Is there an Unbeatable Mode?

[billeau2]

Don't really get the question. Wlad didn't perform against Fury. Sure part of that was what Fury did but Wlad definitely didnt perform at all well. Fury's team was saying Wlad would never take the rematch - and as soon as he did - Fury retired. So clearly Fury didn't think there was an unbeatable mode he could tap into OR they knew that Wlad would perform better now he had nothing to lose. The 2 year PED ban Fury took soon after also agrees with this.

Fury still only has TWO title defences. Probably the lowest ever for someone so acclaimed. Don't believe in these unbeatable modes!

You really have to understand sometimes that there are levels to the game. The fact that you make me have to agree with Warroom argghhh!!!!

Yes, to fans with a limited understanding of boxing the Fury Vlad fight looks slow. BUT if you understand elements of mastery like timing, and feinting, Fury puts on a master class. He literally prevents Vlad from punching using feints, timing and his own well placed shots. A fantastic fiat. One often hears the old saw about Willie pep winning a round throwing no punches... well that did not happen but it developed as a tale to exemplify the ability of a true defensive elite fighter's ability to make the other guy unable to attack.

[billeau2]

No fighter is unbeatable. Anybody can lose a fight on any given night. That’s why the sport is so entertaining.

I think the point you’re missing is certain styles can make fighters look better than they actually are. Margarito was a favourable style for Williams for example, however if Williams employed them same tactics against say Tommy Hearns he ends up face down on the mat like when he fought Martinez the second time.

For the purposes of this thread I would put Buster Douglas up there: The night he beat Tyson he fought a fantastic fight on all accounts and looked essentially unbeatable. I say "looked" because who knows if a fighter is ever unbeatable, or not?

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

For the purposes of this thread I would put Buster Douglas up there: The night he beat Tyson he fought a fantastic fight on all accounts and looked essentially unbeatable. I say "looked" because who knows if a fighter is ever unbeatable, or not?

He nearly lost that night though man. Tyson had him hurt bad. Douglas showed a lot of heart, toughness, mental fortitude etc that night but he was nowhere close to unbeatable IMO.

[billeau2]

He nearly lost that night though man. Tyson had him hurt bad. Douglas showed a lot of heart, toughness, mental fortitude etc that night but he was nowhere close to unbeatable IMO.

Well... I qualified my post for a reason: I said "looks" unbeatable because if a fighter looks close to perfect in what they are doing, that translates as the same qualities as "appearing" unbeatable. Let me put it another way: To me, whether Tyson gets the knockdown, or not, does not change two things:

1. The quality of the things Douglas was doing that looked so perfect. They were as close to perfect as anything I have seen in the ring.
2. The actual ability to be "unbeatable." There is under no circumstances a fighter that is truly unbeatable.

And no, Douglas was not almost beaten.

[RJJ-94-02=GOAT]

Well... I qualified my post for a reason: I said "looks" unbeatable because if a fighter looks close to perfect in what they are doing, that translates as the same qualities as "appearing" unbeatable. Let me put it another way: To me, whether Tyson gets the knockdown, or not, does not change two things:

1. The quality of the things Douglas was doing that looked so perfect.
2. The actual ability to be "unbeatable."

Yeah but unbeatable means nobody can or could have beat them. You really think that version of Douglas beats any HW in history?

Let’s say Douglas fought a completely different fighter stylistically like Tyson Fury, Lennox Lewis etc that night instead of Mike Tyson. Do you see him winning those fights? I sure don’t.

[Lupara]

Fury v Wlad was one of the worst HW championship fights in history lad

[billeau2]

Yeah but unbeatable means nobody can or could have beat them. You really think that version of Douglas beats any HW in history?

Let’s say Douglas fought a completely different fighter stylistically like Tyson Fury, Lennox Lewis etc that night instead of Mike Tyson. Do you see him winning those fights? I sure don’t.

Again, there are two ways to take the concept of unbeatable. One is literally, the other, as a way to qualify perfection. I am choosing the second way. I can say "that jab looks as close to perfect as any jab i have ever seen" and that is a true statement. I cannot say that the statement "Because of the perfect jab thrown the fighter would be unbeatable" is a true statement.

Qualifying Douglas as looking unbeatable because of his technique is merely a way to describe the perfection of the technique. I know it seems like splitting hairs, but one can say a fighter appears unbeatable without meaning they would never lose... "appears" is the magic word here. And this is all we could ever know. Nobody can say a fighter would not lose because of their performance... But anyone can marvel that a fighter's performance makes them appear great. Douglas, as a big strong heavyweight who looked superb that evening against Tyson, and used footwork, jabs and combos expertly... appeared impossible to beat because of these qualities.

