BoxRec

i am always conflicted with wladimir klitschko.
whenever i get excited again about him he shows
a performance with too much grabbing that makes
me frustrated again.

i for one have always been thinking that tyson fury
is totally overrated. i think he has great heart and
decent power, but he doesn't strike me as very fast,
enduring or intelligent as a boxer. he definitely is
a huge entertainer, possibly among the best the
sport has ever seen. but that won't help him much
within the ring.

wladimir seems to look better against tall opponents.
i am afraid of the grabbing, but i could imagine that
we reached the point, where wlad gets punished
earlier by the refs and that could make a big difference.

boxing wise it should be any easy night for wlad, but
i could imagine he gets intimidated if fury makes a
real stance, which i think he will.

i still have wlad in a possibly weird fight.

Mike Tyson kills Wlad.


This Tyson. Em, not so much.

diddy wrote:Mike Tyson kills Wlad.


This Tyson. Em, not so much.

This. It's insulting to Mike Tyson this giant slab of flab was named after him. Fury doesn't even have a punchers chance, his power has cane from inflicting his body mass onto smaller men, like Cunningham for example.

He's also chinny. Wlad will pick him to bits in a couple of rounds like he did to Pulev.

Klitschko by a landslide.

Fury has little or no chance whatsoever, unless Wladimir suddenly gets old.

I give to Fury 35/40% of chances. Fury can boxe with boxe stances. He got good power in both hands. He defintly can get Klitschko in trouble.

geronimo wrote:I give to Fury 35/40% of chances. Fury can boxe with boxe stances. He got good power in both hands. He defintly can get Klitschko in trouble.

I think Fury's power is average at best. His boxing ability is reasonable(ish), his chin is suspect.... He's a big man, which should make it 'interesting' (in a way that klitscho will stay out of range and nothing will happen for 3 rounds).

Fury will either fight to stay the distance or, if he chooses to engage, get caught on the way in and go down for the count.

Fury's chances are slim to none, IMO.

If ever there was a fighter who will make wlad look sensational its tyson fury, tyson has nothing to bother Wlad. Would love to see Fury pull off a mega upset but the only thing hes winning is the pre fight antics.

geronimo wrote:I give to Fury 35/40% of chances. Fury can boxe with boxe stances. He got good power in both hands. He defintly can get Klitschko in trouble.

You are quite mental. Fury has average power, he has a poor chin, his technique is far from stellar.

About the only advantage he has is reach, and Wlad will soon negate that by stepping inside his jab.

He's going to get outboxed, and then torn to pieces.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

geronimo wrote:I give to Fury 35/40% of chances. Fury can boxe with boxe stances. He got good power in both hands. He defintly can get Klitschko in trouble.

You are quite mental. Fury has average power, he has a poor chin, his technique is far from stellar.

About the only advantage he has is reach, and Wlad will soon negate that by stepping inside his jab.

He's going to get outboxed, and then torn to pieces.

You are quite stupid. He got 75% of KO's. Is the only who won way KO with Cunningham and he destroyed Chisora in the second fight. KId, talk to me when you'll prepared about boxing. Good bye

geronimo wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:

geronimo wrote:I give to Fury 35/40% of chances. Fury can boxe with boxe stances. He got good power in both hands. He defintly can get Klitschko in trouble.

You are quite mental. Fury has average power, he has a poor chin, his technique is far from stellar.

About the only advantage he has is reach, and Wlad will soon negate that by stepping inside his jab.

He's going to get outboxed, and then torn to pieces.

You are quite stupid. He got 75% of KO's. Is the only who won way KO with Cunningham and he destroyed Chisora in the second fight. KId, talk to me when you'll prepared about boxing. Good bye

75% of KO's against who - people Cunningham who put him on his arse? Cunningham fought most of his career at cruiserweight! That's why nobody else stopped him, he was fighting much smaller men than Fury.

He has bought a bunch of stiffs. I've forgotten more about boxing than you'll ever know pal, I can assure you. And don't kid me, I'm 44 years old mate.

If you think Fury is a puncher, then you're totally out of your mind. David Haye smashed Chisora to pieces in a few rounds, knocking him spark out - now that is a puncher.

About the only advantage he has is reach, and Wlad will soon negate that by stepping inside his jab.

