Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Heavyweight Boxing

1261262264266267569

Comments

  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,532 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    He really should go to Abel Sanchez. Look what he did with Joe Joyce. If AJ still has it he'll put him back in top.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 15,612 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu



    there are so few big fights at HW that all there is to do is endlessly argue about whether Tyson was any good.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,229 ✭✭✭✭normanoffside


    Damn, I had been eyeing up a bet on a Wallin points win. Was about to put it down at 9/2 on Boyles.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,950 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    You can't compare how fighters are just because of there age Wlad got better as he matured, He was miles better than a already retired Holmes was at that age, Sure look at Mike who was past his best by 25

    Usyk was 221lbs when henwon the title Spinks was 200lb big difference,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 40,532 ✭✭✭✭eagle eye


    Wlad was done when he fought Fury. He'd been going downhill for quite a while.

    So now 20lbs is huge? How on earth did Joshua beat the nearly 50lbs heavier Ruiz?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,950 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    No there a huge difference between a 200lbs heavy weight & being a 220lbs heavy weight, As you just pointed Ruiz would have been 83lbds heavier than Spinks ,

    Not really he wasn't great against Jennings but he had ko'd out 3 of his last 5 opponents ,



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,060 ✭✭✭AdrianG08


    I'm not a Fury lover like a good few posters on here, but to say Wlad was done is nonsense. He nearly took out Joshua 2 years later. Hindsight is always used to fit a narrative.

    Wlad was a fine champion but he always used his size advantages to outmatch an opponent, and his pseudo intellectual ways of trying to psyche people out. He had no idea how to deal with Fury, he was spooked. Fury would turn up at one press conference, compliment him, call him a great champion, the next day he was mouthing off in his face. He genuinely could not figure out if the guy had mental health issues or if it was gamesmanship.

    Couple all of that carry on with his inability to be able to pin Fury down, giving up his usual size advantages etc.. he wasn't done he just had no answer to it. The fight was razor close, but all this crap about Wlad being afraid to pull the trigger, its ok pulling the trigger (i.e big straight right hand) when your opponent is standing right in front of you).

    Chances are the likes of Usyk would have beaten Wlad too, not too many fighters on his resume with a great degree of movement.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 20,950 ✭✭✭✭yourdeadwright


    Has Hearn spoken on Whyte v Wallin , will it ever happen now , i wonder what the ocntract situation is there



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,060 ✭✭✭AdrianG08


    Is Wallin a voluntary defence of that WBC international title? I'd be trying to get out of that one if I was Whyte, so much at stake (potential shot at Fury), handier tune up on the menu for Hearn maybe.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,711 ✭✭✭Joeseph Balls


    Isn't Whyte WBC mandatory for Fury?

    So this fight with Wallin just jeopardized that if he lost? He had nothing really to gain from it but a potential fight with Fury to lose?

    Am I right in thinking that?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,222 ✭✭✭squinn2912


    Let’s say that is right… how does Fury Whyte go? Does Whyte put up a better show than Wilder did? As well as wilder dug in he was a beaten docket for long n long in that fight



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,524 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Whyte doesn’t have Wilder’s range and height to be a problem..and, he’s far more predictable than Wilder. That’s not a compliment to Wilder, more an observation as to his awkwardness.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,351 ✭✭✭Littlehorny


    Very hard to predict Fury vs Whyte fight. There is so many variables.

    Fury was not in as good a shape for Wilder 3 as Wilder 2, will he be in worse shape for Whyte?

    They have no common opponents so hard to judge on that score, I personally think Wilder is useless from a boxing point of view so Whyte is a better boxer imo.

    Whyte jabs a bit and has a left hook, will be hungry to prove himself, is strong. But Fury is the better fighter/boxer but will the real Fury turn up?



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,222 ✭✭✭squinn2912


    They both fought Chisora twice each. Perhaps a different type of Chisora I’ll give you.

    I agree I think whyte is a much better boxer than wilder even if wilder would likely ko him. I think whyte is a sterner test



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,555 ✭✭✭✭AckwelFoley


    Whyte has done all he's going to do and no more. He's peaked.

    Only way he wins heavyweight title is if he gets a lucky punch



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,222 ✭✭✭squinn2912


    I’m not so sure I agree with you on that. If he’s peaked then what is the peak? Rivas? I was at that fight and there’s another gear in him. Pov II? Finished old man that wasn’t fit for fighting in any case. Chisora? Those were two good wins based on the performances Chisora has pulled out in the last few years so maybe that will be Whyte’s best moment. In reality Povetkin I he messed up. It wasn’t completely agaisnt the run of play no but he had that fight in the bag. He can be careless but against Fury I don’t think that’s a ko like it was with Pov or aj.

    I’ve been reluctantly impressed at how he has improved over the years. Big Helinius will likely get a shot at Usyk if he beats aj again and I’d have Whyte well above him. He’s a lump of a man and he’s game as. Fury would have no respect for him either. I’d expect Fury to win but not easily at all. Outside of aj and Usyk what’s the challenge for him?



