Tweet
It wasn't pretty, but Klitschko tried hard to knock his opponent out. You can't say that about the ultra cautious Crawford who fought a much lighter puncher. The truth is that if he wasn't promoted by Arum, HBO would put Crawford behind Rigondeaux on their wish list.
-
-
I agree that the Klitschko fight wasn't the worst fight of the day, in fact it wasn't even that bad of a fight by the standards of the heavyweight division. To Ray Corso and others criticizing Wlad Klitschko and this fight go and watch Marciano - Walcott I, a supposed classic heavyweight encounter, and tell me that this fight was not drastically different from Klitschko - Povetkin. Anyway it was not Klitschko's fault that Povetkin didn't have the skill to avoid being tied up so often, or at least get some damage in before being clinched. Apparently it is Klitschko's responsibility to compensate for Povetkin's inadequacies and let himself be punched on the inside....
The way Ray Corso writes the old timers were superhuman Gods beyond reproach, devoid of any flaws. Pep's consistent clinching was the work of extravagant skill because he fought in the 40s and 50s, because Klitschko fights now his clinching is a sign of boxing decline!Comment
-
I'm voicing my opinion based on earning a living in boxing I couldn't give a damn if you agree or not! If you can't understand the techniques involved in being a high tier caliber fighter thats your problem. If you think greatness is based on wins and losses on a weak record sheet thats ok by me. You will not change my mind and others are realizing that Wlad is an ordinary talent. He happens to be bigger than everyone.........not better!! His opposition is weak and untested so he wins, congradulations to him! It doesn't make an ATG!
Even Primo Canerra was a champ, big deal! RayComment
-
You can have an opinion but you rarely offer much argument to back it up beyond offering superlatives about past fighters and bringing up your age and supposed longevity within the sport, as if this substantiates your opinions.
Wlad Klitschko is hardly the only heavyweight champion in history who has fought poor opponents, Marciano and Louis hardly fought too many of worth, a couple more than Wlad of course, but also lineups of bums. Wasn't Marciano an ordinary talent? What were Louis's best wins before the war, Schmeling and Conn, the former's credentials are actually quite dubious, winning the heavyweight championship of the world against Sharkey and Young Stribling, and Conn was a light heavyweight that Louis outweighed by 25 pounds. After the war his best wins are Conn again outweighing him by 25 pounds and Walcott who he had real dificulty with. Louis is obviously an all time great but his resume is not that impressive in terms of opponents.
You bring up Klitschko's size, you obviously can't mean weight because you have suggested before that weight means little, especially in heavyweight boxing, so it must be his height, arm length and general size of his frame that you mean. Is physical advantage somehow now counting against a fighter? Hearns cannot be rated so highly at Welterweight or Junior Middleweight because he had such a size advantage? Same goes for others 'big' at their weight?
Carnera was a complete fraud, Wlad Klitschko is undefeated without the aid of fixed fights for 9 years.Comment
Comment