How far would Ibeabuchi go ?

[Rusty Tromboni]

I'm just not that impressed by Fury. I'm not trying to be a ****, but, outside of jabbing at distance, bending at the waist to draw men in, and pivoting when close while firing off a few short range shots, I don't see much to him and most accredit his success to who he's fought.

Go in a bit on Fury's skillset as you see it if you would.

His footwork, upperbody movement and blocking make him incredibly elusive and hard to hit clean. It's not Locche headmovement, but he's effective in using his size, spatial awareness and reflexes.

What did Floyd do to reach 50-0? Look at his fight w/ Hatton, with Judah, with De La Hoya, with Alvarez (actually an impressive shut-out). He's a minimalist. And sometimes, you see him defying his limitations.

The same can be even more easily said of Marciano. Most dismissed him. Al Weill was very, very experienced and saw a lot he could work with. But he also managed Marciano very shrewdly, keeping him on a safe local circuit until the opportunity for real success presented itself - the mass extinction event at Heavyweight.

Marciano beat a lot of hacks. Not one person he fought would qualify for a top 20 Heavyweight. That's pretty bad when you consider how lean that division is for talent.

Fury embarrassed Wlad and Wilder. When he loses a couple rounds fights are made out to be direly close. Sure, there are features of those fights which make them appear to be glances at death. But he has shown an incredible ability to overcome precarious situations.

For a big man to move THAT well. Is really incredible. Marciano, comparatively, is a MUCH smaller man (closer to a Lightweight in size than to Fury), but much slower. And while a lot is made of his power, he needed a ridiculous volume of punches to breakdown men who weren't known for being extraordinarily durable.

Wlad and Wilder, on the other hand, are LETHAL. What did that account for when facing Fury?

Defending Fury is like the opposite side of the coin of defending Dempsey. The one fights defensively, the other offensively. They both have slight flaws in their record/style/legacy whatever. But just looking at the film it's obvious that at their time and weight they're the best. The criticisms of them, then are also made clear: everyone else feels insecure that their guy/their group/ their era/their "whatever" doesn't stack up.

Now, if they were:
less talented
a shade darker
a whole lot dumber
less successful at life

You can be sure there'd be endless kakk-sucking posts dedicated to their greatness. But because they look like everybody else who has made it in this world, they're targeted because, for many people, Boxing is supposed to be the sport where people who aren't good at life come to succeed. People don't want a guy who looks like: a CEO, a world leader, an academic, a star in a better paying team sport, to also be the best Boxer.

If we're getting down to brass tacks.

[Rusty Tromboni]

About this fight:


1) JohnScully was a great commentator.

2) Both fought "dumb"

A) Ibeabuchi could haven pitched a shut-out a la Lewis. He just needed to keep that jab going, and follow it up with a right hand. Side-stepping would have nailed it home. Really, he was raw, but that was a huge mistake.

B) Tua was head0hunting, and conserving too much energy for the later rounds. There was no combination punching. And the whole point of fighting in close is to wear an opponent down. Ike wasn't making it hard for Tua. TUA was making it hard for Tua. He just completely neglected the body. Sure, he was green, too. But the fact that he blew that opportunity pretty much decided the fight. However, you scored it, Tua did NOT fight to win.

3) They threw lots of punches, but not effectively. Ike had good combos. He let his hands go. He looked faster than any other time I remember, but Tua was also there to be hit. If I were a Heavy Bag I would have been embarassed for Tua. Magnets had a tougher time connecting with each other than Ike's punches.

Buuuut he wasn't landing very clean. Even his jab was getting picked off. It looked good to the judges, I'm sure. But Tua didn't take a lot of damage. Sure, less robust fighters would've wilted, but we've seen fighters land cleaner and more consistently on Tua.

And we've seen fights w/ less gawdy numbers, where fighters were truly going life and death. A lot of Holmes fights come to mind.

4) Again, not too much of a criticism on Ike. He was hitting what he felt was there. For a "young" fighter, he did really well. But neither guy could really settle down and figure out what was happening. If Ike could have stepped back, he could have made some adjustments which would have made the fight play out much more in his favor

5) A rematch would have been nice. Not jsut for enterainment value, but because of what it would have revealed about the fighters. Tua and Ibeabuchi both wasted a lot of energy and opportunities. With revision they both could have done much better, and we'd have a much better and more certain idea of who the better man was.

That fight felt like a (very) rough draft.

6) weren't steroids amazing? For as much praise as we give these guys, does anyone think they would have made a blip on the radar in any other era? Without the juice - definitely at this stage in their careers - they would have been nothing more than club fighters cutting their teeth on a local circuit.

[QueensburyRules]

His footwork, upperbody movement and blocking make him incredibly elusive and hard to hit clean. It's not Locche headmovement, but he's effective in using his size, spatial awareness and reflexes.

What did Floyd do to reach 50-0? Look at his fight w/ Hatton, with Judah, with De La Hoya, with Alvarez (actually an impressive shut-out). He's a minimalist. And sometimes, you see him defying his limitations.

The same can be even more easily said of Marciano. Most dismissed him. Al Weill was very, very experienced and saw a lot he could work with. But he also managed Marciano very shrewdly, keeping him on a safe local circuit until the opportunity for real success presented itself - the mass extinction event at Heavyweight.

Marciano beat a lot of hacks. Not one person he fought would qualify for a top 20 Heavyweight. That's pretty bad when you consider how lean that division is for talent.

Fury embarrassed Wlad and Wilder. When he loses a couple rounds fights are made out to be direly close. Sure, there are features of those fights which make them appear to be glances at death. But he has shown an incredible ability to overcome precarious situations.

For a big man to move THAT well. Is really incredible. Marciano, comparatively, is a MUCH smaller man (closer to a Lightweight in size than to Fury), but much slower. And while a lot is made of his power, he needed a ridiculous volume of punches to breakdown men who weren't known for being extraordinarily durable.

Wlad and Wilder, on the other hand, are LETHAL. What did that account for when facing Fury?

Defending Fury is like the opposite side of the coin of defending Dempsey. The one fights defensively, the other offensively. They both have slight flaws in their record/style/legacy whatever. But just looking at the film it's obvious that at their time and weight they're the best. The criticisms of them, then are also made clear: everyone else feels insecure that their guy/their group/ their era/their "whatever" doesn't stack up.

Now, if they were:
less talented
a shade darker
a whole lot dumber
less successful at life

You can be sure there'd be endless kakk-sucking posts dedicated to their greatness. But because they look like everybody else who has made it in this world, they're targeted because, for many people, Boxing is supposed to be the sport where people who aren't good at life come to succeed. People don't want a guy who looks like: a CEO, a world leader, an academic, a star in a better paying team sport, to also be the best Boxer.

If we're getting down to brass tacks.

- -Rustoleum getting down to brass tacks in a brass knuckles sport...Priceless!

[Marchegiano]

His footwork, upperbody movement and blocking make him incredibly elusive and hard to hit clean. It's not Locche headmovement, but he's effective in using his size, spatial awareness and reflexes.

What did Floyd do to reach 50-0? Look at his fight w/ Hatton, with Judah, with De La Hoya, with Alvarez (actually an impressive shut-out). He's a minimalist. And sometimes, you see him defying his limitations.

The same can be even more easily said of Marciano. Most dismissed him. Al Weill was very, very experienced and saw a lot he could work with. But he also managed Marciano very shrewdly, keeping him on a safe local circuit until the opportunity for real success presented itself - the mass extinction event at Heavyweight.

Marciano beat a lot of hacks. Not one person he fought would qualify for a top 20 Heavyweight. That's pretty bad when you consider how lean that division is for talent.

Fury embarrassed Wlad and Wilder. When he loses a couple rounds fights are made out to be direly close. Sure, there are features of those fights which make them appear to be glances at death. But he has shown an incredible ability to overcome precarious situations.

For a big man to move THAT well. Is really incredible. Marciano, comparatively, is a MUCH smaller man (closer to a Lightweight in size than to Fury), but much slower. And while a lot is made of his power, he needed a ridiculous volume of punches to breakdown men who weren't known for being extraordinarily durable.

Wlad and Wilder, on the other hand, are LETHAL. What did that account for when facing Fury?

Defending Fury is like the opposite side of the coin of defending Dempsey. The one fights defensively, the other offensively. They both have slight flaws in their record/style/legacy whatever. But just looking at the film it's obvious that at their time and weight they're the best. The criticisms of them, then are also made clear: everyone else feels insecure that their guy/their group/ their era/their "whatever" doesn't stack up.