I don't think any fighter is unbeatable... I do think a great performance from a fighter can make the fighter appear closer to perfection. Perfection is another quality a fighter can come closer to and deviate from... BUT there is no perfect fighter either RJJ, it is a metric, an approximation and nothing else.

[PRINCEKOOL]

So Tyson Fury gets backed up all night, never once hurts Kiltschko and? He is unbeatable in that fight.

Cut the crap out mate, seriously that is all I am going to say on this thread.

Tyson Fury bamboozled and stole the fight on Kiltschko. He did not beat him up, or at any point have him on the verge of a stoppage.

I am still adamant that Anthony Joshua beat a better prepared and superior Wladimir Kiltschko. All the evidence is there, Kiltschko himself stated he was in better condition for Joshua.

I don't rate Fury vs Kiltschko as Fury's best performance, he got the job done but he could of done more.

I think there is a level, which some fighters reach where? They rise above elite level. Nobody in today's era of boxing has reached that point.

Prince Naseem Hamed, Roy Jones Junior, Mike Tyson, Joe Calzaghe, Floyd Mayweather Junior have all entered into this realm during specific fights 'Those are the modern fighters in my opinion who have entered into this realm'.

It is a realm of functioning, which is extremely vivid. Anyone who witnesses it, will automatically know that what they are viewing is different.

Honestly try and think when is the last time in boxing at elite level, you witnessed something like that? I think we have to go back 15-20 years.

Tyson Fury vs Deontay Wilder II, could may well be Fury's best performance. Even though I don't think he was at his peak.

Tyson Fury before his lay off, was not forced to show his full hand. Nobody knows the upper limits of his abilities. Like I stated before, Fury got the job done vs Kiltschko ' But I don't class that fight as a masterclass'.

[War Room]

Lara was unbeatable the night he fought Paul Williams.

Even though Lara is a great fighter, imo that was more of Williams not showing up imo. WIlliams had a lot of kinks in his armour, short amateur career, made a lot of mistakes on the inside. I don't think you're being serious and just taking a stab at Williams who should have lost that fight.

I thought fury from the second wilder fight was better than the klitschko fight. In the klitschko fight he didn’t really do anything

But floyd mayweather is unbeatable mode

WIlder is the biggest scam in boxing history, I don't rate him AT ALL. Alex Stewart would have done Wilder any way you want and that cat was a B+ level fighter in an extremely competitive era.

Fury's boxing and movement against a man who was on something like a 22 win streak was poetry in motion. Vlad was older ok, but Vlad had the style to beat guys and stay older because he was economical, ko power in both hands, didn't take a lot of damage, and a physical speciman. Fury shut him down and made him look like a C- level fighter imo. I think I gave Vlad 2 rounds and I didn't used to like Fury, I used to hate him, but he was unbeatable that night.

No fighter is unbeatable. Anybody can lose a fight on any given night. That’s why the sport is so entertaining.

I think the point you’re missing is certain styles can make fighters look better than they actually are. Margarito was a favourable style for Williams for example, however if Williams employed them same tactics against say Tommy Hearns he ends up face down on the mat like when he fought Martinez the second time.

I'm talking adjectives, you're talking nouns. If you knew Paul Williams fights you would know that was an atypical performance for him. I'll just leave it at that Mr. Knowitalltownedrunkondutchgold.

Don't really get the question. Wlad didn't perform against Fury. Sure part of that was what Fury did but Wlad definitely didnt perform at all well.

It's not a question, that might be your problem. It's a hypothetical STATEMENT. Vlad didn't perform well, because Fury didn't let him.

I think Tyson would have beat Fury. Too short. Too strong. Too fast. He would have felled Fury with a liver shot or something along those lines.

I dunno man, Fury was twinkle toes out there and he's extremely long keeping the big man at bay and made it look easy.

Fury v Wlad was one of the worst HW championship fights in history lad

Winning in dominant fashion isn't always exciting. Nobody is talking about exciting, the topic is being in an unbeatable mode. Not being an excitable mode.

So Tyson Fury gets backed up all night, never once hurts Kiltschko and? He is unbeatable in that fight.

Cut the crap out mate, seriously that is all I am going to say on this thread.

Why does he have to hurt him to win 10 rounds and make it look easy? 22 win streak mad to look like a C level fighter, you're missing the point.

Well, I did cut 10 additional sentences out of your most so you did have a lot more to say now didn't ya?

[Lupara]

It wasn't dominate. It was akin to a staring contest

One just ****** less than the other