Are the Klitschko's Boring?

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

Lewis in his early career to me was over enthusiastic at times, to the point of almost reckless.

he was negative and boring, never wreckless!

walshb

cowzerp wrote: »

he was negative and boring, never wreckless!

In his younger years he could be a bit too eager, and it came across as reckless/gung ho. Later on he calmed down, and could be called patient and methodical, and fearful, I guess, fearful of getting whacked. Regardless, boring or not, he was not as boring as the Klits. That is how I see it.

cowzerp

walshb wrote: »

he was not as boring as the Klits. That is how I see it.

Ok, and i see it that he was far more Boring, and fearfull was right

Even in his early days he would regularly turn his back with fear when punches where coming at him

kryogen

So when its Lewis its called "patient and methodical" and when its the Klitschkos it "boring"

I get it now.

---

Maybe someone should start a new thread about them? Could change the wording and move the goalposts till the response that was desired is achieved?

walshb

kryogen wrote: »

So when its Lewis its called "patient and methodical" and when its the Klitschkos it "boring"

I get it now.

---

Maybe someone should start a new thread about them? Could change the wording and move the goalposts till the response that was desired is achieved?

Lewis could be well argued as being at times boring. Never said otherwise. I said he was not as boring, to me anyway, as the Klits. I have used similar language in describing the Klits. Patient, cautious, methodical etc. All these words can lead some to view them, like Lewis, as boring.

Simple: Prime Lewis or past prime Lewis is on fighting X; or prime or past it Klits are on fighting X. I will tune into Lewis most times. I think he was both a better boxer and more enjoyable to watch.

corny

cowzerp wrote: »

That's fine, 61% don't think their boring.

So the majority rule and the 39% are wrong?

kryogen

No its very much a case of personal preference, if you think they are boring, they are boring to you. I dont think they are boring, so they are not boring to me, its why I voted no.

Also, what is the point of a poll if not to see what the majority think?

Would you be complaining about the result if it went the other way?

corny

kryogen wrote: »

Would you be complaining about the result if it went the other way?

I think you haven't been keeping up on current events pal. I voted no.

kryogen

corny wrote: »

I think you haven't been keeping up on current events pal. I voted no.

Why would I be aware or be interested that you voted no?

You seemed to have a problem with the poll result going by your question, asking are the 31% who voted Yes wrong by cowzerps logic.

Didnt mean to cause offense to you anyway, was simply responding to you and its pretty clear if you read the whole post and not just the part you quoted (which is still a question) I am questioning you on your stance regarding the purpose of polls, then I enquire about your preference, would you be complaining if the poll went the other way

The first part was to point out that is fairly subjective. Depends on what you like yourself.

runboyrun

kryogen wrote: »

Why would I be aware or be interested that you voted no?

You seemed to have a problem with the poll result going by your question, asking are the 31% who voted Yes wrong by cowzerps logic.

Didnt mean to cause offense to you anyway, was simply responding to you and its pretty clear if you read the whole post and not just the part you quoted (which is still a question) I am questioning you on your stance regarding the purpose of polls, then I enquire about your preference, would you be complaining if the poll went the other way

The first part was to point out that is fairly subjective. Depends on what you like yourself.

your so smart !! well done !! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

walshb

corny wrote: »

So the majority rule and the 39% are wrong?

I wasn't aware that cowzerp was saying anyone was wrong. There is no right or wrong here. I will say that the Klits haven't scored too well, and as I said earlier, they would rank low in the excitement stakes, as to me, and plenty of others, their style is not all that aesthetically appealing.

corny

kryogen wrote: »

Why would I be aware or be interested that you voted no?

You seemed to have a problem with the poll result going by your question, asking are the 31% who voted Yes wrong by cowzerps logic.

Didnt mean to cause offense to you anyway, was simply responding to you and its pretty clear if you read the whole post and not just the part you quoted (which is still a question) I am questioning you on your stance regarding the purpose of polls, then I enquire about your preference, would you be complaining if the poll went the other way

The first part was to point out that is fairly subjective. Depends on what you like yourself.

I wasn't offended.

With subjective experience there is no right or wrong. Its just an opinion. I thought Cowzerp, while acknowledging its a subjective issue, might be implying the majority are correct by force of numbers so i asked him a question to clear it up. No big deal.

If you are indeed after the quieter life then i'd suggest you don't presumptuously answer questions directed at other people.

RiseToTheTop

I think the reason they don't go for KO's is because they aren't forced to. Even after the Mormeck fight people in Germany will still buy their fights because they regard the Klitschko's as "us".

If they had to go to the US to go for a title I think they might have to fight more.

They fight like the fight is going to go for the decision, it might not, but that is how they fight. It is obvious they have a magnificent advantage in Germany regards the judges scoring. I think they have it on their mind that if they go 12 rounds "i'll win."

