Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comments Thread For: David Can Be Great if He Drops The Haymakers

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Kayoer View Post
    tourlou82 Here you are b***h, Why do you girl so dislike Klichko? May be they are too good for such cheap b***h like you. Or you just envying to Hayden Pannetiere. Or you just a friend of another b***h Diva Hay.
    I already told you, your attempts at speaking english are pathetic. You know a lot of curse words. Congratulations. Suits you well since all a Klitard can do is insulting the ones that are not adoring the Klits.

    Get out of here uneducated idiot. Find some ukrainian boxing forum where you can suck on the Klits ****s all day long, there are already enough Klitards here on BS.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Dave Rado View Post
      Haye was astonishingly easy to hit with the jab against Ruiz, and based on that performance, he has no chance against either Klitschko. The only way to have a chance against either of them is to block their jabs and counter them effectively, but Haye didn't block Ruiz's jabs and almost never countered them.

      Then, three of his four knock-downs were illegal; all objective people think Ruiz should have been given time to recover after all three of those knock-downs; and some respected boxing writers think Haye should have been disqualified.

      Furthermore, his stamina looked awful: he looked tired from the second round, and at the end he was so exhausted that he could barely walk out of the ring.

      Finally, how can someone who plans to retire after only another four fights credibly claim to be the saviour of the Heavyweight division? To be the saviour of the division, he'd have to not only beat both Klitschkos, but to then defend his title for several years, like Ali, Lewis, and most of the other greats, have done.
      So you're saying Haye will fight the Klits the same way he fought Ruiz?

      Haye was wreckless against Ruiz because he thought he wasn't much of a threat, and he was trying to get him out of there as quick as possible. His training was also below par, with the lack of sparring.

      Against the Klits he will use a much different gameplan, and work on how to deal with the jab. Don't write Haye off because of the Ruiz performance.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Spray_resistant View Post
        Some of you are grossly underrating the Klitschkos talking about them being contenders at best in all of these so called better eras when they most likley could give any HW who ever laced them up the fight of his life possibly beat any HW who ever laced them up.

        I just don't get where the "weak era" idea even comes from.

        It seems like it stems from ppl having biased against Wlad and Vitali and so if they are dominating the era must be bad.

        Since I am in this thread I will just say lol at the notion of Haye becoming a great HW ever.
        Then it's time for you to get a bit into the history of boxing. You see, there have been other boxers before your precious Klits were even born.

        We are in a very weak era for the HW division. That "idea" is not an idea, it just comes from observation. Look around : where are the good HW ? The great HW ? Nowhere to be seen. Since Lewis has retired, the HW division is an empty hole.

        Just try to make a list of the good or great HW since 2003, and compare that list with this one, taken out of the seventies :

        Ali, Foreman, Quarry, Ellis, Frazier, Norton, Shavers, Lyle, Young, Chuvalo, Bonavena, Bugner, Holmes (late),...

        The division is at its lowest point ever, it's a fact, like it or not.

        You Klitards are so blind it's unbelievable.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by Dave Rado View Post
          With the possible exception of Chambers, what Heavyweight in the last 5 years (other than the Klitschkos) has consistently performed well by the standards of the past???? Not one.
          Which are the standards of the past, exactly?

          Comment


          • #35
            Haye fought the perfect fight against Valuev? Is that supposed to be a joke? Haye shouldn't even have won that fight. 46 year old Evander Holyfield fought a better fight against Valuev. Haye just tried to emulate what he did but looked worse

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Steelhammer2010 View Post
              Terrible article.

              Terence Dooley is just another delusional biased British Haye nuthugger.

              Either Klitschko easily destroys Hypejob Haye.
              You really are fcuking boring, stop spouting the same dam crap all the time, you backwards inbred.

              Comment


              • #37
                Haye said he's only gonna have 4 more fights and then retire. No point trying to change his fighting style. Haye does things in a ring that just can't be mended.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Steelhammer2010 View Post
                  Terrible article.

                  Terence Dooley is just another delusional biased British Haye nuthugger.

                  Either Klitschko easily destroys Hypejob Haye.
                  Without doubt, you are the most predictable and boring poster on here. Either Klitschko destroys... blah blah blah. It's getting to the point where I am considering paying for your tuition in the hope you will come up with something interesting to say!

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by tourlou82 View Post
                    Ali, Foreman, Quarry, Ellis, Frazier, Norton, Shavers, Lyle, Young, Chuvalo, Bonavena, Bugner, Holmes (late),...
                    Ellis was far from being a great Heavyweight and wouldn't have a hope in hell against the current version of either Klitschko. Quarry was game and exciting but not much better than Arreola (albeit more in shape). Young was no better than Chambers. Bugner wouldn't be in today's top 5. Chuvalo and Bonavena were good but very inconsistent and wouldn't have a chance against the current version of either Klitschko. Shavers had a huge punch but was very limited, and wasn't much better than Sanders. And the Holmes era was marked by a similar weak Heavyweight division to today's - most of the top fighters didn't train properly during his reign, and frequently turned up badly overweight for fights.

                    The early 70s was one of the best eras in boxing history, but there have been many weak eras, including the late 70s - today's is far from being the first or the worst. And several of the fighters you named don't help your case.
                    Last edited by Dave Rado; 04-09-2010, 05:38 PM.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by - JCHING - View Post
                      So you're saying Haye will fight the Klits the same way he fought Ruiz?
                      I'm saying that he hasn't shown any indication since he moved to Heavyweight that he has what it takes to beat either Klitschko, and those who give him more than an outside chance are not basing it on evidence but just on wishful thinking.

                      Originally posted by - JCHING - View Post
                      Haye was reckless against Ruiz because he thought he wasn't much of a threat
                      He wasn't reckless, he just didn't block the jab. It's not like he was taking a punch in order to deliver a punch - his workrate wasn't much, and he didn't counter the jabs he took.

                      And he said before the fight that he expected it to be by far his toughest fight to date. And in some ways it was - he was completely exhausted at the end, and his face was very bruised.
                      Last edited by Dave Rado; 04-09-2010, 05:35 PM.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP