BoxRec

BIGMARK wrote:It seems all these threads are blaming Haye for under performing but for my money Wlad put on his best performence to date. I personal thought Wlad would try to hold centre ring, not try to force the fight, sit back on his jab and not open up until Haye was tired . However Wlad came forward, close the space down,forced Haye onto the backfoot, showed good upper body movement and was not scared to throw punches (i havent seen him throw so many right hands in a bout 5 years). His jab was excellent through out the fight and IMO he was always looking for the KO right from the off, so for me Haye was beaten by a superior fighter

David Haye is a good small Heavyweight but Wlad is an Excellent big one who would give any boxer from any era a run for their money

I'd agree that Vitali would give any boxer from any era a run for their money just due to his granite chin and accuracy with his punches but i think even going back 10 years ago Lennox Lewis would have smashed Wlad to bits inside 6 rounds.

Yes Wlad deserves credit for being unbeaten since 2006 and coming back and rebuilding his career from big KO losses to Sanders and Brewster but it's hard to get past the fact that he throws just 2 type of punches during fights, left jab right hand.

I agree. I think Haye has found his level now.

I think you know as a boxer, as soon as the fight starts, what the other fella is like. I think Haye quickly realised that Klit was a class and weight above which is the reason he stayed in his shell

Totally agree Klitschko fought (and always fights) a very good fight. He's so effective with what he does, jab and when the opponent shoots a shot he steps back and lands either a strong left jab or a cuffing hook. He must be very difficult to hit as his feet are deceptively fast at taking him in and out of range. It'll take a great performance to take Wlad's titles

Not sure Lewis would have beaten a prime Tyson, not sure at all. not sure either about Lewis vs a prime Foreman.

BIGMARK wrote:It seems all these threads are blaming Haye for under performing but for my money Wlad put on his best performence to date. I personal thought Wlad would try to hold centre ring, not try to force the fight, sit back on his jab and not open up until Haye was tired . However Wlad came forward, close the space down,forced Haye onto the backfoot, showed good upper body movement and was not scared to throw punches (i havent seen him throw so many right hands in a bout 5 years). His jab was excellent through out the fight and IMO he was always looking for the KO right from the off, so for me Haye was beaten by a superior fighter

David Haye is a good small Heavyweight but Wlad is an Excellent big one who would give any boxer from any era a run for their money

Disagree 110% Mark,

Haye is a far better fighter than Wlad.
He is simply to small, its a great Heavyweight against a very good 21st century Super heavy.
That said a prime Holy would have walked though Wlad and chinned him, Holy had the chin to do it, Haye does not.

Haye beats ANY man his own size or smaller.

Raff The Frenchman wrote:Not sure Lewis would have beaten a prime Tyson, not sure at all. not sure either about Lewis vs a prime Foreman.

Well there's no real evidence he would have beaten any prime heavyweight, he definately would have competed very well against them though but at the same time he did struggle with Ray Mercer and Holyfield fight 2 which no matter what anyone says i've always seen as a close fight compared to the first which Lewis clearly won.

It's purely speculation but we never got to see the greatest heavyweight in history fighting which was an active Ali 1967-1970 during his prime years.

I'm still in shock that Wlad beats Haye and a few other puddings at Heavyweight and suddenly people are talking like he's an ATG Heavyweight..just can't see it and i want to be a believer.

Vitali Klitscko gets my full respect though, always been a big fan and it's just such a shame he had those 4 years away when he could have really dominated the division right through till now. He's still the best Heavyweight out there for me.

BIGMARK wrote:It seems all these threads are blaming Haye for under performing but for my money Wlad put on his best performence to date. I personal thought Wlad would try to hold centre ring, not try to force the fight, sit back on his jab and not open up until Haye was tired . However Wlad came forward, close the space down,forced Haye onto the backfoot, showed good upper body movement and was not scared to throw punches (i havent seen him throw so many right hands in a bout 5 years). His jab was excellent through out the fight and IMO he was always looking for the KO right from the off, so for me Haye was beaten by a superior fighter

David Haye is a good small Heavyweight but Wlad is an Excellent big one who would give any boxer from any era a run for their money

Agreed!

Coco wrote:I think you know as a boxer, as soon as the fight starts, what the other fella is like. I think Haye quickly realised that Klit was a class and weight above which is the reason he stayed in his shell

yup about when he swatted him to the floor like an oversized mosquito!