  • Posts: 13,688 ✭✭✭✭ Manuel Warm Giant


    The only thing Whyte will do against Fury is enjoy the millions in his bank account afterwards.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,524 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Please, for the sake of boxing, stop giving Whyte any chance here

    In pretty much any other era he'd be a journeyman



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,060 ✭✭✭AdrianG08


    Unfortunately in an era where most of the top guys would be journeymen, that makes the likes of Whyte and formerly Chisora contenders.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,222 ✭✭✭squinn2912


    I disagree. If he were in another era and Mike Tyson KO’d him then you would be referencing him as evidence of Tyson’s greatness in any prime fantasy showdown. He’d be competitive in any era. He’s not great but he’s not awful and he has attributes that would make him a handful for anyone. He can and has beaten anyone outside of the top 3 or 4 now that Usyk has joined. He rattled aj - I’ve dismissed that in the past but looking more at aj he missed quite an opportunity in that 2nd or 3rd round. I’d like to see him vrs Joyce or Dubois if not for a title fight.

    1995 had Bruno, Moorer, Seldon, Zolkin and Akinwande all in it I’d be betting on him against all of them and Foreman that year too.

    I’ve looked at the 1985 (I was 1 so don’t remember it) and I’d have him lower down but would he beat Berbick, Weaver and dokes?

    2005 Byrd, Rachman, Toney, Brewster, Ruiz, Barrett, Brock, Wlad, Peter and Valuev


    That’s all just from a quick search of Ring Mag. I’m not his biggest fan. I think he’s an asshole but he’s at the upper end of the division at the moment and I think the division is better than a lot are giving it credit for. There were always turkeys in the top 10 or thereabouts.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,524 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    No, Whyte I would argue a journeyman full stop. Based on purely what I have seen of him. Is never a real contender in some other eras.

    if in Tyson’s 80s championship group I’d back all the others as bettter.

    and yes, turkeys in all eras.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,555 ✭✭✭✭AckwelFoley


    @squinn2912


    You summed it up yourself


    "He’d be competitive in any era. He’s not great but he’s not awful and he has attributes that would make him a handful for anyone. He can and has beaten anyone outside of the top 3 or 4 now that Usyk has joined"

    I fully agree with this statement but, That just makes him just not good enough to be a champion. He's just outside the real contenders. He'll get the shot bit can't see him beat any of the top 3 or 4



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 5,222 ✭✭✭squinn2912


    I get your point pal I’m not saying he’s great but good.

    fir me a journeyman would be Hammer, Allen, Harrison or Price. Whyte is a good cut above that. Washington, Browne… yano tune ups



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,524 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Yes, I'd agree here. Maybe I am a bit harsh on him.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,555 ✭✭✭✭AckwelFoley




  • Posts: 4,727 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    I said it a few weeks ago that I wondered if Whyte regretted the Wallin fight.

    He wouldn’t have known at the time that he’d get a shot at Fury. Title on the line in an all UK fight.

    Whyte probably wanted another decent name on his CV. But no need for the risk now.

    He’s waited long enough. Make the fight with Fury.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,524 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Just on this. You used Tyson in his 2002 loss to Lewis to mention his age and being younger than Lewis. Even though by 2002 aged 36 or so, Mike was shot to bits.

    Also, Tyson was past his best aged 25, but only very very slightly. He was still exceptionally good in 1991. Could argue still in his prime years.

    His performances in both Ruddock fights were very very close to his late 80s performances.

    When he came out prison aged 29/30, then he was noticeably past his best.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,351 ✭✭✭Littlehorny



    Cannot agree with the last line of your post there Walshb. When Tyson came out of prison he looked just as fast and ferocious as he had ever done. He actually looked more ripped than in his early twenties.

    He came out and regained a title and only took 3 rounds to rip Bruno apart and took out Sheldon in a round. He was 30 and finally Holyfield and himself were getting it on. Holyfield was 34 and had looked poor in a couple of previous fights.

    Holyfield was by far the underdog going into the fight and he won a great fight, but lets be clear Tyson before this fight no one was saying Tyson was noticeably past his best.

    Maybe this was the time that the tag "prime" and "peak" started to be used for Tyson.



  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 58,524 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    Well, for me it seemed clear that in 1995, albeit still good, he was clearly not as sharp, ferocious or as physically fit as pre prison. How could he be?

    being more ripped, or having a more chiselled torso. What is this supposed to mean? Are you arguing that it shows/proves he was as good, if not better than pre prison?

    also, a 1995 Bruno was not the same as a 1989 Bruno. And Seldon wasn’t up to much at all, and some thought that he took a dive.

    it’s all down to percentages and slight changes: 1987/1988 years he was at 100 percent. 1991 I’d say 90 percent, and 1995 he was at 75/80 percent..

    btw, Holyfield too was not at his best. Holyfield’s prime HW years were 1990-1992



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,351 ✭✭✭Littlehorny


    Wow, you must have been the only person in the world who seen before the Holyfield fights that Tyson had regressed that much.

    It was clear to you that Tyson was past his best before he fought Holyfield? Really?

    Well no one can prove that is what you thought I suppose.

    All I can remember about Tyson vs Holyfield 1 is that Holyfield shook the world but you must have seen that Mike was in decline better that everyone else.



Advertisement