British lightweight title fight on the Gomez-Arthur bill, but champion Graham Earl pulled out injured.
So Conway was in good shape, and put in a decent effort. As you point out Knockout, the bad cut Romanov suffered probably discouraged him a bit, but Conway deserves credit for a good losing performance.
Yeah, thats very true. Whilst Steve Robinson was not the fighter he was I still don't think he was as finished as people thought he was. Scott Harrision, his possibly his finest performance, caught Robinson a little cold more than anything.

Not saying, had Robinson not got caught he would have won, but I did think it was a real 50:50 fight. Although Robinson was on a losing run, he was never embarresd and was fighting world class operators (except for Calvo). On a few of these occasions ( against Calvo and certainly Cassius Baloyi) Robinson could have won.

Yet Steve Conway beat him (pretty convincingly) which shows what he can do when ready.
leedswolf
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 25
Joined: 03 Nov 2003, 16:48

I was there and......

Post by leedswolf »

Well chaps..

Romanov was troubled by an early cut, but it did not effect what was a poor performance.

Full marks to Conway who never took a backward step and gave Romanov stacks of problems.

I'm sure it was just a bad day at the office for Romanov who looked as though his mind was elsewhere.

As for Conway 10 out of 10.... But I just hope his great performance doesn't scare off over opponents.

On this form he would be a true to test to the very best in the UK
Post Reply