Something to consider about Tarver/Jones

Collapse
Collapse
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Fox McCloud
    Mission Complete!
    Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
    • Apr 2007
    • 18176
    • 789
    • 1,151
    • 26,037

    #21
    Originally posted by reedickyaluss
    Great fighters aren't
    Mayweather/Castillo I... off night.
    Jones/Griffin I... off night.
    Lewis/McCall or Rahman I... off nights.

    Are those guys not great?

    Comment

    • THE REED
      Sixty Forty
      Franchise Champion - 20,000+ posts
      • Apr 2007
      • 43489
      • 1,992
      • 1,483
      • 690,068,075

      #22
      Originally posted by DWiens421
      Mayweather/Castillo I... off night.
      Jones/Griffin I... off night.
      Lewis/McCall or Rahman I... off nights.

      Are those guys not great?
      ur talkin one fight with those guys... tarver is like every other fight he looks like ****

      Comment

      • Fox McCloud
        Mission Complete!
        Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
        • Apr 2007
        • 18176
        • 789
        • 1,151
        • 26,037

        #23
        Originally posted by reedickyaluss
        ur talkin one fight with those guys... tarver is like every other fight he looks like ****
        Harding I...

        Hopkins...

        Who else?

        He looked good against Jones I, Johnson I... who else has he looked bad against?

        Comment

        • tyson
          Undisputed Champion
          Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
          • Oct 2003
          • 5344
          • 317
          • 435
          • 13,084

          #24
          Originally posted by DWiens421
          Man, this is getting to be one of the best discussions I've had on here in quite a while.

          Alright, I'll try to answer each thing.

          First, even though Johnson does have about a million losses, a lot of them were in fighters back yards, and a lot are considered to be bad decisions. You make the point that the fighters he lost to were nothing to talk about, but that's the bad thing about ****ty decisions, they always make a lesser fighter beat a better one. Mayweather could have gotten robbed against Baldomir, and it doesn't mean Floyd is worse for it because Baldomir is a bad fighter, it just means he got robbed.
          I had to laugh off the bolded part Point taken regardless.
          Like I said, I don't know how many of those fights he should have won and how close they really were. Many are controversial, but I doubt many are flat out robberies. And his last controversial decision was 5 years ago.
          However we flip and turn it, Coffeeman is still old and basically limited.
          A tough customer worthy of the name "Warrior", but still not good enough to be the measuring stick to greatness.

          And I agree about pretty much everything in the last paragraph. Clearly Johnson is one dimensional. I felt he got outboxed by Tarver in the first fight, and he got beat a lot worse when Tarver made adjustments, and Johnson... didn't.

          The only reason I mentioned Dawson is because Dawson is one of those athletic freak champions that people get excited about (OMFG THE NEXT ROY JONES!!!!11), and Johnson had a damn good fight against him. The boxer is supposed to be able to keep the pressure fighter on the outside with the jab, but Dawson couldn't. One last thing about Chad Dawson... He looks a lot better than he did after Tomasz Adamek kicked O'Neil Bell's ass recently, considering he waxed Adamek like it was nothing.
          To be brutally honest, I think Bell is way past it. I could be wrong as I have very little interest in the guy, but he has been through some terrible battles over the years.
          I understand the point and intention of bringing Dawson into the discussion, and I have no problem with that. He may be the next great thing, or he may not be. Johnson has a habit of making people look bad, so it was no surprise to me that Dawson struggled. Intense will and pressure will be difficult for anyone, even a prime Jones would have some rough moments with Coffeeman.

          But when it comes to Tarver and the linkage to Coffee and then Dawson, I won't really comment too much on the matter before the career of Dawson unfolds.
          My initial point was that Tarver beating a 35 year old Coffebean wasn't really
          a sign of greatness still holds water in my mind because of a few factors;

          Coffeeman has had a long and tough career with many more fights than Tarver at the time they fought.

          And Coffeeman had struggled with too many sub-par opponents prior to Tarver.

          (It could probably be argued that he rejuvinated himself at an advanced age and became more serious and focused on the sport. I don't know enough about such details, but that is nevertheless another "what if" scenario)

          I wish LHW was deeper so Tarver could test himself against some other fighters, because there are a lot of questions left unanswered. A Hopkins rematch would have been nice to prove whether he looked bad that night because of some external factor, or whether Hopkins was able to make him look bad. It's too bad Johnson lost, because a third fight would have been another good marker on where he is at. Calzaghe would be a good fight for him (even though he would lose), but Calzaghe isn't going to fight him. Finally, he does really need to make and win a Dawson fight before he retires... It's pretty much all there is out there for him now.
          Calzaghe and Tarver should have fought after Tarver fought Roy or after the second fight with Coffee.
          The stamina and lack of activity would make it rather easy for Calzaghe at this point, provided Tarver doesn't land one of those lefts from Hell again.

          And even the Tarver that fought Jones struggled with lateral movement, which reduced him to a stalker.

          You make for a brilliant discussion, son.

          Comment

          • Fox McCloud
            Mission Complete!
            Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
            • Apr 2007
            • 18176
            • 789
            • 1,151
            • 26,037

            #25
            I've pretty much said all I have for you Tyson...

            Any way I can answer your arguments above are just going to repeats of earlier posts... I think we are just going to have to agree to disagree on Antonio Tarver.

            A couple of things:
            1. LOL at you calling Johnson "The Coffeeman"... made me laugh. Glencoffe is a lame enough name that it is begging for it.
            2. You are probably 100% correct about Bell, but Adamek did look good enough in that fight that you can't just brush him off as a nobody on Dawson's resume anymore.
            3. Best discussion I've had on boxingscene... ever I'm pretty sure. Thank you for that.

