Official Tyson Fury vs Wladimir Klitschko Post Fight Discussion Thread

[Elroy1]

The thing with the Jennings fight is that it was more likely staged than it was real.

Even still, Fury's style and attriutes pretty much lock in a KO loss.

The only fighters with any chance to beat Wladimir in the foreseeable future are really big punchers with rreally solid chins at a bare minimum, and they'd e in the realm of flukes, just like all his losses so far.

[beez721]

Fury really isn't that good thus why someone like Jennings has a good chance of beating him. Anyone that can throw a decent overhand right is going to cause Fury problems, e.g Pajkic and Cunningham who both dropped him with one. Both of whom are not big punchers at all.

Either you or Laced reply to me and list Fury's best 5 wins and then compare him to other top contenders. I think then you'll realise how unproven he is.

fury isnt great,,,,,but I think he's good and has the type of style to give wlad problems. not basing this on his resume which isnt that good but his size and inside boxing ability should trouble an aging wlad. fury isnt nearly as vulnerable to right hands as he was back then. he used to back straight up with his chin high often. he only does that occasionally now against guys without a big threat so im sure he'll be even more careful against wlad. anyway,,,,I agree hes unproven to a degree and im not picking him to win but I think his attributes give wlad some porblems. hope that was enough. im tired,,lol

[beez721]

The thing with the Jennings fight is that it was more likely staged than it was real.

Even still, Fury's style and attriutes pretty much lock in a KO loss.

The only fighters with any chance to beat Wladimir in the foreseeable future are really big punchers with rreally solid chins at a bare minimum, and they'd e in the realm of flukes, just like all his losses so far.

thats the way it used to be with wlad but hes older now and can be out worked. fury has a great gas tank and youth on his side

[LacedUp]

Fury really isn't that good thus why someone like Jennings has a good chance of beating him. Anyone that can throw a decent overhand right is going to cause Fury problems, e.g Pajkic and Cunningham who both dropped him with one. Both of whom are not big punchers at all.

Either you or Laced reply to me and list Fury's best 5 wins and then compare him to other top contenders. I think then you'll realise how unproven he is.

What exactly is Jennings best win that makes you say Fury is unproven? Fury has beaten Chisora twice, Cunningham & Kevin Johnson.

Not exactly a murderous row by any means, but Fury fought Johnson right after Johnson fought Klitschko. And Fury did a better job than him. Fought and beat Chisora when he was undefeated and then again when he was on the best run of his career and ranked in the top 10. Cunningham, good fighter not a heavyweight of course, but proved himself vs Mansour & Adamek after the Fury fight.

Jennings best win .... Mike Perez? I mean he was a good fighter, but he was totally dominated until Perez ran out of gas.

Then beat a couple of fighters who weren't even European level in Spilkza or whatever his name was and Liakhovic.

His claim to fame is losing a lopsided decision to the worst Wlad we've seen in 8 years.

And yes, I'm not saying Fury is proven to be on Wlad's level. Of course not - Because Wlad is the only one on his level. Neither Pulev, Povetkin, Haye, Ibragimov or any of the top opponents Wlad has had over the years had proven themselves much more than Fury.

Povetkin yes, but everyone else were fighting worse opposition than Fury incl. Pulev and Jennings.

[LoadedWraps]

Fury really isn't that good thus why someone like Jennings has a good chance of beating him. Anyone that can throw a decent overhand right is going to cause Fury problems, e.g Pajkic and Cunningham who both dropped him with one. Both of whom are not big punchers at all.

Either you or Laced reply to me and list Fury's best 5 wins and then compare him to other top contenders. I think then you'll realise how unproven he is.

A good way to expose a certain lack of boxing knowledge is to do the rookie mistake of using a fighters resume as the be-all-end-all of judging a fighter.

Every fighter in history goes through a phase of their career where they haven't fought contenders or elite fighters. Until said fighter retires that is largely meaningless.

If you know boxing, you don't need to see a fighter face elite opposition to recognize talent and skill.

Fury has a weak resume.
Ward has a weak resume.
Golovkin has a weak resume.
Roman has a weak resume.
Lomachenko has a weak resume.
Brook has a weak resume.
Shiming has a weak resume.
Rigo has a weak resume.

All of the above are elite, quality fighters who are significantly better than their record would indicate. All above fighters are fundamentally sound, intelligent, have high ring IQ, and are multidimensional.