I don't get why people think Vitali is aggressive and more reckless. He took Shannon Briggs 12 rounds, carried Adamek for a few rounds when he was hurt, etc. I don't get why he is labelled the more "dangerous" of the fighters.

kryogen

corny wrote: »

I wasn't offended.

With subjective experience there is no right or wrong. Its just an opinion. I thought Cowzerp, while acknowledging its a subjective issue, might be implying the majority are correct by force of numbers so i asked him a question to clear it up. No big deal.

If you are indeed after the quieter life then i'd suggest you don't presumptuously answer questions directed at other people.

Thats a fair enough point, apologies for intruding on the private conversation

I would like to think that since Cowzerp thanked my post that he shared my sentiments though.

kryogen

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

I think the reason they don't go for KO's is because they aren't forced to. Even after the Mormeck fight people in Germany will still buy their fights because they regard the Klitschko's as "us".

If they had to go to the US to go for a title I think they might have to fight more.

They fight like the fight is going to go for the decision, it might not, but that is how they fight. It is obvious they have a magnificent advantage in Germany regards the judges scoring. I think they have it on their mind that if they go 12 rounds "i'll win."

I don't get why people think Vitali is aggressive and more reckless. He took Shannon Briggs 12 rounds, carried Adamek for a few rounds when he was hurt, etc. I don't get why he is labelled the more "dangerous" of the fighters.

Wladimir Klitschko -60 fights 57 wins 50 KO's
Vitali Klitschko -46 fights 44 wins 40 KO's

Kinda high KO % if they don't go for KO's no?

Re Adamek, he fought him in his hometown, I dont think he wanted to KO him in front of his own people so to speak, that is my opinion on it, could be wrong, I just think from a pr point of view to him, its better to let their guy make it through the fight rather then get KTFO in front of them all.

corny

kryogen wrote: »

Thats a fair enough point, apologies for intruding on the private conversation

I would like to think that since Cowzerp thanked my post that he shared my sentiments though.

Which is why i ignored the top half of your first post (got my answer so to speak) and focused on the loaded question implying i was complaining about the result of the poll. Anyway. An insincere and snide apology. Classy, but if it draws a line in the sand i'll take it.:)

cowzerp

corny wrote: »

With subjective experience there is no right or wrong. Its just an opinion. I thought Cowzerp, while acknowledging its a subjective issue, might be implying the majority are correct by force of numbers so i asked him a question to clear it up. No big deal.

I simply meant that the majority of voters feel their not boring, in a voting system if this was a win lose situation then yes, the not boring side would be clear winners.

It's all opinion anyway and subjective, as things stand their big news and fighting these nothing Brits has actually made them more famous over here and they do well out of Boxing due to their massive fan base and talent.

kryogen

corny wrote: »

Which is why i ignored the top half of your first post (got my answer so to speak) and focused on the loaded question implying i was complaining about the result of the poll. Anyway. An insincere and snide apology. Classy, but if it draws a line in the sand i'll take it.:)

RiseToTheTop

kryogen wrote: »

Wladimir Klitschko -60 fights 57 wins 50 KO's
Vitali Klitschko -46 fights 44 wins 40 KO's

Kinda high KO % if they don't go for KO's no?

Re Adamek, he fought him in his hometown, I dont think he wanted to KO him in front of his own people so to speak, that is my opinion on it, could be wrong, I just think from a pr point of view to him, its better to let their guy make it through the fight rather then get KTFO in front of them all.

How many early KOs do they have?

Vitali was 32-1 when he met Lewis, I would think he wasn't fighting top class opposition in those 32 wins. He didn't look a KO machine against Shannon Briggs.

cowzerp

Foreman did not knock him out either, Briggs was decent and tough.

RiseToTheTop

Foreman was 48 though.

It's just peculiar how the Klitschko's have that high KO percentage yet 40% of people find them boring. (As the poll question asks.)

cowzerp

No it's not, most the people who voted their boring you can be sure are basing it on the Haye fight, where Haye was unwilling to engage at all.

That would be the majority's experience of them(sky sports) , fans who watch lots of boxing would have seen them regular and seen excitement or at least not found them boring

I remember 1st time watching Vitali live versus herbie hide who I really liked, told all my mates hide would ko the big Russian, Vitali smashed him and was deadly, I've also seen him pick fighters apart and enjoyed it, and regardless of debating the result, the klitschko v Lewis was exciting.

Been way better than all opposition does not tend to be exciting, boring to some obviously but I like watching class.

kryogen

Is there 80 people who post in/lurk this forum? Seemed quieter then that.

A KO is a KO, doesn't actually matter what round it happens in, Tyson actually came in for abuse from some sections for a lot of his fights going no more then 1 round in the early days, 2 or 3 rounds even.

Amazing to you I'm sure, some people actually said it was boring to watch such mis matched fighters in a ring together and that some of the fights were nothing more then stat padders.