            Comment

            • tyson
              Undisputed Champion
              Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
              • Oct 2003
              • 5344
              • 317
              • 435
              • 13,084

              #26
              Agree to disagree is agreed indeed

              Adamek is not a nobody at all. Dawson I have high hopes for, let him rock on!

              Comment

              • Steak
                Undisputed Champion
                Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
                • Aug 2006
                • 10713
                • 509
                • 268
                • 17,902

                #27
                I feel like Tarver gets a little too much criticism myself.

                the first Harding fight was boring as hell. I actually never got to see the rematch.

                Most people seem to completely ignore the fact that Tarver was acting for months in a Rocky movie before the Hopkins fight...its a classic example of someone not being prepared and not being focused before a fight, theres plenty of examples of fighters having off nights. all you have to do is watch the fight and youll see that Tarver looked like ass in that fight, and it wasnt just because of Hopkins. he just looked horrible in general, the way he threw punches, is punch output, everything...

                couple that with the fact that he had to lose a lot of weight after having gained movie for the Rocky movie and Tarver has some very valid excuses for looking like ****. speaking of ****, thats what he looked like as a 'heavyweight' in Rocky...but its still taxing to have to lose all that weight, especially in a short amount of time. just like Roy Jones.

                Hes not exactly the best ever at Light Heavy, hell theres plenty of people I think could have beat him there, and Light Heavyweight is one of the weight class Im probebly the least faimiliar with in a historical point of view...but hes better than people make him out to be.

                Comment

                • !! Shawn
                  !! Shown
                  Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                  • Dec 2007
                  • 9810
                  • 670
                  • 724
                  • 31,455

                  #28
                  Originally posted by blackirish137
                  I feel like Tarver gets a little too much criticism myself.

                  the first Harding fight was boring as hell. I actually never got to see the rematch.

                  Most people seem to completely ignore the fact that Tarver was acting for months in a Rocky movie before the Hopkins fight...its a classic example of someone not being prepared and not being focused before a fight, theres plenty of examples of fighters having off nights. all you have to do is watch the fight and youll see that Tarver looked like ass in that fight, and it wasnt just because of Hopkins. he just looked horrible in general, the way he threw punches, is punch output, everything...

                  couple that with the fact that he had to lose a lot of weight after having gained movie for the Rocky movie and Tarver has some very valid excuses for looking like ****. speaking of ****, thats what he looked like as a 'heavyweight' in Rocky...but its still taxing to have to lose all that weight, especially in a short amount of time. just like Roy Jones.

                  Hes not exactly the best ever at Light Heavy, hell theres plenty of people I think could have beat him there, and Light Heavyweight is one of the weight class Im probebly the least faimiliar with in a historical point of view...but hes better than people make him out to be.
                  People don't ignore the Tarver weightloss and acting in Rocky Balboa. He doesn't get to play that card because he gave Roy so much **** over it.

                  Tarvers claim to fame is beating a weight drained Roy Jones. Being a dumbass and doing that exact same thing to yourself and losing to old man Popkins is not worthy of sympathy.

                  Comment

                  • tyson
                    Undisputed Champion
                    Super Champion - 5,000-10,000 posts
                    • Oct 2003
                    • 5344
                    • 317
                    • 435
                    • 13,084

                    #29
                    Originally posted by blackirish137
                    I feel like Tarver gets a little too much criticism myself.

                    the first Harding fight was boring as hell. I actually never got to see the rematch.

                    Most people seem to completely ignore the fact that Tarver was acting for months in a Rocky movie before the Hopkins fight...its a classic example of someone not being prepared and not being focused before a fight, theres plenty of examples of fighters having off nights. all you have to do is watch the fight and youll see that Tarver looked like ass in that fight, and it wasnt just because of Hopkins. he just looked horrible in general, the way he threw punches, is punch output, everything...

                    couple that with the fact that he had to lose a lot of weight after having gained movie for the Rocky movie and Tarver has some very valid excuses for looking like ****. speaking of ****, thats what he looked like as a 'heavyweight' in Rocky...but its still taxing to have to lose all that weight, especially in a short amount of time. just like Roy Jones.

                    Hes not exactly the best ever at Light Heavy, hell theres plenty of people I think could have beat him there, and Light Heavyweight is one of the weight class Im probebly the least faimiliar with in a historical point of view...but hes better than people make him out to be.
                    To make one thing perfectly clear.

                    Comparing Jones's weightloss to Tarver's is like comparing night to day.

                    Jones was all muscles. Tarver was all fat.

                    Other than that, I can't say anything more than I've already said on the subject.

                    Comment

                    • Steak
                      Undisputed Champion
                      Unified Champion - 10,00-20,000 posts
                      • Aug 2006
                      • 10713
                      • 509
                      • 268
                      • 17,902

                      #30
                      Originally posted by !! Shawn
                      People don't ignore the Tarver weightloss and acting in Rocky Balboa. He doesn't get to play that card because he gave Roy so much **** over it.

                      Tarvers claim to fame is beating a weight drained Roy Jones. Being a dumbass and doing that exact same thing to yourself and losing to old man Popkins is not worthy of sympathy.
                      yea, I was pretty happy that he got so embarressed like that. but he is a little better of a fighter than some people give him credit for.
                      Originally posted by tyson
                      To make one thing perfectly clear.

                      Comparing Jones's weightloss to Tarver's is like comparing night to day.

                      Jones was all muscles. Tarver was all fat.

                      Other than that, I can't say anything more than I've already said on the subject.
                      eh, it cant have been all fat, and the inactivity and lack of focus needs to be taken into account more than the weight loss. Jones' weight loss was way worse, theres no doubt about that.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      TOP