klitschko Vs Any American = Mismatch

[New England]

And Mitchell is? Come on. Even taking into account the vast gulf in experience, it's clear as day that Chambers is the sharper, quicker and more fluid fighter. Mitchell's a big body with decent speed, above average power, plodding feet and reasonable combination punching ability. He's not untalented, but he's crude as a caveman compared to Chambers, again even taking into account the experience differential. Look at some of Eddie's older fights when he was still making a name for himself. He won fights more or less on talent alone, because he lacked any sort of punching power. Mitchell at least has the benefit of power to hide his deficiencies.

no, he's not. but he's certainly not where he is because of boxing craft. he does have things going for him.
i do think mitchell is more talented than chambers, especially as a HW, but again, mitchell is not a unique talent in the least in football. there are plenty of bigger and stronger and faster guys

chambers is a very good boxer, and very sharp. much more so than mitchell. mitchell has only been boxing since 2006 and turned pro with two years of experience and chambers has been a pro since 2000
i'm not saying seth mitchell would become muhammad ali if he boxed when he was 10, but that' gulf in experience cannot be overstated

[Someone88]

Some people are biased with their opinions I also see some good points as well, yeh there could be better American heavyweight Boxers but also Europeans have been more focused on Boxing as well. Vitali and Wladimir are great athletes and great fighters who work very hard so that's mainly why they are so successful

[Mike Tyson77]

maybe he Wlad should fight holyfield, grant and lawrence in one 12 rounder, 4 rounds each. proabaly knock them all out

No one can beat Wlad right now.

[nomadman]

no, he's not. but he's certainly not where he is because of boxing craft. he does have things going for him.
i do think mitchell is more talented than chambers, especially as a HW, but again, mitchell is not a unique talent in the least in football. there are plenty of bigger and stronger and faster guys

chambers is a very good boxer, and very sharp. much more so than mitchell. mitchell has only been boxing since 2006 and turned pro with two years of experience and chambers has been a pro since 2000
i'm not saying seth mitchell would become muhammad ali if he boxed when he was 10, but that' gulf in experience cannot be overstated

Mitchell's obviously the greater talent in football, but that's irrelevant here.

As far as talent in the boxing ring goes I think it's clear Chambers has more of it. He's obviously not a bigger puncher, but then was Tua a more talented heavy than Byrd? Chambers has the sort of talent that's pretty evident even early on in one's career. Mitchell isn't untalented, but he's what 25 fights into his career now? What you see is more or less what you're ever gonna get, and nothing in his performances suggests that he has anywhere near the ring craft, sharpness of hand and mind and general boxing savvy that Chambers possesses. Of course he doesn't need to given his equaliser, his power.

Chambers's general talent gets overlooked a lot. He's a small, light fisted, stalking counter puncher who fights out of a high guard and relies of relatively low output to get the job done. That takes major talent. He made a still sharp Povetkin look like an amateur, ruined a pretty good fighter in Brock, outpointed the giant (and then undefeated) Dimitrenko... in Germany! The guy's easily the most talented heavy in the division today, outside of Wlad, and he accomplished most of this whilst still in his mid to late twenties. A damn good fighter.

[ShoulderRoll]

America's best athletes get funneled into football, basketball, and baseball since they are kids.

If boxing was as popular as it was back in the day (when it rivaled baseball as the national pasttime) those athletes would be funneled into boxing instead.

That's just a fact. And it's the reason why you see a dwindling number of American boxers at ANY weight, not just heavyweight.

[DE100]

America's best athletes get funneled into football, basketball, and baseball since they are kids.

If boxing was as popular as it was back in the day (when it rivaled baseball as the national pasttime) those athletes would be funneled into boxing instead.

That's just a fact. And it's the reason why you see a dwindling number of American boxers at ANY weight, not just heavyweight.

Just imagine if some of these NBA dudes chose boxing.




(And Odom is on the slim side when compared to his piers.)

[nomadman]

America's best athletes get funneled into football, basketball, and baseball since they are kids.

If boxing was as popular as it was back in the day (when it rivaled baseball as the national pasttime) those athletes would be funneled into boxing instead.

That's just a fact. And it's the reason why you see a dwindling number of American boxers at ANY weight, not just heavyweight.

Say something we haven't heard a billion times before.

- At no stage in boxing's history has the US ever had champions the size and athleticism of guys in the NBA today.

- At no time would Frazier have ever made it into the NFL.

- Under no circumstances could men like Tony Galento, Abe Simon or Jess Willard ever be considered some of America's best athletes.

Those last two aren't 'facts' but I dare you to argue against them.

[nomadman]

Just imagine if some of these NBA dudes chose boxing.




(And Odom is on the slim side when compared to his piers.)

[ShoulderRoll]

- At no stage in boxing's history has the US ever had champions the size and athleticism of guys in the NBA today.

American athletes today are generally bigger across all sports than their historical counterparts. .

- At no time would Frazier have ever made it into the NFL.

And? I'm not claiming that every single great heavyweight also has to be a great athlete. But it certainly helps.

- Under no circumstances could men like Tony Galento, Abe Simon or Jess Willard ever be considered some of America's best athletes.

See above. Plus Galento and Simon were never great heavyweights, were they? And Willard won his title because Jack Johnson finally got old more than anything. When he stepped in against an elite, prime fighter in Dempsey he got exposed and destroyed.

[nomadman]

American athletes today are generally bigger across all sports than their historical counterparts. .

There've been big guys in the NBA for ages, even back in the 70s. Why weren't they boxing then? They certainly weren't lumbering and slow.

Where was this six foot nine American ATG who'd now be playing in the NBA, eh?

And? I'm not claiming that every single great heavyweight also has to be a great athlete. But it certainly helps.

See above. Plus Galento and Simon were never great heavyweights, were they? And Willard won his title because Jack Johnson finally got old more than anything. When he stepped in against an elite, prime fighter in Dempsey he got exposed and destroyed.

I pointed them out because they were contenders at one point and fought for the heavyweight title, thus they were in some measure representative of their eras. That's what this argument is about, eras, not just the top 1%. And the fact of the matter is that very few eras of HW boxing have ever been filled with top class athletic talent outside the champs.