Comments Thread For: A Look at The Heavyweight Division in 2010

[joe strong]

This


Pulev and Helenius have accomplished more than Briggs or Ruiz have in the last several years. And in terms of how the division is going to shape up they'd be far more critical to mention than 38 yr old Ruiz or 5 punch output per round briggs



good post

I see what you are saying & it's valid but comparing those guys to Briggs & especially ruiz is questionable.ruiz has been a 2 time world champion & fought many of the best in our era & Briggs has a world title too.pulev has beaten matt Skelton & helenius' win vs brewster is solid but both of them have accomplished very little.helenius is going to be a force but in terms of accomplishments is not close.ruiz has earned the right rather you like him or not & Briggs has fought many decent fighters as well.Briggs is not a contender anymore.

[ShoulderRoll]

I agree, I was just pointing out that Carnivore didn't say any of those guys were top 10, which you had claimed.

This article is basically a top 10 list of heavyweights, along with a mention of the top fighters just outside that. So I fail to see why any of the guys on Carnivore's list should be mentioned.

That's what I was trying to claim.

[The Hammer]

You're crazy if you think any of those guys deserve mention in a top 10 list of heavyweights.

And this American writer that you want to criticize put 7 non-Americans in his top 10. What more do you want? He's being objective unlike you who apparently wants this list to be all Euros.

I wasn't saying they are top ten.

I'm saying the people are I mentioned are more relevant in 2010 than Shannon Briggs who he mentions. Briggs doesn't have a single win since 2006.

The article was supposed to be about 2010 heavyweights not 2000 heavyweights.

[The Hammer]

I see what you are saying & it's valid but comparing those guys to Briggs & especially ruiz is questionable.ruiz has been a 2 time world champion & fought many of the best in our era & Briggs has a world title too.pulev has beaten matt Skelton & helenius' win vs brewster is solid but both of them have accomplished very little.helenius is going to be a force but in terms of accomplishments is not close.ruiz has earned the right rather you like him or not & Briggs has fought many decent fighters as well.

You need to get your mind out of the 90s and into the 21st century.

Briggs is no longer a player in the heavyweight division. He hasn't won a fight since 2006.

And Briggs fought mostly bums, very poor opposition. He has only two good wins in his entire career - Lyakhovich and Foreman - and the age 46 Foreman actually defeated Briggs and was robbed.

[joe strong]

You need to get your mind out of the 90s and into the 21st century.

Briggs is no longer a player in the heavyweight division. He hasn't won a fight since 2006.

And Briggs fought mostly bums, very poor opposition. He has only two good wins in his entire career - Lyakhovich and Foreman - and the age 46 Foreman actually defeated Briggs and was robbed.

how come you cut off my last post? I said Briggs was not a contender anymore & ruiz has earned the right still...pulev has 5 fights & helenius has 11,price has 4....my head is NOT still in the 90's carnivore it's just I don't recognize a guy whose only marginal win is vs matt Skelton! I also gave helenius his due but you need to get your head out of EUROPE's ass...why don't you move there? Since you think Canada & the states are so bad! You never give anyone their due unless it's a guy named jerkov or beatov...you jump on & off the bandwagon so much it's funny.you used to talk up dimitrenko & boytsov & what have they done? Now dimitrenko lost to chambers & it's universums fault? Maybe he just sucks!boytsov is what 28-0 vs d level fighters,& pulev? Come on! You also have a hard on for teddy atlas so now povetkin sucks I suppose? LOL! You make me laugh.maybe you been BALLGAZING at wreck beach too much! You need names on your resume to earn a good reputation...at least helenius has brewster,which I stated & said they are solid up & comers but you fail to realize this...read everything instead of only what you want to see.

[BritishBoxing92]

The heavyweight division has slightly changed over the last twelve months. Champions Wladimir and Vitali Klitschko remain at the top, but other faces were either promoted or demoted in the division’s rankings. Also, we witnessed the arrival of former light heavyweight and cruiserweight champion Tomasz Adamek, who stopped veteran Andrew Golota in his first heavyweight win. Old faces returned such as Shannon Briggs and David Tua, although Briggs is currently suspended since he tested positive for a banned substance in his return bout against Marcus McGee on December 3rd. It was originally a 1st-round knockout win for Briggs, but was eventually changed to a no contest. [Click Here To Read More]

gd to see hayes a WBA HW champ since hes fast and got power....wladimir and vitali also pack hard punches...

[El Jesus]

for me, david haye is the ONLY interesting heavyweight and thats because hes mobile, in shape and comes to fight. if hes fighting im interested, everyone else can **** off.

[Dave Rado]

This article is basically a top 10 list of heavyweights, along with a mention of the top fighters just outside that. So I fail to see why any of the guys on Carnivore's list should be mentioned.

That's what I was trying to claim.

The first four paragraphs and especially the title imply more than that, and Carnivore was referring specifically to the fact that it mentioned Briggs, whom it doesn't rate at or even near the top 10. He didn't say or even imply that the guys he listed should be rated in or near the top 10, just that he thought they were more worthy of being mentioned than Briggs was.

[Roy Hobbs]

the next great american heavyweight is just waiting to be found. Actually waiting to be told not to play football or basketball but to give boxing a try. There is no shortage of big american athletes capable of being a great boxers. They just need to be found & steered in boxing's way, cultivated & supported.

[ShoulderRoll]

The first four paragraphs and especially the title imply more than that, and Carnivore was referring specifically to the fact that it mentioned Briggs, whom it doesn't rate at or even near the top 10. He didn't say or even imply that the guys he listed should be rated in or near the top 10, just that he thought they were more worthy of being mentioned than Briggs was.

Like I said, the article mentioned Briggs as an old face that had come back . Just like it mentioned David Tua.

Why didn't Carnivore jump all over the mention of David Tua too? I'll tell you why: because it doesn't support his ridiculous contention that the writer is biased towards Americans.