Official Tyson Fury vs Wladimir Klitschko Post Fight Discussion Thread

[removed]

Takam couldn't beat Fury.

I suspect a bit of trolling in that one.

Takam is average at best.

The only HW capable of beating Tyson Fury is Wladimir Klitschko. Fury beats everyone else, including Povetkin.

[Fury4daWIN]

Takam is average at best.

The only HW capable of beating Tyson Fury is Wladimir Klitschko. Fury beats everyone else, including Povetkin.

I think Pulev gives him some problems myself.

[mlac]

If you already knew that then why did you try to spin it that Adamek won in order to support your point? That's pretty lowly behaviour in my book.

And you crow about calling out people on their BS? Seems you're more full of it than most.

are you dim?

that's a rhetorical question, i never said adamek won or spun anything you weirdo.
if you read my posts, which you haven't seemed to of grasped, it's pretty simple: i made the point Cunningham was not rated in the top 10 when he fought fury.

[removed]

I think Pulev gives him some problems myself.

Pulev is a lead footed bum. Fury would box his ears off. Have you watched his fight against Ustinov? It's laughable how anyone could even think that Fury ducked them both.

[removed]

are you dim?

that's a rhetorical question, i never said adamek won or spun anything you weirdo.
if you read my posts, which you haven't seemed to of grasped, it's pretty simple: i made the point Cunningham was not rated in the top 10 when he fought fury.

Cunningham is a top 10 HW right now you fool. Name me 9 other HW's who are better than him?

[Calculating...]

The only HW capable of beating Tyson Fury is Wladimir Klitschko. Fury beats everyone else, including Povetkin.

I disagree, I bet Anthony Joshua and Wilder can knock him out but they're not nearly as entertaining as the GYPSY WARRIOR!

I think Pulev gives him some problems myself.

I can see it being a long 12 round match, good fight actually

[too_much]

I would say Fury has won the first round.

[1hourRun]

Fury Klitschko plan has backfired

[LoadedWraps]

could you please inform me how you can be top 10 without beating any top 10 guys?

It's called the eye test. You either haven't been in the ring, don't know much about boxing, or both.

It's the same way fighters like Golovkin, Loma, and Rigo are rated highly. I feel like i've said this every other day for weeks here. You don't judge fighters based solely on their resumes, that's for comparing ATG's, historical context comparisons, and champions were most all else is equal.

You don't have to like Fury, or believe he can beat Wlad, but that doesn't mean you won't look foolish trying to slight him, I will put you on blast real quick, you, Elroy1, and -scott-wladland-.

[Fury4daWIN]

are you dim?

that's a rhetorical question, i never said adamek won or spun anything you weirdo.

Erm, you just stated flat out that Cunningham lost to Adamek (post #2633). Since you did so baldy and without any qualifiers, that has to be regarded as either ignorance of the generally accepted controversy that surrounded the result or an attempt to spin the facts to make Cunningham look bad, which it seems is exactly what you're doing.

if you read my posts, which you haven't seemed to of grasped, it's pretty simple: i made the point Cunningham was not rated in the top 10 when he fought fury.

OK, and what does that prove? That the victory was no good? Would you have preferred Fury to have fought Adamek just because he was officially ranked higher than Cunningham, even though he was clearly the inferior fighter?

Your whole point is that Fury shouldn't be rated as highly as he is because he's never beaten a top ten fighter (false). Clearly, then, you put stock in beating fighters of a certain ranking. Fair enough. But when said rankings are clearly manipulated as a result of corruption, judging incompetence and what have you then other, less tangible, factors come into play when judging quality of victory, eye test, opponent resume, stylistic difficulties, public perception of the opponent at the time.

With Cunningham it was fairly easy to see that he was a better fighter than Adamek and therefore a stiffer test for Fury since Adamek didn't possess any significantly greater attributes that might have posed Fury problems where Cunningham did not. Had the fighter been someone like Mansour you could have maybe argued that his punching power might have allowed him to get the KO, but Adamek at that stage was a shell of himself, slow, feather fisted and lacking any form of solid punch resistance. A victory over him would have been meaningless except to satisfy ranking freaks like you and those too lazy or ignorant to judge quality of win on anything other than a number on a list.

At the end of the day Fury is ranked where he's ranked. If you have any issue with it then go take it up with the ranking bodies you seem to put so much faith into (when it suits you).