Lennox Lewis could be frustrating to watch also. He was almost as reluctant as Wlad is in a couple of his defences. So lets not paste over things eh

I do think its good that we do now appreciate the Klitschko brothers atlast. It took us a long time to appreciate Lennox also

Jon Saxon wrote:

BIGMARK wrote:It seems all these threads are blaming Haye for under performing but for my money Wlad put on his best performence to date. I personal thought Wlad would try to hold centre ring, not try to force the fight, sit back on his jab and not open up until Haye was tired . However Wlad came forward, close the space down,forced Haye onto the backfoot, showed good upper body movement and was not scared to throw punches (i havent seen him throw so many right hands in a bout 5 years). His jab was excellent through out the fight and IMO he was always looking for the KO right from the off, so for me Haye was beaten by a superior fighter

David Haye is a good small Heavyweight but Wlad is an Excellent big one who would give any boxer from any era a run for their money

Disagree 110% Mark,

Haye is a far better fighter than Wlad.
He is simply to small, its a great Heavyweight against a very good 21st century Super heavy.
That said a prime Holy would have walked though Wlad and chinned him, Holy had the chin to do it, Haye does not.

Haye beats ANY man his own size or smaller.

Rubbish,if he was better he would have beat a bigger guy !

Yes well done Wlad - you cant be HW Champion for that long without doing something right.

He is miles and above better than every other Heavyweight - quicker, faster, stronger and in his peak.

I don't know - give him credit for being involved in a shit fight? Would you pay to watch him again? I'd pay for some sought of freak fight with him and his brother! Otherwise let's face it he won every round of a really boring fight.

yid14 wrote:I don't know - give him credit for being involved in a shit fight? Would you pay to watch him again? I'd pay for some sought of freak fight with him and his brother! Otherwise let's face it he won every round of a really boring fight.

Sounds like you are talking about Floyd Mayweather, another great champ who is miles and above everyone else also - so good thats its "boring".

He fights to his strengths - he has 49 kos from 59 fights - I would call that "boring" - just very very effective.

His opponents cant get near him - at Heavyweight he is the man, and likely will be for a few more years to come.

Alba wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:

BIGMARK wrote:It seems all these threads are blaming Haye for under performing but for my money Wlad put on his best performence to date. I personal thought Wlad would try to hold centre ring, not try to force the fight, sit back on his jab and not open up until Haye was tired . However Wlad came forward, close the space down,forced Haye onto the backfoot, showed good upper body movement and was not scared to throw punches (i havent seen him throw so many right hands in a bout 5 years). His jab was excellent through out the fight and IMO he was always looking for the KO right from the off, so for me Haye was beaten by a superior fighter

David Haye is a good small Heavyweight but Wlad is an Excellent big one who would give any boxer from any era a run for their money

Disagree 110% Mark,

Haye is a far better fighter than Wlad.
He is simply to small, its a great Heavyweight against a very good 21st century Super heavy.
That said a prime Holy would have walked though Wlad and chinned him, Holy had the chin to do it, Haye does not.

Haye beats ANY man his own size or smaller.

Rubbish,if he was better he would have beat a bigger guy !

What shite you write, by this thinking Lewis was a better fighter than Holyfield? get the fornicate outa here, Holyfield was the best all rounded HW ever and he lost to Lewis.

So shut it wee baws your embarrising my country,

ThereByTheGrace wrote:

yid14 wrote:I don't know - give him credit for being involved in a shit fight? Would you pay to watch him again? I'd pay for some sought of freak fight with him and his brother! Otherwise let's face it he won every round of a really boring fight.

Sounds like you are talking about Floyd Mayweather, another great champ who is miles and above everyone else also - so good thats its "boring".

He fights to his strengths - he has 49 kos from 59 fights - I would call that "boring" - just very very effective.

His opponents cant get near him - at Heavyweight he is the man, and likely will be for a few more years to come.

I'm not looking forward to his next fight though, it's boring and I certainly wouldn't pay to see him! Clearly I follow boxing for a little charisma, not the brash talking bullshit of Haye but just boxing - that was crap and boring last night, your a fool if you think otherwise!

yid14 wrote:

ThereByTheGrace wrote:

yid14 wrote:I don't know - give him credit for being involved in a shit fight? Would you pay to watch him again? I'd pay for some sought of freak fight with him and his brother! Otherwise let's face it he won every round of a really boring fight.

Sounds like you are talking about Floyd Mayweather, another great champ who is miles and above everyone else also - so good thats its "boring".

He fights to his strengths - he has 49 kos from 59 fights - I would call that "boring" - just very very effective.

His opponents cant get near him - at Heavyweight he is the man, and likely will be for a few more years to come.