Fighters can have decent to good resumes but be severely flawed and/or protected, or barely skate by with the right wins but are on a collision course with reality. Examples?

Canelo
Thurman
Garcia
Khan
Ruslan
Broner

Fighters can also have unimpressive resumes, and be flawed, overrated, and or just plain fringe over achievers. Examples?

Wilder
Arreola
Nonito
JJC jr.
Salido
LeMule

I could go on and on and on, but I think i've proved my point here.

[denium]

Fury really isn't that good thus why someone like Jennings has a good chance of beating him. Anyone that can throw a decent overhand right is going to cause Fury problems, e.g Pajkic and Cunningham who both dropped him with one. Both of whom are not big punchers at all.

Either you or Laced reply to me and list Fury's best 5 wins and then compare him to other top contenders. I think then you'll realise how unproven he is.

Chisora can throw a big overhand right as well as anyone, what happened to him during their second fight? Fury completely neutralised him by leaning back & fighting southpaw.

Let me just repeat this one more time. Fury is not the same fighter he was when he was dropped by Cunningham/Pajkic, just like Wladimir isn't the same fighter he was when he was KTFO by Sanders & Brewster.

[D-MiZe]

What exactly is Jennings best win that makes you say Fury is unproven? Fury has beaten Chisora twice, Cunningham & Kevin Johnson.

Not exactly a murderous row by any means, but Fury fought Johnson right after Johnson fought Klitschko. And Fury did a better job than him. Fought and beat Chisora when he was undefeated and then again when he was on the best run of his career and ranked in the top 10. Cunningham, good fighter not a heavyweight of course, but proved himself vs Mansour & Adamek after the Fury fight.

Jennings best win .... Mike Perez? I mean he was a good fighter, but he was totally dominated until Perez ran out of gas.

Then beat a couple of fighters who weren't even European level in Spilkza or whatever his name was and Liakhovic.

His claim to fame is losing a lopsided decision to the worst Wlad we've seen in 8 years.

And yes, I'm not saying Fury is proven to be on Wlad's level. Of course not - Because Wlad is the only one on his level. Neither Pulev, Povetkin, Haye, Ibragimov or any of the top opponents Wlad has had over the years had proven themselves much more than Fury.

Povetkin yes, but everyone else were fighting worse opposition than Fury incl. Pulev and Jennings.

Jennings is a level above anything Fury has fought before. See how poor Fury's opposition is now you've listed it? At least compared to other contenders out there who have mixed it with each other. You couldn't honestly say Fury is deserving of a world title shot based off any of his wins.

Fury should be mixing it with the rest at the top after 28/11 though and we'll see how good he really is then. Spilkza is a decent fighter too.

A good way to expose a certain lack of boxing knowledge is to do the rookie mistake of using a fighters resume as the be-all-end-all of judging a fighter.

Every fighter in history goes through a phase of their career where they haven't fought contenders or elite fighters. Until said fighter retires that is largely meaningless.

If you know boxing, you don't need to see a fighter face elite opposition to recognize talent and skill.

I don't think anyone is using a fighter's resume as the be all and end all but it is a huge factor when talking about how proven one is. Fury doesn't need to beat Wlad to prove he's got a great engine, moves well for a man his size and quick hands.

Obviously my reasoning for Fury losing to Wlad and others is because of how sloppy and careless he is, other things he does in the ring to his detriment too. We can all reel off flaws and advantages of a fighter but it's easier to point to his opposition to prove certain things.

[denium]

lol at Wlad fans claiming that Bryant Jennings is some kind of elite fighter. The dude was literally a janitor a few years ago.

[beez721]

lol at Wlad fans claiming that Bryant Jennings is some kind of elite fighter. The dude was literally a janitor a few years ago.

what wlads fans? the onlly claims ive noticed are that jennings fought a very defensive minded fight that night which he did and that wlad is getting old

[D-MiZe]

I just want to make this clear too, I cannot stand Wlad Klitschko. Boring ass fighter and doesn't appeal to me whatsoever, much more a Tyson Fury fan. Got to clarify that before people start assigning bullshit.

From what I remember, Chisora couldn't miss Fury with the overhand right. I don't remember much from their second meeting apart from being disappointed with Chisora's performance/lack of enthusiasm. I don't think I've seen the Hammer fight either or at least I don't remember it. Fury will forever be open for that overhand right.

I'll concede that at the time Chisora was on the level of Jennings as in both are/were contenders. But outside of Chisora, Fury really lacks any fights against good opposition.