The **BOXING** thread
Discussion
I'd love Manny to win but I think he has too many miles on the clock now, four years ago it might have been another story. My prediction is a fairly even fight until the later rounds, when PBF will tire less and start to exude some superiority, taking the fight on a points decision by 3/4 rounds.
I do hope I'm wrong though.
I do hope I'm wrong though.
Fittster said:
Klitschko looking his age.
He can probably still take Fury (although at least he takes away Klitschko size advantage that he normally enjoys) but Deontay Wilder might be a real test.
to be honest his performance last November was phenomenal .....i can't see him slipping in 20 weeks. I just think jennings employed good tactics and wlad had an off night. He'd never admit it but there have been reports from a few sources that he cracked his right hand in the 3rd or 4th.He can probably still take Fury (although at least he takes away Klitschko size advantage that he normally enjoys) but Deontay Wilder might be a real test.
there's footage somewhere of klitschko sparring wilder last year. Deontay was WAY out of his depth. He was unconcious for minutes apprently. David haye also knocked him silly in sparring.
tuscaneer said:
Fittster said:
Klitschko looking his age.
He can probably still take Fury (although at least he takes away Klitschko size advantage that he normally enjoys) but Deontay Wilder might be a real test.
to be honest his performance last November was phenomenal .....i can't see him slipping in 20 weeks. I just think jennings employed good tactics and wlad had an off night. He'd never admit it but there have been reports from a few sources that he cracked his right hand in the 3rd or 4th.He can probably still take Fury (although at least he takes away Klitschko size advantage that he normally enjoys) but Deontay Wilder might be a real test.
there's footage somewhere of klitschko sparring wilder last year. Deontay was WAY out of his depth. He was unconcious for minutes apprently. David haye also knocked him silly in sparring.
Deontay has been called a bum for the quality of the opponents he's face but the fight against Stiverne show's to be taken seriously. If Deontay is an easy fight for Wlad why not take it? That's where the money.
Do you think there's much to be gained by Wlad fighting Fury or Briggs bar the fact he can add to his number of successful defences (although I can't see him making much money fighting that pair)?
hornetrider said:
I'd love Manny to win but I think he has too many miles on the clock now, four years ago it might have been another story. My prediction is a fairly even fight until the later rounds, when PBF will tire less and start to exude some superiority, taking the fight on a points decision by 3/4 rounds.
I do hope I'm wrong though.
I'm actually pretty confident about Manny's ability to last the pace. Since the Hatton fight, he's only had two fights that didn't go the distance and one of those still went to the twelfth (the other being the KO loss to Marquez). Indeed, other than Marquez, all his other opponents over the last 3-4 years have all been guys in their late 20s /early 30s (so you'd assume physically in their prime); Tim Bradley twice, Brandon Rios and Chris Algieri. The fact that he's able to go the full twelve with fighters like that and not exactly look like he's hanging on at the end - at a time when there were questions over his commitment to the sport - I think says something...I do hope I'm wrong though.
Mayweather on points.
I always keep thinking one day someone will catch him good and proper though. Perhaps Manny is the one to do it.
Manny can be hit though, he's not 'that' elusive and Mayweather is very accurate.
Possibly a SD and a rematch and a final half century fight to end his career.
I always keep thinking one day someone will catch him good and proper though. Perhaps Manny is the one to do it.
Manny can be hit though, he's not 'that' elusive and Mayweather is very accurate.
Possibly a SD and a rematch and a final half century fight to end his career.
Fittster said:
Against Jennings he again enjoyed his huge size advantage (stay behind the jab and clinch) but he didn't look impressive doing it. Lets face it Jennings has no track record to show he was ever going to be a threat.
Deontay has been called a bum for the quality of the opponents he's face but the fight against Stiverne show's to be taken seriously. If Deontay is an easy fight for Wlad why not take it? That's where the money.
Do you think there's much to be gained by Wlad fighting Fury or Briggs bar the fact he can add to his number of successful defences (although I can't see him making much money fighting that pair)?
jennings had a 4 inch reach advantage believe it or not!!Deontay has been called a bum for the quality of the opponents he's face but the fight against Stiverne show's to be taken seriously. If Deontay is an easy fight for Wlad why not take it? That's where the money.
Do you think there's much to be gained by Wlad fighting Fury or Briggs bar the fact he can add to his number of successful defences (although I can't see him making much money fighting that pair)?
The problem with the Deontay Wilder match for klitschko is wilders people. Wlad has stated publicly that the wilder match would take presidence over any other match as he wants to unify all the belts. You can bet that wilder would make far more money fighting klitschko than anyone else.......
......but is the memory of the hiding he was given in Austria still too fresh in the memory???.
I think wladimir probably underestimated jennings a bit and Bryant fought better than I've ever seen him before. A good effort. But klitschko still won nearly all the rounds. A bad night for Wlad.......but he's so good he still effectively won Nearly every round against one of his mandatorily.and he's beaten more previously unbeaten opponents than any other champion in history.
tuscaneer said:
he's beaten more previously unbeaten opponents than any other champion in history.
Not sure I read too much into that. I've no facts to back it up but it seems promoters are ultra keen to ensure there prospects are not really challenged. Maybe the world has always been like that. I guess the problem is one defeat does so much damage to a boxers career its not worth taking risky fights unless belts or massive pay days are available. Do you think more Wilder because he's undefeated or does that just he's fought a lot of week opposition before he won his belt?
I'd be interested to see how many of Wlad defences have been against people taller than he is.