I'm not looking forward to his next fight though, it's boring and I certainly wouldn't pay to see him! Clearly I follow boxing for a little charisma, not the brash talking bullshit of Haye but just boxing - that was crap and boring last night, your a fool if you think otherwise!

It was disappointing yes, but I wouldnt say crap and boring. I just love my boxing and admire world class boxers I guess.

Sorry I didn't mean to be so harsh, but I was looking forward to this fight for such along time and it was shit and boring.

yid14 wrote:Sorry I didn't mean to be so harsh, but I was looking forward to this fight for such along time and it was shit and boring.

No worries!

Roll on the "Brawl to settle it all", "The bout to knock the other guy out!"

Fury v Chisora - winner vs Wlad at Unannounced German Stadium - November?

ThereByTheGrace wrote:

yid14 wrote:Sorry I didn't mean to be so harsh, but I was looking forward to this fight for such along time and it was shit and boring.

No worries!

Roll on the "Brawl to settle it all", "The bout to knock the other guy out!"

Fury v Chisora - winner vs Wlad at Unannounced German Stadium - November?

And I'll be there at Fury-Chisora!!!

Jon Saxon wrote:

BIGMARK wrote:It seems all these threads are blaming Haye for under performing but for my money Wlad put on his best performence to date. I personal thought Wlad would try to hold centre ring, not try to force the fight, sit back on his jab and not open up until Haye was tired . However Wlad came forward, close the space down,forced Haye onto the backfoot, showed good upper body movement and was not scared to throw punches (i havent seen him throw so many right hands in a bout 5 years). His jab was excellent through out the fight and IMO he was always looking for the KO right from the off, so for me Haye was beaten by a superior fighter

David Haye is a good small Heavyweight but Wlad is an Excellent big one who would give any boxer from any era a run for their money

Disagree 110% Mark,

Haye is a far better fighter than Wlad.
He is simply to small, its a great Heavyweight against a very good 21st century Super heavy.
That said a prime Holy would have walked though Wlad and chinned him, Holy had the chin to do it, Haye does not.

Haye beats ANY man his own size or smaller.

Disagree 110% with this.

I don't think Haye is technically a top fighter at all, and certainly not as good as Wlad.
And is having a good chin not part of being a good boxer?
And when you say any man his size or smaller is this currently or in history? Don't agree either way. I think Hopkins would beat him out of the currents (at cruiser - unless you are just talking heavy) and could come up with an endless list from history.
Overall, I don't believe from what Haye has shown in the HW division (ie not much) that you can call him a 'great Heavyweight'.

Anyway all these height arguments about Haye are tiring - If you want the fame and money of the division (which he does) then height can't be an excuse. If you are good enough you are tall enough.

Joe Frazier gave away 4 inches to Ali and I wont go through the countless other wins in the division by guys much smaller than their opponent.

mkirkhope wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:

BIGMARK wrote:It seems all these threads are blaming Haye for under performing but for my money Wlad put on his best performence to date. I personal thought Wlad would try to hold centre ring, not try to force the fight, sit back on his jab and not open up until Haye was tired . However Wlad came forward, close the space down,forced Haye onto the backfoot, showed good upper body movement and was not scared to throw punches (i havent seen him throw so many right hands in a bout 5 years). His jab was excellent through out the fight and IMO he was always looking for the KO right from the off, so for me Haye was beaten by a superior fighter

David Haye is a good small Heavyweight but Wlad is an Excellent big one who would give any boxer from any era a run for their money

Disagree 110% Mark,

Haye is a far better fighter than Wlad.
He is simply to small, its a great Heavyweight against a very good 21st century Super heavy.
That said a prime Holy would have walked though Wlad and chinned him, Holy had the chin to do it, Haye does not.

Haye beats ANY man his own size or smaller.

Disagree 110% with this.

I don't think Haye is technically a top fighter at all, and certainly not as good as Wlad.
And is having a good chin not part of being a good boxer?
And when you say any man his size or smaller is this currently or in history? Don't agree either way. I think Hopkins would beat him out of the currents (at cruiser - unless you are just talking heavy) and could come up with an endless list from history.
Overall, I don't believe from what Haye has shown in the HW division (ie not much) that you can call him a 'great Heavyweight'.

Anyway all these height arguments about Haye are tiring - If you want the fame and money of the division (which he does) then height can't be an excuse. If you are good enough you are tall enough.

Joe Frazier gave away 4 inches to Ali and I wont go through the countless other wins in the division by guys much smaller than their opponent.

