Tyson Fury vs Joe Fraizer

One_More_Mile · 22-12-2014 10:59PM

Joe put much better fighters than fury on the floor, regardless of eras the man was relentless. Any discussion is subjective but Joe Frazier went to war with some of the greatest heavy weights that ever lived. Fury In my eyes has a lot to prove

Big Ears · 22-12-2014 11:08PM

Littlehorny wrote: »

Yeah the Klitchko's are one thing , but Fury? Come on, he is no good. Just a huge, strong, game fella. He once hit himself in a fight for god's sake. Steve Cunnigham was a cruiserweight champ and he had Fury is loads of trouble. The KO of Cunnigham was illegal as well. he lifted Cunnigham's head up with left arm and hit him with his right.
He just looks like a big slob to me sometimes imo.

My god !, Muhammed Ali and Lennox Lewis would never have done anything line that.

Are you sure disliking the chap (and therefore likely having a bias against him) is preventing you from realising he has an excellent jab (from either hand), fantastic foot speed and footwork for a Heavyweight, nevermind a behemoth of a heavyweight and good hand speed ?

Fury is vulnerable to overhand rights, that's pretty much the reason he fought Southpaw against Chisora in his last fight. His chin while not problematic, certainly isn't granite, although he does recover well. They are his main weaknesses, and the reason Cunningham dropped and hurt him.
Cunningham is actually a pretty decent fighter, and his only other loss at heavyweight is a dodgy decision to Adamek. He's actually fighting an IBF eliminator in his next bout.

Disregarding his defensive flaws, Fury is actually a fantastic fighter, offensively he's as good a heavyweight as anyone out there.
Ring magazine rank him the #3 contender in the World and for me they're right on the money with that.
He's not perfect, but he's developed into a very, very good fighter (despite once punching himself in the face

).

Henno30 · 23-12-2014 12:17AM

Littlehorny wrote: »

Yeah the Klitchko's are one thing , but Fury? Come on, he is no good. Just a huge, strong, game fella. He once hit himself in a fight for god's sake. Steve Cunnigham was a cruiserweight champ and he had Fury is loads of trouble. The KO of Cunnigham was illegal as well. he lifted Cunnigham's head up with left arm and hit him with his right.
He just looks like a big slob to me sometimes imo.

Naazim Richardson if it was the other way around: "That's an old Philly gym move from a guy named Blind Joe McJones from back in the day. I guess Mr Fury won't have seen anything like that over in the UK."

ebbsy · 23-12-2014 09:37AM

I remember watching him fight on the undercard of the Dunne/Poonsawat fight, in a drunken haze one of my friends said to me " he has the same name as Tyson but doesn't fight like him".

He couldn't shine Joe's boots in my opinion.

walshb · 23-12-2014 09:58AM

The thread is going nowhere. Folks are more interested in comparing the names and eras as opposed to how Fury and Frazier match up in a fight. That is what is being asked.

Larsso30 · 23-12-2014 04:05PM

fury, beating an all time great. the same fury who struggled against john mcdermott.

Jesus wept.

HigginsJ · 23-12-2014 04:25PM

walshb wrote: »

The thread is going nowhere. Folks are more interested in comparing the names and eras as opposed to how Fury and Frazier match up in a fight. That is what is being asked.

You are right of course, but you can't simply overlook the names.

Claiming some random HW would beat an all time great will always get peoples ire & rightly so.

The greats are the greats and debates as to who would come out on top between them are fun, a debate like this just comes across as downgrading the achievements of a legend.

Larsso30 · 23-12-2014 05:07PM

Show me what Fury has done, whats his best achievement? BEating Steve Cunningham? Derek Chisora?

Do me a favour

Larsso30 · 23-12-2014 05:07PM

Show me what Fury has done, whats his best achievement? BEating Steve Cunningham? Derek Chisora?

Do me a favour :eek:

walshb · 23-12-2014 05:08PM

Larsso30 wrote: »

Show me what Fury has done, whats his best achievement? BEating Steve Cunningham? Derek Chisora?

Do me a favour :eek:

He hasn't lit the world on fire, but he still beats the tar out of Frazier!

One_More_Mile · 23-12-2014 05:37PM

walshb wrote: »

He hasn't lit the world on fire, but he still beats the tar out of Frazier!

Stop embarrassing yourself

walshb · 23-12-2014 05:37PM

One_More_Mile wrote: »

Stop embarrassing yourself

Fine debating there!

Registered Dolphin · 23-12-2014 07:51PM

The 100m version of Tyson Fury would beat the beat the best 100m sprinters of the 70's. Athletes today are way ahead of back then.

efb · 23-12-2014 09:52PM

walshb wrote: »

He hasn't lit the world on fire, but he still beats the tar out of Frazier!