There are also a lot of cruiser weights fighting a heavyweight because of the greater financial rewards who end up taking on far larger opponents. I do think there's an argument to somehow split the heavyweight class so you don't end up with 6 ft 5in+ giants fighting people who are around 6 ft. Some form of professional Super heavyweight class.
There are case where a smaller man can overcome Haye v Valuev but generally speaking being a lot bigger than your opponent is one hell of an advantage.
Edited by Fittster on Monday 27th April 14:37
Fittster said:
tuscaneer said:
he's beaten more previously unbeaten opponents than any other champion in history.
Not sure I read too much into that. I've no facts to back it up but it seems promoters are ultra keen to ensure there prospects are not really challenged. Maybe the world has always been like that. I guess the problem is one defeat does so much damage to a boxers career its not worth taking risky fights unless belts or massive pay days are available. Do you think more Wilder because he's undefeated or does that just he's fought a lot of week opposition before he won his belt?
I'd be interested to see how many of Wlad defences have been against people taller than he is.
There are also a lot of cruiser weights fighting a heavyweight because of the greater financial rewards who end up taking on far larger opponents. I do think there's an argument to somehow split the heavyweight class so you don't end up with 6 ft 5in+ giants fighting people who are around 6 ft. Some form of professional Super heavyweight class.
There are case where a smaller man can overcome Haye v Valuev but generally speaking being a lot bigger than your opponent is one hell of an advantage.
Edited by Fittster on Monday 27th April 14:37
now look at the amateur pedigree of fighters like alexander povetkin , kubrat pulev , ruslan chagaev , and sultan ibragimov. all phenominal fighters with exemplary amateur and pro credentials............until wlad wrecked the party.....
kin freaky that reach!!Fittster said:
There are case where a smaller man can overcome Haye v Valuev but generally speaking being a lot bigger than your opponent is one hell of an advantage.
Didn't seem to bother Tyson throughout most of his career not to mention Joe Frazier & Marciano. tyson used to say its the taller man's disadvantage as he could get right under them & use his legs for powering his uppercut & boy could he uppercut...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo2JxpcJ2BA
Edited by Gerradi on Monday 27th April 17:19
Gerradi said:
Fittster said:
There are case where a smaller man can overcome Haye v Valuev but generally speaking being a lot bigger than your opponent is one hell of an advantage.
Didn't seem to bother Tyson throughout most of his career not to mention Joe Frazier & Marciano. tyson used to say its the taller man's disadvantage as he could get right under them & use his legs for powering his uppercut & boy could he uppercut...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jo2JxpcJ2BA
Edited by Gerradi on Monday 27th April 17:19
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennox_Lewis_vs._Mike...
Arguable the last non-giant to hold the linear heavyweight belt was Michael Moorer back in 1994 at 6 ft 2 in.
Since then George Foreman @ 6 ft 4 in (although I've also seen him listed at 6 ft 3) in
Shannon Briggs @ 6 ft 4 in
Lennox Lewis @ 6 ft 5 in
Walad @ 6 ft 6 in
To me Evander Holyfield was the last relatively small heavyweight who could stay at the top of the pile for a while rather than just win a one off fight, such as Hasim Rahman.
With regards to fighters like Joe Frazier & Marciano I think there's a need to acknowledge people and especially fighter are bigger now than they once were.
I hope this is not 12 rounds of clam shell defenses and jabs. Fittster said:
He didn't do to well against one of the modern world's giants. I'm not saying height on it's own is a guarantee of success (as I'm sure Fury will prove) but it's bloody helpful.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennox_Lewis_vs._Mike...
Arguable the last non-giant to hold the linear heavyweight belt was Michael Moorer back in 1994 at 6 ft 2 in.
Since then George Foreman @ 6 ft 4 in (although I've also seen him listed at 6 ft 3) in
Shannon Briggs @ 6 ft 4 in
Lennox Lewis @ 6 ft 5 in
Walad @ 6 ft 6 in
To me Evander Holyfield was the last relatively small heavyweight who could stay at the top of the pile for a while rather than just win a one off fight, such as Hasim Rahman.
With regards to fighters like Joe Frazier & Marciano I think there's a need to acknowledge people and especially fighter are bigger now than they once were.
I think the reason Tyson did not do well was he was past his best out of condition, not ready & tbh it was pitiful to watch the great man mix it with A Lewis, who lets face it would not have lived with a in prime Tyson. Listen to what Tyson says after the fight...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lennox_Lewis_vs._Mike...
Arguable the last non-giant to hold the linear heavyweight belt was Michael Moorer back in 1994 at 6 ft 2 in.
Since then George Foreman @ 6 ft 4 in (although I've also seen him listed at 6 ft 3) in
Shannon Briggs @ 6 ft 4 in
Lennox Lewis @ 6 ft 5 in
Walad @ 6 ft 6 in
To me Evander Holyfield was the last relatively small heavyweight who could stay at the top of the pile for a while rather than just win a one off fight, such as Hasim Rahman.
With regards to fighters like Joe Frazier & Marciano I think there's a need to acknowledge people and especially fighter are bigger now than they once were.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=49ky1yAIGB0
Where will agree with you re Tyson I think this can be reversed in the Holme/Tyson fight, IMO Tyson would not have beaten in prime Holmes.
As far as Holyfield goes he ,imo, has been one of the most courageous heavyweights out there !
Edited by Gerradi on Tuesday 28th April 12:25
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff