Klitco vs Fraizer

[cple]

If all you needed was defense and teamwork in order to win, then inner city schools wouldn't completely dominate high school basketball, and the colleges with the best recruiting processes wouldn't dominate either.

I guess they didn't have that device like they had in Rocky IV that measured the pounds of pressure of Drago's punches back in the day. Its really not that hard someone who is bigger than someone else is going to throw harder punches than than the smaller more often than not. Why do you think that boxers lose their power when they move up in weight?

I didn’t say that all you need is defense and teamwork to win. However, they are the essential elements to succeeding. And you really think high school players can play defense or have teamwork? Yes, to a certain point, but they lack knowledge and experience. So athleticism can overcome inexperience. But once you enter the pros, athleticism can only get you so far.

What does recruiting have to do with anything? Dominant college teams dominate because the players are well coach, because of pure athleticism. College is where players learn teamwork, the fundamentals, and how to play defense. Why do you think players today are so selfish and lack defensive skills? Because they forego college.

As for the US squad, yes, I do realize that the reason they lost is because they lacked shooting. But I thought you said “basketball revolves around quickness and jumping ability”. If this were true, why didn’t the US win, since they were ten times as athletically gifted as the other teams? And why couldn’t the US team make a 3 or jump shot? Because NBA is obsessed with dunking and slashing into the lanes. They prefer flash over a mid-range jump shot. If anything, this “evolution” of basketball has deteriorated the game.

I still don’t understand why you don’t think Byrd could compete. He was the complete package: possibly the purest shooter of all-time, could board, could defend, was clutch, and understood the game better than anyone else. Simply because he wasn’t as quick or couldn’t jump too high, he would be crap? How do you explain Tim Duncan, who isn’t too athletic or dunk crazy? It’s because he’s unselfish, can play defense, and has a better grasp of fundamentals than anyone else in the league.

As for punching power, size isn’t the sole determining factor. Jess Willard towered over Jack Dempsey and Primo Carnera over Joe Louis/Max Baer, yet their power was dwarved by the much smaller men. Yes, size can determine power, but it’s not the deciding factor.

[dempseyfire]

'Modern-day power??' what are you 10 years old??? Just b/c Klitschko lifts some weights (and judging by his physique it doesn't look like he does much of that) he now has power that the old timers didn't possess??? Punching power has nothing to do with how much you can bench-press, but I suppose you wouldn't know much about that. Someone who doesn't twist their hips and turns their feet properly, like Klitschko, will never be a one-punch KO artist, b/c he is limiting the torque his body will possess for each punch. Klit's punching technique plain sucks. The guy throws a nice straight right hand and that's it. His jab sucks (he pushes out his jab, no stepping into it, no snap, no twist of the glove etc.), his left hook sucks. And those are the 3 punches he throws right there . . .
Vitali never threw his best shot against Sanders and Lewis, when both were wobbly and their hands were down????????????? Wow, if that's true the guy is even worse then I thought . . . . .

[Neuraxis]

we agree on the shooter theory. Whoever picked the team..is an idiot.

on the previous point..I'm astounded and can't even bring myself to argue with you on the 80's players. How can you say Magic,Bird and Jordan are not as good as the current players. I know you didn't mention Jordan by name, but if you say Magic and Bird, its the same thing. It's so absurd, I think your probably screwing with me and don't really mean it.


I guess Bob Gibson is not as good as Mark Mulder either?

Regardless they wouldn't dominate like they did in the 80s. The 80s might be too recent though, so let's make this easier. Do you actually think that Pete Maravich would be just as dominate now as he was back in 1970s?

No Mulder sucks, we are talking about elite athletes here. Randy Johnson is better than Bob Gibson.

[Neuraxis]

I didn’t say that all you need is defense and teamwork to win. However, they are the essential elements to succeeding. And you really think high school players can play defense or have teamwork? Yes, to a certain point, but they lack knowledge and experience. So athleticism can overcome inexperience. But once you enter the pros, athleticism can only get you so far.

What does recruiting have to do with anything? Dominant college teams dominate because the players are well coach, because of pure athleticism. College is where players learn teamwork, the fundamentals, and how to play defense. Why do you think players today are so selfish and lack defensive skills? Because they forego college.

As for the US squad, yes, I do realize that the reason they lost is because they lacked shooting. But I thought you said “basketball revolves around quickness and jumping ability”. If this were true, why didn’t the US win, since they were ten times as athletically gifted as the other teams? And why couldn’t the US team make a 3 or jump shot? Because NBA is obsessed with dunking and slashing into the lanes. They prefer flash over a mid-range jump shot. If anything, this “evolution” of basketball has deteriorated the game.

I still don’t understand why you don’t think Byrd could compete. He was the complete package: possibly the purest shooter of all-time, could board, could defend, was clutch, and understood the game better than anyone else. Simply because he wasn’t as quick or couldn’t jump too high, he would be crap? How do you explain Tim Duncan, who isn’t too athletic or dunk crazy? It’s because he’s unselfish, can play defense, and has a better grasp of fundamentals than anyone else in the league.

As for punching power, size isn’t the sole determining factor. Jess Willard towered over Jack Dempsey and Primo Carnera over Joe Louis/Max Baer, yet their power was dwarved by the much smaller men. Yes, size can determine power, but it’s not the deciding factor.

Apparently you haven't seen too much elite high school ball. High School is not this huge waste of time that you make it out to be. Many former college coaches coach high school. My high school coach was a former head coach at Loyola Marymount and assistant coach at Villanova. Players learn all of those stuff, ie fundamentals, teamwork, and defense in high school or even earlier. The best schools like St. Anthony's have extremely athletic athletes and superb coaching where they play excellent defense and have great teamwork.

The NBA is played like it is because the rules are geared toward it, and that's what the random idiot wants to see instead of good basketball.

I guess we are just going to have to agree to disagree about Bird and punching power, but no one said Bird would be garbage, he just wouldn't dominate the league like he did. Duncan is the complete package because he has excellent fundamentals and he also has the quickness and jumping ability of modern athletes.

[Neuraxis]

'Modern-day power??' what are you 10 years old??? Just b/c Klitschko lifts some weights (and judging by his physique it doesn't look like he does much of that) he now has power that the old timers didn't possess??? Punching power has nothing to do with how much you can bench-press, but I suppose you wouldn't know much about that. Someone who doesn't twist their hips and turns their feet properly, like Klitschko, will never be a one-punch KO artist, b/c he is limiting the torque his body will possess for each punch. Klit's punching technique plain sucks. The guy throws a nice straight right hand and that's it. His jab sucks (he pushes out his jab, no stepping into it, no snap, no twist of the glove etc.), his left hook sucks. And those are the 3 punches he throws right there . . .
Vitali never threw his best shot against Sanders and Lewis, when both were wobbly and their hands were down????????????? Wow, if that's true the guy is even worse then I thought . . . . .

You obviously haven't seen many Klitschko fights. I tend to think that he may have even been on the juice pre Byrd, and that that may have played some factor in him getting hurt.

Juice: http://www.klitschko.com/gallery/ind..._Mahon_062.jpg
No Juice: http://www.klitschko.com/gallery/ind...=scena0058.jpg

[Yogi]

I find it funny when people try to use the evalution of other sports as a way of trying to prove that today's boxers are better.

Here's something to factor in;

These other sports have only been around for about one hundred years, whereas boxing has been around for a couple of thousand years ( got it's start in the ancient Greek Olympics).

There's only so many ways to throw a punch, and they figured out all the punching techniques a long, long time ago.

[Neuraxis]

I find it funny when people try to use the evalution of other sports as a way of trying to prove that today's boxers are better.

Here's something to factor in;

These other sports have only been around for about one hundred years, whereas boxing has been around for a couple of thousand years ( got it's start in the ancient Greek Olympics).

There's only so many ways to throw a punch, and they figured out all the punching techniques a long, long time ago.

If all that boxing was was just standing stationary throwing punches, then you might be right.

[Yogi]

If all that boxing was was just standing stationary throwing punches, then you might be right.

I take it you've never seen any footage of the great lightweight from the early 1900's, Joe Gans.

[Neuraxis]

I take it you've never seen any footage of the great lightweight from the early 1900's, Joe Gans.

One person does not = everyone. I've seen enough small, flat footed old timers to come to the realization that they wouldn't do much against a modern athlete.

[Yogi]

One person does not = everyone. I've seen enough small, flat footed old timers to come to the realization that they wouldn't do much against a modern athlete.

And I've seen enough big and strong, yet unco-ordinated heavyweights, lose to men much smaller than them, which enables me to form my opinion that Vitali wouldn't stand a chance against a number of heavyweights from years past, no matter how much bigger he is.