How? Why? I can't see it. Fury is very limited

walshb · 23-12-2014 09:56PM

efb wrote: »

How? Why? I can't see it. Fury is very limited

I posted my reasons earlier.

barney4001 · 24-12-2014 01:46PM

Molester Stallone II wrote: »

Hall of fame legend being compared to a journeyman I suppose would be what he's alluding to

to compare fury to Joe Frazier or even the rivals Joe fought through his career is obnoxious to my way of thinking about boxing matches

barney4001 · 24-12-2014 01:56PM

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=147&cat=boxer

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=479205&cat=boxer

i think haye would destroy fury if he put his mind to it probably price as well

shamrock55 · 24-12-2014 02:15PM

People go on about romantic notions of smokin joe beating fury, suffering jesus the only romantic notion hear is the notion that fury would have any hope in hell against one of the greatest heavy weight boxers ever,frazier every day of the week.

megadodge · 24-12-2014 02:33PM

Without actually giving my opinion on what I feel would be the outcome, the most standout thing for me in this debate is, as usual, the 'everything-in-the-old-days-was-better' brigade refuse point blank to give any breakdowns or technical analysis of how a fight between a 5'10" cruiserweight and a 6'9" 18+ stone opponent would pan out.:rolleyes:

Instead of the utterly useless "Frazier hammers him" answers, why doesn't someone give a little credibility to that argument by actually telling people HOW he'd go about it.

shamrock55 · 24-12-2014 03:53PM

megadodge wrote: »

Without actually giving my opinion on what I feel would be the outcome, the most standout thing for me in this debate is, as usual, the 'everything-in-the-old-days-was-better' brigade refuse point blank to give any breakdowns or technical analysis of how a fight between a 5'10" cruiserweight and a 6'9" 18+ stone opponent would pan out.:rolleyes:

Instead of the utterly useless "Frazier hammers him" answers, why doesn't someone give a little credibility to that argument by actually telling people HOW he'd go about it.

He would beat him to a pulp with his fists thats how

walshb · 24-12-2014 04:01PM

shamrock55 wrote: »

He would beat him to a pulp with his fists thats how

Ridiculous answer in fairness. How does his fists connect with a man so big, and a man that will also be throwing his fists with 250 lbs behind them? Maybe a stepladder, Fury told to stay still, and Joe pounds away? Unless you believe that Joe gets the job done by beating Fury into submission around the belly section?

Fall_Guy · 24-12-2014 06:33PM

shamrock55 wrote: »

He would beat him to a pulp with his fists thats how

I really feel people think that it is a knock on frazier to suggest he would struggle with Fury and therfore they jump to defend him without thinking about the fight properly. In recent times we have seen Fury displaying good footwork, excellent handspeed and a very effective jab. People have mentioned being knocked down by a man of similar size to Frazier (Steve Cunningham) and while there is no denying that in that fight Fury left himself wide open to a counter overhand right by fighting with a wide-open style, he has since shown himself to be able to fight a much more disciplined fight if he so choose.

Also, for all Frazier's many many qualities (and they are many), I would believe Cunningham to be a far faster fighter. Frazier's money punch was also a left hook which he threw almost exclusively, which would be quite a feat to land with much power left in it by the time it reached the chin of a 6'9 even if he was able to work his way inside.

Without wanting to be disrespectful to a great great fighter, I would imagine a match between the two men being similar enough to Chisora's more recent effort against Fury, all be it with Frazier showing more relentlessness in his efforts to close the distance on Fury to fight more effectively.

Let's say he did have more success in closing the distance, I don't really see how that leads to guaranteed victory for Frazier either...while many are pointing to the Cunningham fight as evidence of Fury's weaknesses, it also shows show he can effectively bully a smaller man, as he lay all over Cunningam in close, bullied him and beat him up quite comprehensively.

The more I think about it, the more I see it being a horrible night for Frazier.

megadodge · 24-12-2014 07:36PM

shamrock55 wrote: »

He would beat him to a pulp with his fists thats how

Oooohh that's brilliant stuff!

Won't be long now til Boxnation come knocking on your door willing to part with big dosh in exchange for your razor-sharp boxing analysis.

walshb · 24-12-2014 07:40PM

megadodge wrote: »

Won't be long now til Boxnation come knocking on your door willing to part with big dosh in exchange for your razor-sharp boxing analysis.

That gave me a nice chuckle!

weemcd · 25-12-2014 02:26AM

Fall_Guy wrote: »

I really feel people think that it is a knock on frazier to suggest he would struggle with Fury and therfore they jump to defend him without thinking about the fight properly. In recent times we have seen Fury displaying good footwork, excellent handspeed and a very effective jab. People have mentioned being knocked down by a man of similar size to Frazier (Steve Cunningham) and while there is no denying that in that fight Fury left himself wide open to a counter overhand right by fighting with a wide-open style, he has since shown himself to be able to fight a much more disciplined fight if he so choose.

