Pulev is garbage; the HW div. is trash.

[LacedUp]

Taller men have a more challenging balance. When they DO develop it though they are far more effective. They can even be more effective anyway simply by utilising their length advantage.

Heavier boxers have always been and still are more dangerous than smaller ones no matter what.

The skills are the same.

Being larger can affect your stamina & speed negatively. Which is why larger fighters need to fight at a more measured pace. Obviously these things are more than compensated for by the benefits.

How do you explain that some of these 240lb tall fighters are actually FASTER than cruiser sized boxers of the past also? WK for instance is faster than most of Ali's opponents AND bigger. Stiverne's fists move quicker than Frazier's did! Nikolay Valuev at 320lbs was faster than 215lb Sonny Liston!

And speaking of pure skills, objective analysis of current HW's compared to past HW's shows clearly better form and technique than olden days BY SO FAR IT IS UNBELIEVABLE YOUD EVEN TRY TO COMPARE. Previous boxers fought like drunks by comparison!

Wow worst post ever.

[5burowz]

Pulev didn't look great to me. Too stiff, no head movement. That's bread and butter to Wlad.

Let's be honest though, he's more or less unbeatable. The only man i can see causing him any problems is Tyson Fury, and while he might cause Wlad some issues early, i think Fury will get GTFO once Wlad figures him out and starts unleashing those big rights.

I'm not a fan of Wlad, i think he holds far too much, but i will say that he's a great champion, and a great ambassador for the sport.

Your signature is awesome

[daggum]

Pulev didn't look great to me. Too stiff, no head movement. That's bread and butter to Wlad.

Let's be honest though, he's more or less unbeatable. The only man i can see causing him any problems is Tyson Fury, and while he might cause Wlad some issues early, i think Fury will get GTFO once Wlad figures him out and starts unleashing those big rights.

I'm not a fan of Wlad, i think he holds far too much, but i will say that he's a great champion, and a great ambassador for the sport.

why do you think that is? was he unbeatable when he didn't hold? no he was knocked out many times and knocked down dozens of times. without cheating he was nothing. with cheating he's great? i don't understand that at all. oh he's great because he found he could cheat and get away with it instead of relying on actual defense or legal boxing moves to win him fights.

[Elroy1]

not true. huck was robbed against povetkin who is the #1 or 2 heavyweight since wlad should have been dq'd. cunningham beat adamek and mansour. chambers was beaten by a cruiserweight. boxing is about skills more than size. some guys are so big that they can no longer box effectively.

why wasn't butterbean a champ if weight is an advantage? its science not opinion. being chubby effects your stamina, agility, mobility and other factors in negative ways. people in other eras were in much better shape hence they weren't as big.

I have wrote extensively about fat and weight in general so I'll excuse that bit for now.

Addressing your first couple of points..

I never said smaller boxers couldn't beat larger boxers. I simply said that the chances of winning against larger boxers decreases the larger the discrepancy. This is just blatantly true.

Today there are HW's that are in better shape than any previous era could have ever imagined!

And Butterbean was of course a bum beater period, just like Sonny Liston. That's why you need to make a quality+weight comparison together.

[Weebler I]

This doesn't make any sense.

Either you see the skills or you don't. Big men have problems developing similar skills to smaller fighters, therefore they just don't have them. they aren't hidden as you seem to suggest. Especially when he could stand to lose an extra 15 lbs.

Of course they do. They have a lot of skill, most of them have been boxing since they were kids, it's just not as flashy or as visually obvious as the little guys, the same is true in a sport like rugby.

Anyone can take two looks at Poolev and see his "skills" are non existent and the only thing he has going for him is an OK jab. He doesn't have good precision, his feet seem to be planted in cement, his head movement is non-existent. He only throws the jab. Basically he has a very amateurish style.

Where are the skills supposed to be?

This is crazy-talk man. His jab is outstanding, his footwork is usually really good too. Not a runner but he boxes on his toes. Ask Tony Thompson how much skill Pulev has, he'll tell you. You simply don't get to that position without having an abundance of skill.

[removed]

why do you think that is? was he unbeatable when he didn't hold? no he was knocked out many times and knocked down dozens of times. without cheating he was nothing. with cheating he's great? i don't understand that at all.

It is what it is. That's why i want to see Wlad-Fury, Tyson will give him as good as he gets when it comes to fighting dirty.

[5burowz]

Of course they do. They have a lot of skill, most of them have been boxing since they were kids, it's just not as flashy or as visually obvious as the little guys, the same is true in a sport like rugby.



This is crazy-talk man. His jab is outstanding, his footwork is usually really good too. Not a runner but he boxes on his toes. Ask Tony Thompson how much skill Pulev has, he'll tell you. You simply don't get to that position without having an abundance of skill.

hhahahaahahahahahaa

[LacedUp]

Of course they do. They have a lot of skill, most of them have been boxing since they were kids, it's just not as flashy or as visually obvious as the little guys, the same is true in a sport like rugby.

This is crazy-talk man. His jab is outstanding, his footwork is usually really good too. Not a runner but he boxes on his toes. Ask Tony Thompson how much skill Pulev has, he'll tell you. You simply don't get to that position without having an abundance of skill.

You can't compare the two at all. So what skills does he have? He certainly doesn't have an "outstanding" jab, that's simply insane. He has a good jab compared to today's heavyweight division. Look at Joshua's jab - it's already miles better than Poolev's.

No it's not and why would I ask one turd about another turds skills?

Tony Thompson is one of the worst "top" fighters I've seen ever. He's so shit. He's the mentally challenged equivalent of Tony Tucker.

He doesn't have an abundance of skill at all.

[Kobra Pulev]

Watch a replay full match, damn... One time in 1 round. Two times in 4 round and again one time in 5 round Klitschko got wobbled! Are you blind ? Yes, Pulev had bad defence but after David Haye match Klitschko had some troubles again...

[Weebler I]

You can't compare the two at all. So what skills does he have? He certainly doesn't have an "outstanding" jab, that's simply insane. He has a good jab compared to today's heavyweight division. Look at Joshua's jab - it's already miles better than Poolev's.

No it's not and why would I ask one turd about another turds skills?

Tony Thompson is one of the worst "top" fighters I've seen ever. He's so shit. He's the mentally challenged equivalent of Tony Tucker.

He doesn't have an abundance of skill at all.

It really isn't. Joshua is a mile off becoming a legit HW fighter. He took up the game late, got a gift medal (most felt he was beaten twice) and remains a Hearn hype-job until he proven otherwise. He's a UK Bryant Jennings or Deontay Wilder, not even that right now, and may never be more.

Pulev is one of the more skilled fighters in the division, having to rely on his technical ability to win fights rather than power. He systematically breaks bigger fighters down over 12 rounds and stops them late. He does this by accident of course, with no skill whatsoever...

You disrespect these guys calling them turds etc but you support Haye, the real toe of the division who likely gets stretched by Povetkin and Pulev and avoids the likes of Fury.