He's going to get outboxed, and then torn to pieces.[/quote]

You are quite stupid. He got 75% of KO's. Is the only who won way KO with Cunningham and he destroyed Chisora in the second fight. KId, talk to me when you'll prepared about boxing. Good bye[/quote]

75% of KO's against who - people Cunningham who put him on his arse? Cunningham fought most of his career at cruiserweight! That's why nobody else stopped him, he was fighting much smaller men than Fury.

He has bought a bunch of stiffs. I've forgotten more about boxing than you'll ever know pal, I can assure you. And don't kid me, I'm 44 years old mate.

If you think Fury is a puncher, then you're totally out of your mind. David Haye smashed Chisora to pieces in a few rounds, knocking him spark out - now that is a puncher.[/quote]

Treat me with respect and i treat you with respect. I never sad that Fury is a puncher! A puncher is Marciano, Lyle, Shavers, Formenan, not Fury! I just sad that is power punch is "good", nothing more. Wlad Klitschko wha has fought? All the heavyweight division nowadays is a mediocre division.

Yeah Haye has got a solid punch. Remember that Vitali Klitschko can't KO Chisora...

geronimo wrote:About the only advantage he has is reach, and Wlad will soon negate that by stepping inside his jab.

He's going to get outboxed, and then torn to pieces.

You are quite stupid. He got 75% of KO's. Is the only who won way KO with Cunningham and he destroyed Chisora in the second fight. KId, talk to me when you'll prepared about boxing. Good bye[/quote]

75% of KO's against who - people Cunningham who put him on his arse? Cunningham fought most of his career at cruiserweight! That's why nobody else stopped him, he was fighting much smaller men than Fury.

He has bought a bunch of stiffs. I've forgotten more about boxing than you'll ever know pal, I can assure you. And don't kid me, I'm 44 years old mate.

If you think Fury is a puncher, then you're totally out of your mind. David Haye smashed Chisora to pieces in a few rounds, knocking him spark out - now that is a puncher.[/quote]

Treat me with respect and i treat you with respect. I never sad that Fury is a puncher! A puncher is Marciano, Lyle, Shavers, Formenan, not Fury! I just sad that is power punch is "good", nothing more. Wlad Klitschko wha has fought? All the heavyweight division nowadays is a mediocre division.

Yeah Haye has got a solid punch. Remember that Vitali Klitschko can't KO Chisora...[/quote]

Ok, well perhaps I misconstrued, I thought you were suggesting he was a puncher.

I think that his opposition flatters him in the power stakes, he landed shed loads of shots on Chisora in both fights, and didn't put him over, the 2nd fight Chisora was little more than an ambling punch bag.

I'd say his power is better than average, but no more than that.

I thought you mean the real Tyson lol. I looked at the poll and was like REALLY?..... LOL but Wladimir will beat Fury decision I think

Ok, we understood each other now. Have a nice day.

I voted for Wladimir - he's a deserving favourite, but I don't see this as the foregone conclusion that some do.

I agree that Fury isn't a puncher - he certainly doesn't have the one-punch pop of a Wlad, Wilder, Stiverne, Joshua, Haye or David Price. That said, he punches hard enough to hurt Wlad, whose chin isn't concrete.

Fury's punch resistance is definitely a concern - he was put down by non-puncher Neven Pajkic (28% KO ratio) and former cruiserweight Steve Cunningham (37% KO ratio), who wasn't known as a puncher at cruiserweight, let alone heavyweight. That said, unlike Wlad, he has never been stopped and recovered well from being put down both times.

On the other hand, I think it's hard to deny that Tyson Fury has shown dramatic improvement over the last few years. Despite his flabby physique and yo-yo-ing weight, he has generally shown an ability to pace himself in fights and seems to have fairly good stamina, arguably better than that of the chiseled Klitschko. In his last two fights he has completely dominated ranked opponents in an almost Wlad-like style - winning every round and slowly grinding them down for a late stoppage. He beat Dereck Chisora more one-sidedly than Vitali Klitschko and more easily than David Haye (who stopped Chisora earlier, but was breathing hard and never looked in command to the extent that Fury was).

Some people repeat that the only advantages Fury has over Wlad are age and size, but that isn't true. Fury has the ability to switch stances and is a far better inside fighter than Wlad. He also throws a good uppercut, which is a punch that Wlad doesn't seem to know how to throw. Fury may lack Wlad's punching power and polish, but he is by far the more complex fighter with more tools in his belt.

For me, the biggest black mark against Fury is that he doesn't have real fight experience against anyone of Wlad's size and punching power. If he had a win over a Mariusz Wach or similar, I would give him a much better chance.

I think the best game plan for Fury is to try to get on the inside, impose his size and weight on Wlad and use his superior infighting skills, while being cautious to protect his questionable chin. If Wlad is fighting cautiously, he could have some success with a southpaw stance. If Wlad is going for the KO, Fury needs to smother his punches and stay on the inside.

I think the best game plan for Wlad is to be aggressive and try to throw Fury off his game plan. If Fury goes southpaw, Wlad needs to neglect his jab and walk him down like he did to Tony Thompson in their rematch, and try to land a big right hand and put him to sleep. If Wlad can draw Fury into trading punches, it may actually play into Wlad's favour, as he is the one with one-punch KO power.

jezzamundo wrote:I voted for Wladimir - he's a deserving favourite, but I don't see this as the foregone conclusion that some do.

I agree that Fury isn't a puncher - he certainly doesn't have the one-punch pop of a Wlad, Wilder, Stiverne, Joshua, Haye or David Price. That said, he punches hard enough to hurt Wlad, whose chin isn't concrete.

Fury's punch resistance is definitely a concern - he was put down by non-puncher Neven Pajkic (28% KO ratio) and former cruiserweight Steve Cunningham (37% KO ratio), who wasn't known as a puncher at cruiserweight, let alone heavyweight. That said, unlike Wlad, he has never been stopped and recovered well from being put down both times.

On the other hand, I think it's hard to deny that Tyson Fury has shown dramatic improvement over the last few years. Despite his flabby physique and yo-yo-ing weight, he has generally shown an ability to pace himself in fights and seems to have fairly good stamina, arguably better than that of the chiseled Klitschko. In his last two fights he has completely dominated ranked opponents in an almost Wlad-like style - winning every round and slowly grinding them down for a late stoppage. He beat Dereck Chisora more one-sidedly than Vitali Klitschko and more easily than David Haye (who stopped Chisora earlier, but was breathing hard and never looked in command to the extent that Fury was).

Some people repeat that the only advantages Fury has over Wlad are age and size, but that isn't true. Fury has the ability to switch stances and is a far better inside fighter than Wlad. He also throws a good uppercut, which is a punch that Wlad doesn't seem to know how to throw. Fury may lack Wlad's punching power and polish, but he is by far the more complex fighter with more tools in his belt.

For me, the biggest black mark against Fury is that he doesn't have real fight experience against anyone of Wlad's size and punching power. If he had a win over a Mariusz Wach or similar, I would give him a much better chance.

I think the best game plan for Fury is to try to get on the inside, impose his size and weight on Wlad and use his superior infighting skills, while being cautious to protect his questionable chin. If Wlad is fighting cautiously, he could have some success with a southpaw stance. If Wlad is going for the KO, Fury needs to smother his punches and stay on the inside.

I think the best game plan for Wlad is to be aggressive and try to throw Fury off his game plan. If Fury goes southpaw, Wlad needs to neglect his jab and walk him down like he did to Tony Thompson in their rematch, and try to land a big right hand and put him to sleep. If Wlad can draw Fury into trading punches, it may actually play into Wlad's favour, as he is the one with one-punch KO power.

Finally a reasonable post. Agree completely. Fury has numerous advantages over Klitschko. He does have a big problem though and its his suspect chin. The question is will it hold up to Klitschko power. If it does and if he doesn't get demolished like Pulev with a single punch I favor Fury to win.

RandomUsername wrote:This won't be the first time that I voice my opinion that Wlad is getting beat and Fury is going to make it look easy. The reactions that we'll get after that will be typical of idiot boxing fans. Some will JUMP on the Fury bandwagon praising him as the new Ali, others won't be able to keep their mouths shut about some off night or flue or who knows what but the fact is and will be that Wladimir just wasn't ever that good. If this guy would have been fighting in the crusierweight division he would never have become champ, lhw, smw, mw, jr mw, ww enough said. He's been able to get by on a strange combination of hiding behind his brother, size, improving skills but not such good stamina or chin. Now he's facing someone bigger, similarly skilled with better stamina and a better chin. It's all over.

