Page 1 of 1
Vitali win is better for boxing
Posted: 12 Dec 2004, 20:23
by E
Sorry to say - but not only am I glad Vitali won (I had a bet on him) but it is also much better for boxing.
At least we have a obvious number one - had Danny won and we would be in an even worse state than the 80s heavyweights when at least we had Larry Holmes.
How many divisions can we say that about currently?
And I have to say I got sick of reading everyday about a different reason from Jim McDonell about why Williams would win, he was really grasping at straws....
The thought of a guy beaten by Julius Francis and Michael Sprott as 'heavyweight champion' is too depressing for words.
At least Danny has three big fights left:
Tyson, Harrison or Skelton.
Posted: 12 Dec 2004, 20:51
by stujones
I'm sure 99% of us would tip Klitschko over everybody, but that still doesn't mean to say we have an obvious number one. Who won the contest between Vitali and Byrd?
The devision is in as bad a state as the 1980's, worse if anything. Klitshcko has NO defining fights in his career, nothing. Larry Holmes fought and beat a fair few decent fighters and Kenny Norton was his defining hour.
Mike Tyson main era (1986-1989) is the same as now, we have one dominant champion and nobody else. Tyson will never have the legacy he perhaps deserved because he had no defining fights. An inactive bulked up Light Heavyweight (who was gifted a decision vs an aging Holmes) isn't what I call a legacy defining fight. Given Larry Holmes victory over Mercer and good performances vs Holyfield and McCall (very close fight) perhaps its Holmes that stands as Tysons' best win. A past it Larry Holmes!
It is more unfortunate maybe for Tyson in that many of the fighters who he fought will have the "we'll never know what could have happend to him". I mean, Pinklon Thomas looked a good little fight, a few experts tipped him to beat Iron Mike. However, Tyson destroyed him and his career was pretty much in tatters after that. Similarly with Tyrell Biggs (although drugs destroyed him). With the Don King Heavyweight PPV's WE KNOW that the other champions are poor.
Klitschko might have 3-4 years left in him, I cannot see anyone coming through to challenge him and seal his legacy. Tyson cleaned up the devision (bar Witherspoon) an fought pretty much the entire top ten, but yet never had a legacy fight during his peak years. I'm afraid we will never truly know how good Klitschko is, and for that his lasting legacy will suffer.
.
Posted: 12 Dec 2004, 20:55
by Wales
whilst i personally see vitali #1 I dnot think WE have a number one till he beats ruiz and / or byrd.
As for it being a good thing for boxing i agree, however, If williams had beat vitali surely he would have had to have been the better boxer, hence a much improved williams from theone we saw loose to francis /sprott...
My question; where does Williams stand now? WIlliams v Skelton type fighter or Williams Vs Monte Barret type fighter. From what warren says (i.e - I want danny to retire) it sounds like he'll be ack on these shores fighting skelton for the brit title!! (cough andliningwarrens pocketsintheprocess cough)
Posted: 12 Dec 2004, 21:05
by stujones
I think its all up to Danny, alot will depend on the views of the likes of Merchant and co (I still don't know) did they go for the "Danny the braveheart" angle or "Danny the piss poor fighter angle" (which I still think it should be "piss poor performance", I still have some belief).
Don King is desperate to conjure up his stable of heavyweight fighters, I think it would be a good idea to try and sneak a deal with King. If Kali Meehan can get two high profiled bouts then Danny can immediately still.
It looks like Klitchsko might be facing Toney or Rahman next, so maybe a fight with Barrett under the DK banner in some sort of eliminator bout would be acceptable. Perhaps a rematch with Kali Meehan would generate interest.
In my opinion, if at all possible he should really look towards maybe a clash with Ruiz or Brewester. It all depends on what the US papers think of Danny now and what Mr King can bring to the table. The US public are getting fed up of the same inept faces fighting in a round robin style event on PPV, perhaps Danny could add a different tonic to this.