Now, if they were:
less talented
a shade darker
a whole lot dumber
less successful at life

You can be sure there'd be endless kakk-sucking posts dedicated to their greatness. But because they look like everybody else who has made it in this world, they're targeted because, for many people, Boxing is supposed to be the sport where people who aren't good at life come to succeed. People don't want a guy who looks like: a CEO, a world leader, an academic, a star in a better paying team sport, to also be the best Boxer.

If we're getting down to brass tacks.

I know we've had our words so this might be read as just flippancy, but, it really isn't.

I appreciate your perspective, but, can you write without comparison?

Forgive me, but, far as technique goes I don't see anything you wrote that I didn't mention in a much shorter post.

Most of this I'd chalk up to a weak understanding of things you didn't already appreciate. I'm sure you can speak at length to how good Nicolino was or how bad Marciano was. Can you speak to what Nico was bad at or Rock good at? I think, less so.

Can you do any of it without comparing? Tyson's juxta to Nico doesn't make him good or bad at anything....nor Floyd, nor Marciano.


Also, some revisionist history probably because you don't know it well. Marciano took out the midwest and west before heading on to the title. He cleared the Northeast, Roland would have been the big peer there. He cleared the midwest, that's Layne's bit and at the time Layne was Ring's and Nat's choice for next champ, and then he stopped the 55+ win streak of the west coast contender.


If Tyson, or Wilder, or Joshua or even Wlad had a 55+ win streak opponent on their record who ended their career with 90+ wins to only 7 losses while fighting top ranked fighters since their 19th fight that win would be their best win. Since Marciano demolished this man it's a hack win is it? What semantics you gonna use for that? Eye test?

So yeah, I'll say it again, bending at the waist and pivoting is some basic ass ****. No being able to explain techniques without comparisons is some basic ****, and your depiction of Marciano some basic ****. No depth t o your post at all bubba.

[QueensburyRules]

About this fight:


1) JohnScully was a great commentator.

2) Both fought "dumb"

A) Ibeabuchi could haven pitched a shut-out a la Lewis. He just needed to keep that jab going, and follow it up with a right hand. Side-stepping would have nailed it home. Really, he was raw, but that was a huge mistake.

B) Tua was head0hunting, and conserving too much energy for the later rounds. There was no combination punching. And the whole point of fighting in close is to wear an opponent down. Ike wasn't making it hard for Tua. TUA was making it hard for Tua. He just completely neglected the body. Sure, he was green, too. But the fact that he blew that opportunity pretty much decided the fight. However, you scored it, Tua did NOT fight to win.

3) They threw lots of punches, but not effectively. Ike had good combos. He let his hands go. He looked faster than any other time I remember, but Tua was also there to be hit. If I were a Heavy Bag I would have been embarassed for Tua. Magnets had a tougher time connecting with each other than Ike's punches.

Buuuut he wasn't landing very clean. Even his jab was getting picked off. It looked good to the judges, I'm sure. But Tua didn't take a lot of damage. Sure, less robust fighters would've wilted, but we've seen fighters land cleaner and more consistently on Tua.

And we've seen fights w/ less gawdy numbers, where fighters were truly going life and death. A lot of Holmes fights come to mind.

4) Again, not too much of a criticism on Ike. He was hitting what he felt was there. For a "young" fighter, he did really well. But neither guy could really settle down and figure out what was happening. If Ike could have stepped back, he could have made some adjustments which would have made the fight play out much more in his favor

5) A rematch would have been nice. Not jsut for enterainment value, but because of what it would have revealed about the fighters. Tua and Ibeabuchi both wasted a lot of energy and opportunities. With revision they both could have done much better, and we'd have a much better and more certain idea of who the better man was.

That fight felt like a (very) rough draft.

6) weren't steroids amazing? For as much praise as we give these guys, does anyone think they would have made a blip on the radar in any other era? Without the juice - definitely at this stage in their careers - they would have been nothing more than club fighters cutting their teeth on a local circuit.

- -U back on juice again?

[Rusty Tromboni]

I know we've had our words so this might be read as just flippancy, but, it really isn't.

I appreciate your perspective, but, can you write without comparison?

Making comparisons has it's problems: chiefly that it leads down rabbit holes. But it is an easy shortcut, and it provides perspective.

And that's really what it's about. Fury's skills are pretty well-known and available. If there's not a lot of depth there, that's fine. There doesn't need to be. His footwork, jab and head-movement mean that he controls range so much as he wants to.

There really isn't anything more I can say, if you're not impressed by a man a full foot larger than Mayweather and 100 lbs. heavier being just as evasive. There's really nothing I can say, no breakdown I can provide, that will change your mind. Or - let's be honest - admit what you really know.

Again, it comes down to providing perspective. It's like I used to tell my studetns: if your scope can broaden, you can appreciate the finer details. How's that for paradox?

Can you do any of it without comparing? Tyson's juxta to Nico doesn't make him good or bad at anything....nor Floyd, nor Marciano.

Yes or no, these are fighters who are given tremendous credit for comparatively limited accomplishments while Fury is raked over the coals despite being the best we've ever seen?

Having to accept reality seems to make you uncomfortable, so you're trying to reset the terms to something more soothing to your opinions. I admit the comparisons are a short-cut. But they seem to have done the trick.

Also, some revisionist history probably because you don't know it well. Marciano took out the midwest and west before heading on to the title. He cleared the Northeast, Roland would have been the big peer there. He cleared the midwest, that's Layne's bit and at the time Layne was Ring's and Nat's choice for next champ, and then he stopped the 55+ win streak of the west coast contender.


If Tyson, or Wilder, or Joshua or even Wlad had a 55+ win streak opponent on their record who ended their career with 90+ wins to only 7 losses while fighting top ranked fighters since their 19th fight that win would be their best win. Since Marciano demolished this man it's a hack win is it? What semantics you gonna use for that? Eye test?

Yeah, and this is my fault. Anytime comparisons are made, it invites off-topic tangents. I accept responsiblilty for this.

However, it actually makes for a great thread topic (Were Marciano's Opponents Any Good?), so it should be discussed separately. But no one you mentioned, nor anyone else Marciano fought would have beaten Steven Cunningham. I dunno if even Marciano would have beaten Cunningham. Probably not if he catches the kinda leather Fury did. He definitely wouldn't have put him away in 7 the way Tyson did. And despite being half Fury's size, he definitely doesn't out-box Cunningham. Not at all. Anything but.

Again, topic for another thread. But if you can rush to defend Marciano's performances against Layne and LaStarza while calling Fury's skills basic, you've pretty much confined yourself to level of bias that your opinion on the matter cannot be taken seriously.

[ecto55]

In today's era, I think any / either of reveal Ibeabuchi's limitations.

He only had two good fights.....the Tua draw and the Byrd KO.

Has any fighter been lauded as much with so little?

Ibeabuchi's best assets were fitness and a chin. I mean, look at the Tua fight, either he couldn't keep Tua on the outside and so stop Tua imposing his in-fighting on this inside (pretty serious deficiency); or he could have kept Tua at the end of his jab but didn't care to (moron type move) .

Either way, that's a serious deficiency (either a technical or personality / attitude defect) to reveal and I'm not sure the chin, fitness and heart from Ibeabuchi we were able to see makes up for it.

I think Ibeabuchi reached his limit.

[Rusty Tromboni]

In today's era, I think any / either of reveal Ibeabuchi's limitations.

He only had two good fights.....the Tua draw and the Byrd KO.

Has any fighter been lauded as much with so little?

Ibeabuchi's best assets were fitness and a chin. I mean, look at the Tua fight, either he couldn't keep Tua on the outside and so stop Tua imposing his in-fighting on this inside (pretty serious deficiency); or he could have kept Tua at the end of his jab but didn't care to (moron type move) .

Either way, that's a serious deficiency (either a technical or personality / attitude defect) to reveal and I'm not sure the chin, fitness and heart from Ibeabuchi we were able to see makes up for it.

I think Ibeabuchi reached his limit.

Well said. And that limit was significantly extended in the pre-VADA era.

If Tyson Fury came of age in that era he'd have 90% K.O. rate.

Even on his best night Ibeabuchi showed limitations - fighting Tua in the trenches, and flailing wildly agaisnt Byrd. Sure, he was young, but his inability to calm down and hang out behind his jab showed where his brain was at.