RiseToTheTop

cowzerp wrote: »

1)No it's not, most the people who voted their boring you can be sure are basing it on the Haye fight, where Haye was unwilling to engage at all.

That would be the majority's experience of them(sky sports) , fans who watch lots of boxing would have seen them regular and seen excitement or at least not found them boring

2: I remember 1st time watching Vitali live versus herbie hide who I really liked, told all my mates hide would ko the big Russian, Vitali smashed him and was deadly, I've also seen him pick fighters apart and enjoyed it, and regardless of debating the result, the klitschko v Lewis was exciting.

Been way better than all opposition does not tend to be exciting, boring to some obviously but I like watching class.

1) Can you please stop mentioning David Haye and comparisons to him. I never mentioned him, so when quoting a post of mine please don't include the word Haye 2 times in the first sentence.

2) Which Vitali did you prefer to watch: The one verses Herbie Hide or the one versus Shannon Briggs?

BTW I think the topic title is aimed at the Klitschko's ATM, not going back to the 90's. I just mentioned Vitali's pre-Lewis record since it was brought up much and used as a plus in people's eyes, but I placed my vote based upon what I saw this year/last year.

(Please don't try to make David Haye linked to all of the above points.)

Bobby Baccala

Wether or not people find them boring basically depends on what type of boxing fan you are.

If you are a fan who looks for 1st round knockouts you're most likely going to find them boring.

If you're a fan who looks at the technical side of boxing, you should probably find the klitschkos exciting, i love looking at the mechanics of a fight and breaking down every last jab and slip and roll, that's probably why i find them relatively exciting. If all you're looking for is one round knockouts and constant aggression in the wring the klitschkos probably aren't for you.

walshb

P4DDY2K11 wrote: »

Wether or not people find them boring basically depends on what type of boxing fan you are.

If you are a fan who looks for 1st round knockouts you're most likely going to find them boring.

If you're a fan who looks at the technical side of boxing, you should probably find the klitschkos exciting, i love looking at the mechanics of a fight and breaking down every last jab and slip and roll, that's probably why i find them relatively exciting. If all you're looking for is one round knockouts and constant aggression in the wring the klitschkos probably aren't for you.

I am a mixture of the two. I guess why they bore me a little is that they have very little inside game. I like that in a fighter. I know, they are very big and this can be difficult, but Lewis and Bowe could work well on the inside.

I see their skills, and like watching them take apart a man. But, I always come away feeling like they could have given me a little bit more. More aggression and more going for the kill I guess.

Simple; Aggression and attacking will always alert the fans. That's human nature. If they displayed it a bit more I could get to really like them.

RiseToTheTop

Seeing as this is appearing to be the main Klitschkos topic ATM, another one doesn't seem warranted. I'll ask a question.

Who is next for the Klitschko's? Chris Arreola is looking good, but he doesn't look like challenging ATM. Chisora fought recently. I can only see challengers like Mormeck ATM.

cowzerp

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

(Please don't try to make David Haye linked to all of the above points.)

David Haye was the main reason why people would think of him as boring, and was the most high profile fight this side of the water due to Hayes mouth etc so it's perfect using him as an example as to why people may think Wlad is boring, and it was 1 of his most recent fights that you want to talk about

RiseToTheTop

cowzerp wrote: »

David Haye was the main reason why people would think of him as boring, and was the most high profile fight this side of the water due to Hayes mouth etc so it's perfect using him as an example as to why people may think Wlad is boring, and it was 1 of his most recent fights that you want to talk about

Well try not to use David Haye in the first line after you quote me.

Also, I would have thought Mormeck would have been a better example for this purpose. Wladimir went for an early KO with Mormeck.

cowzerp

Your original post which made me reply

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

Foreman was 48 though.

It's just peculiar how the Klitschko's have that high KO percentage yet 40% of people find them boring. (As the poll question asks.)

And my reply is telling you why these fans may see them as Boring when most have probably not even heard of them only for Haye, you say it yourself below!

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

1) Can you please stop mentioning David Haye and comparisons to him. I never mentioned him, so when quoting a post of mine please don't include the word Haye 2 times in the first sentence.

(Please don't try to make David Haye linked to all of the above points.)

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

Well try not to use David Haye in the first line after you quote me.

Funny you say you have not mentioned him before!

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

Look at the Haye fight, Klitschko only used his jab and pressed down on Haye.

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

Many mightn't even know who the Klitschko's are. I wonder how many average Brits knew of Wladimir Klitschko before David Haye.)

Again, just proves what i am saying about the sky sports machine and Propaganda.

RiseToTheTop wrote: »

David Haye has been Wladimir's biggest test by far, if you cannot see this, I dunno what to say.

Sky sports view and totally false-Exactly why i mention Haye as you are the 1 making him out to be a top Heavyweight-which he is not.

With all that in mind don't tell me what i can and can't use in my post's especially when i see it as relevant and showing you up for what you are on this subject.