I think thats what Danny should do, He's 31 got a lonsdale belt, he is not going to get any better than this - so he needs to fight at a much higher level than Skelton (if at all possible). A Samil Sam rematch or Maskaev would be the lowest acceptable fight for Danny.
Posted: 12 Dec 2004, 21:24
by Wales
its a shame that in my opinion his stock has actually dropped after last night, although he fought well, did he actually land a decent punch in 8rds of boxing??
Ithink danny should cut his losses, be happy with his dollars and come back on a very very low key level! surely taking the punches he did against tyson and then only a matter of months later taking a very one sided beat down can only lead to three or four easy low key KO's.
Posted: 12 Dec 2004, 21:32
by stujones
Wales wrote: against tyson and then only a matter of months later taking a very one sided beat down can only lead to three or four easy low key KO's.
Maybe that isn't a bad idea. However, I don't think he should be fighting a Skelton/Sprott type figure. Perhaps a few journeymen as warm ups and then bang straight back up there. Fighting for the British title is something he should have stopped years ago, he is past that stage.
Posted: 13 Dec 2004, 09:57
by E
There are still 4 biggish fights for Danny:
-Skelton
-Harrison
-Tyson
-Hide
These would all be interesting fights and can get Danny a few quid.
I can't understand why FW wants him to retire.........
Posted: 13 Dec 2004, 13:10
by Goz
Funny thing is although Danny beat Tyson I would give Tyson a better shot at beating Vitali. Only for 2 rounds mind, but Tyson is still one of the most skilled and hard-hitting Heavys out there and for that short period of time stands the best chance of getting under that Klitschko jab and connecting.
Unlikely because he couldn't do it against Lennox but as I say he might still have the best chance out there.
Maybe an in shape and focused David Tua would stand a chance because of his iron chin?
Posted: 13 Dec 2004, 14:17
by stujones
Goz wrote:Funny thing is although Danny beat Tyson I would give Tyson a better shot at beating Vitali. Only for 2 rounds mind, but Tyson is still one of the most skilled and hard-hitting Heavys out there and for that short period of time stands the best chance of getting under that Klitschko jab and connecting.
Unlikely because he couldn't do it against Lennox but as I say he might still have the best chance out there.
Maybe an in shape and focused David Tua would stand a chance because of his iron chin?
Nah Tua would get busted up, but Tyson I agree with you entirely (I was getting battered on another thread here by suggesting that).
Posted: 13 Dec 2004, 17:20
by E
stujones wrote:Goz wrote:Funny thing is although Danny beat Tyson I would give Tyson a better shot at beating Vitali. Only for 2 rounds mind, but Tyson is still one of the most skilled and hard-hitting Heavys out there and for that short period of time stands the best chance of getting under that Klitschko jab and connecting.
Unlikely because he couldn't do it against Lennox but as I say he might still have the best chance out there.
Maybe an in shape and focused David Tua would stand a chance because of his iron chin?
Nah Tua would get busted up, but Tyson I agree with you entirely (I was getting battered on another thread here by suggesting that).
I can't believe peoiple are still delusional about Tyson...he is shot, too old for his style, doesn't train, and Vitali would do the same thing to him that Lennox did.
The Tyson of the 80s is long gone - get used to it.
Posted: 14 Dec 2004, 09:37
by Goz
E wrote:
I can't believe peoiple are still delusional about Tyson...he is shot, too old for his style, doesn't train, and Vitali would do the same thing to him that Lennox did.
The Tyson of the 80s is long gone - get used to it.
Dude, me neither. I don’t expect another poster to know another posters ‘history’ but I slate off the delusional Tyson-brigade as much as anyone. Can’t stand them, most aren’t even boxing fans and just like Tyson and WWF. Tyson is shot, shot, shot. More shot than Kurt Cobain.
BUT… I was just saying that he would have stood a better chance than the woefully outclassed Danny Williams, during the first couple of rounds, maybe even minutes.
He doesn’t deserve a shot anyway….
Posted: 14 Dec 2004, 10:49
by J
more shoit that kurt cobain you cruel man!

made me chuckle tho.