This all being said enough is enough. The HW division is becoming the division of "who's biggest", Fury, Wlad, Vitaly, Lewis all these fighters relied heavily on their size. We could see some quality matchups in a higher weight limit cruiserweight division but lately the little guys have just been serving as cannon fodder for the big guys, just because you're not Andre the giant shouldn't mean that almost regardless of your skills you're just gonna be used for target practice by bigger boys.

Can't say I agree with much at all here. Size matters, but the reason we haven't had a small heavyweight champion for a while is because there hasn't been a great small heavyweight. Many of the top guys a level below Wlad at heavyweight are relatively small. If anything, I think cruiserweight should have stayed at 190lb because the gulf between LHW and 200lb is too big.

Well we are talking when they were both active. Wlad butchers Iron Mike

If you matched Wlad 2006 vs Tyson 1987, that would be a real good one.

RandomUsername wrote:Well, I agree with you partially at least. Yes we need a 190 pound division but we should also have a 210 pound division and then we could have our unlimited heavyweigh division.

Larry Holmes was 211 pounds when he fought Ali, Fraizer weighed in at 205 for ALI I, Norton I 210. Marciano VS Moore both weighed in at 188. These were good fights. Humans have simply gotten bigger and finally the really big guys have learned how to fight, boxing should adapt to this.

Wlad though is a bad example. Very very few guys his size can fight well. I'd have picked Larry Holmes to whip the living daylights out of Fury.

Marciano beat a 255 lb abe atell, Louis smashed Carnera to bits.

Wlad is an exception, not a rule.

I do however agree that it makes sense to have cruiserweight from 190-210, or maybe even 215. Most top guys are over 230 lbs these days in the heavyweight division.

The Furious one is going to do this mark my words "And The New" I think the Chisora fight showed us that Tyson has plenty of more levels in him. We will see.

I pick Wlad to win.But if anyone can pull the upset at this day and time it is Tyson Fury.
I hope Tyson wins just because I would rather have a conversation on world events with BNOVELIST
than to watch another hug fest put on by Wlad.

man wrote:i am always conflicted with wladimir klitschko.
whenever i get excited again about him he shows
a performance with too much grabbing that makes
me frustrated again.

i for one have always been thinking that tyson fury
is totally overrated. i think he has great heart and
decent power, but he doesn't strike me as very fast,
enduring or intelligent as a boxer. he definitely is
a huge entertainer, possibly among the best the
sport has ever seen. but that won't help him much
within the ring.

wladimir seems to look better against tall opponents.
i am afraid of the grabbing, but i could imagine that
we reached the point, where wlad gets punished
earlier by the refs and that could make a big difference.

boxing wise it should be any easy night for wlad, but
i could imagine he gets intimidated if fury makes a
real stance, which i think he will.

i still have wlad in a possibly weird fight.

Tyson Fury is amongst the greatest entertainers the sport has ever seen?

Are you on crack - he's quite amusing, but he's not eclipsed Ali just yet I don't think....!

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Tyson Fury is amongst the greatest entertainers the sport has ever seen?

Are you on crack - he's quite amusing, but he's not eclipsed Ali just yet I don't think....!

amongst didn't mean the when i checked
last time.

man wrote:

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Tyson Fury is amongst the greatest entertainers the sport has ever seen?

Are you on crack - he's quite amusing, but he's not eclipsed Ali just yet I don't think....!

amongst didn't mean the when i checked
last time.

Yes, but to event suggest he's amongst the best is pretty ludicrous, a couple of wisecracks about underpants hardy makes you amongst the greatest entertainers in the history of boxing, either in or out of the ring.

Eubank and Hamed, John L Sullivan, Jack Dempsey, I mean Christ, he's just a guy who throws a few barbs around, hardly a compelling character.

I do find him mildly amusing at times, but it's pretty infantile stuff.

jamesmcdonnell wrote:Yes, but to event suggest he's amongst the best is pretty ludicrous, a couple of wisecracks about underpants hardy makes you amongst the greatest entertainers in the history of boxing, either in or out of the ring.

Eubank and Hamed, John L Sullivan, Jack Dempsey, I mean Christ, he's just a guy who throws a few barbs around, hardly a compelling character.

I do find him mildly amusing at times, but it's pretty infantile stuff.

well, i for one believe he is among the
most entertaining fighters ever. but i
sense we differ in what we mean by that.

but cheers, man, nothing worth debating ...