Also, for all Frazier's many many qualities (and they are many), I would believe Cunningham to be a far faster fighter. Frazier's money punch was also a left hook which he threw almost exclusively, which would be quite a feat to land with much power left in it by the time it reached the chin of a 6'9 even if he was able to work his way inside.

Without wanting to be disrespectful to a great great fighter, I would imagine a match between the two men being similar enough to Chisora's more recent effort against Fury, all be it with Frazier showing more relentlessness in his efforts to close the distance on Fury to fight more effectively.

Let's say he did have more success in closing the distance, I don't really see how that leads to guaranteed victory for Frazier either...while many are pointing to the Cunningham fight as evidence of Fury's weaknesses, it also shows show he can effectively bully a smaller man, as he lay all over Cunningam in close, bullied him and beat him up quite comprehensively.

The more I think about it, the more I see it being a horrible night for Frazier.

^superb

/thread

Halloween Jack · 25-12-2014 07:27PM

megadodge wrote: »

Without actually giving my opinion on what I feel would be the outcome, the most standout thing for me in this debate is, as usual, the 'everything-in-the-old-days-was-better' brigade refuse point blank to give any breakdowns or technical analysis of how a fight between a 5'10" cruiserweight and a 6'9" 18+ stone opponent would pan out.:rolleyes:

Instead of the utterly useless "Frazier hammers him" answers, why doesn't someone give a little credibility to that argument by actually telling people HOW he'd go about it.

Still go back to Holyfield valuev, the size difference is even bigger and a decrepit Holyfield gave the bigger man a good fight. Tyson is obviously a better fighter than valuev but A prime Frazier is better than a ridiculously shot holyfield. Then you have the likes of manny beating a much bigger margarito. I the post I've quoted you don't provide any technical analysis either, just state relative heights and weights. (Haven't read the whole thread, so you may have provided such earlier.)

It's a fight Id love to watch, the only thing I'd say is we don't know that much about fury at top level, he's fought a string of bums thus far and hasn't exactly looked stellar most of the time. In saying that has displayed good skills at times and has got better over the last while.

Big Ears · 25-12-2014 09:11PM

Halloween Jack wrote: »

Still go back to Holyfield valuev, the size difference is even bigger and a decrepit Holyfield gave the bigger man a good fight. Tyson is obviously a better fighter than valuev but A prime Frazier is better than a ridiculously shot holyfield. Then you have the likes of manny beating a much bigger margarito. I the post I've quoted you don't provide any technical analysis either, just state relative heights and weights. (Haven't read the whole thread, so you may have provided such earlier.)

It's a fight Id love to watch, the only thing I'd say is we don't know that much about fury at top level, he's fought a string of bums thus far and hasn't exactly looked stellar most of the time. In saying that has displayed good skills at times and has got better over the last while.

In fairness it wasn't the first time Holyfield fought a much larger opponent

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XvJ90_eZErw

Holyfield beat Valuev off the back foot, counter punching and letting combinations go, darting in and back out again. It was also the worst performance of Valuev in any fight since he moved beyond domestic level.
But stylistically it's a hard comparison to make between those 2 with Frazier and Tyson. Tyson Fury is the one with the quicker footwork, and the one who would look to dance away and move. Frazier on the other hand isn't going to look to score jabs and counter with overhand rights off the back foot.

Same story with Pacquiao and Margarito, it was the bigger man who wanted the fight on the inside there and was unable to close the distance and get the toe to toe war he wanted. The main questions re: Frazier vs Fury is could Frazier possibly close the distance without having to take an inordinate amount of punishment in doing so, and if he can, whether he can actually land that left hook to Tyson's head, and if not whether the body attack would do sufficient damage to Fury.

Here's Frazier winning the title vs Buster Mathis

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FE10Ps-n74A

A very competitive affair till Frazier takes over late on and gets the stoppage. Mathis was 6'3 (76 inch reach) and weighed 243 1/2 for the fight.

Of course you could say Joe was a bit green and would perform better against big men as his experience increased. So maybe the next time he faced a big man of the time, about 5 years later he'd fair pretty well

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EtacibssAPg

.....well maybe not, but afterall that is an ATG in George Foreman.

So what about another big fighter of the time who was pretty average. The 6'4, 221 Joe Bugner

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M2VlPnMUNKI

again that wasn't his best performance.

So it seems Joe tends to struggle with the bigger men. Of course you could say Ali was a bigger man of the time, at 6'3 he certainly was tall for the era. But when he was in his younger days, 24 years old he weighed in at just 201 and 204 and was just 212 when he fought Frazier the 2nd time, in his 30's, so I wouldn't consider him a big opponent. With that said he was far bigger than most guys Joe fought.

Halloween Jack · 26-12-2014 10:52AM

Tyson Fury vs Joe Fraizer

Comments