Any man his size in TODAY'S boxing world, hell Holy would have walked right through him at CW, however he would blow Nard out of the water at any weight, lol Hoiopkins? give me a fukin break.
The differance between Ali v Frazer and Haye Vs Wlad is vast.
I could explain in detail but would you even understand and more to the point would it even be worth it?


Methinks not.

mkirkhope wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:

BIGMARK wrote:It seems all these threads are blaming Haye for under performing but for my money Wlad put on his best performence to date. I personal thought Wlad would try to hold centre ring, not try to force the fight, sit back on his jab and not open up until Haye was tired . However Wlad came forward, close the space down,forced Haye onto the backfoot, showed good upper body movement and was not scared to throw punches (i havent seen him throw so many right hands in a bout 5 years). His jab was excellent through out the fight and IMO he was always looking for the KO right from the off, so for me Haye was beaten by a superior fighter

David Haye is a good small Heavyweight but Wlad is an Excellent big one who would give any boxer from any era a run for their money

Disagree 110% Mark,

Haye is a far better fighter than Wlad.
He is simply to small, its a great Heavyweight against a very good 21st century Super heavy.
That said a prime Holy would have walked though Wlad and chinned him, Holy had the chin to do it, Haye does not.

Haye beats ANY man his own size or smaller.

Disagree 110% with this.

I don't think Haye is technically a top fighter at all, and certainly not as good as Wlad.
And is having a good chin not part of being a good boxer?
And when you say any man his size or smaller is this currently or in history? Don't agree either way. I think Hopkins would beat him out of the currents (at cruiser - unless you are just talking heavy) and could come up with an endless list from history.
Overall, I don't believe from what Haye has shown in the HW division (ie not much) that you can call him a 'great Heavyweight'.

Anyway all these height arguments about Haye are tiring - If you want the fame and money of the division (which he does) then height can't be an excuse. If you are good enough you are tall enough.

Joe Frazier gave away 4 inches to Ali and I wont go through the countless other wins in the division by guys much smaller than their opponent.

Sorry mate I just looked at my initial post it and was rude I appoligise (im stuck at home in pain with a fucked up foot and frustrated) same for 'Alba' I should think before I post sometimes.

However I do feel strongly that If wlad was 6.2/3 he wouldnt even be in the world picture.

Haye was simply too small but has the most talent for his weight and height in the world today.

Hopkins would have got ko'ed on Satuirday night.
I believe fat arse Toney (if in shape) could get under Wlad and mess him up, not saying he would win but he would have done better than most.

Haye hardly had a amrk on him yet look at Wlad's "pizza face":-)

I honestly cant believe that you think that a guyt that Joe Calzaghe beat would beat the much bigger Haye?
I know you think that nard is fundametly sound but Haye would be like Pascal on growth serum not only in hieght but in speed and power.


And BTW way I challenge anyone on this forum to tell me of a better schooled heavweight fighter in history than a prime Evander Holyfield.

Haye just isn't on the level of Wladimir Klitschko, simple as that. It's nothing to be ashamed of, of course.

Size isn't particularly relevant. With their respective styles, Klitschko at 6'3'' and Haye at 6'6'' - Klitschko would still win.

Haye simply isn't experienced enough against top quality fighters at heavyweight due to inactivity - partly caused no doubt by being paid a lot of money which may have stemmed his hunger somewhat..... and has plenty of flaws in his game that top quality fighters like Klitschko can expose.

He went the scenic route at heavy rather than making his way through the fringe contenders and so on, which of course was his choice, but ultimately may have counted towards his downfall.

Still, the wonga will ease his pain in that badly broken toe of his.

LeedsLad wrote:Haye just isn't on the level of Wladimir Klitschko, simple as that. It's nothing to be ashamed of, of course.

Size isn't particularly relevant. With their respective styles, Klitschko at 6'3'' and Haye at 6'6'' - Klitschko would still win.

Haye simply isn't experienced enough against top quality fighters at heavyweight due to inactivity - partly caused no doubt by being paid a lot of money which may have stemmed his hunger somewhat..... and has plenty of flaws in his game that top quality fighters like Klitschko can expose.

He went the scenic route at heavy rather than making his way through the fringe contenders and so on, which of course was his choice, but ultimately may have counted towards his downfall.

Still, the wonga will ease his pain in that badly broken toe of his.

Get out of here, Wladimir would have had about 6 losses by now if he was 6ft 3 and had 3/4 inches less reach. People are going waaaay over the top now, next they'll be saying he's a top 10 ATG Heavyweight!