Tweet
Originally posted by ashadam
View Post
-
He boxed and moved. Not great to watch ill give you. I'd rather watch Joshua anyway. But I did recently watch Wilder struggle with Washington and it was boring as hell right until the end. Being good to watch and being the best fighter are not always the same thing. -
Wlad did fight in a very poor era, just from a physical stand point the 00's HW division is probably the poorest I've ever seen. Compare the 00's to now, Wilder 6'7 230, Fury 6'9 260, AJ 6'5 250, Ortiz 6'4 250, Parker 6'4 240, even contenders like Ugonoh, Whyte etc. where were guys with physiques like these in the 00's?By the same logic, all past great 'heavyweights' were 'badly exposed' by much lesser quality opposition in the same age when Wladimir Klitschko was 'badly exposed'.
Muhammad Ali was exposed before the age of 40 (when according to you Wladimir Klitschko was 'badly exposed') by Leon Spinks and Jimmy Young (two guys worse than the opposition Wladimir Klitschko was 'badly exposed' by).
Mike Tyson was 'badly exposed' by Danny Williams and Kevin Mcbride before the age of 40, two guys again worse than Wladimir Klitschko opponents that he was 'badly exposed' by.
I can keep going on and on. Very few past heavyweight boxers were anywhere near as good as Wladimir Klitschko was at the age of 40. Wladimir Klitschko has been doing better at age 40 than Muhammad Ali below age 40.
Those early losses were insignificant when you compare it to much greater accomplishments later on. Wladimir Klitschko has the highest KO percentage in late rounds against top quality opposition. He has the highest KO percentage in history in championship fights. He has the highest KO percentage against the heaviest average opponents that are also top ranked compared to any other past great heavyweight. He has lost fewer number of rounds than virtually any other past great heavyweight.
Before the 'Wladimir Klitschko fought in a poor era' excuse, provide evidence or that statement is baseless. It's more likely that Wladimir Klitschko was so good and dominant, he made top opponents from his era look poor. First view Wladimir Klitschko's best opponents against other opponents that are not named Wladimir Klitschko and then compare their performance to when they fought Wladimir Klitschko, you'll hopefully then understand what I mean.
Tony Thompson, Rahman, Ibragimov, Sam Peter, Mormeck, Chagaev, Austin, Brock, Byrd, look at them from a physical standpoint, pathetic. Even Breazeale's fat ass poses more of a threat than all of those guys.
Ali and Tyson were fighting in divisions filled with in shape HW's, guys that weren't stationary targets, guys in proper condition to fight.
Also, Wladimir Klitschko is infinitely superior to feather fisted powder puffed Andre Ward (Assuming you're an Andre Ward fan). Wladimir Klitschko gets hit far less than Andre Ward (whilst needing less moves), yet gets far more knockouts than that clown.
It's an insult to compare Wlad to Ward, Ward has fought in some of the most stacked divisions in boxing history. Ward beat the best opponents he's fought, actual P4P quality material. He got schooled by Fury and the AJ fight was only competitive when AJ didn't properly pace himself.Comment
-
Originally posted by Cutthroat View Post
1) Physical appearance and boxing abilities are two different things altogether. A false equivalence fallacy commuted from your behalf. Provided a boxer is capable of performing well, the only things that matter are weight, range (height and reach) and boxing skills / abilities. Those 3 combined are what matters. Assuming you're referring to athletic physiques like six pack and big muscles, all of that is irrelevant. Weight is weight. It doesn't even matter whether the weight constitutes of muscle, fat or anything else. There's a reason why weight classes exist and not athletic classes or muscle classes. So physical appearance doesn't have any direct bearing on how good or bad an era is.just from a physical stand point the 00's HW division is probably the poorest I've ever seen. Compare the 00's to now, Wilder 6'7 230, Fury 6'9 260, AJ 6'5 250, Ortiz 6'4 250, Parker 6'4 240, even contenders like Ugonoh, Whyte etc. where were guys with physiques like these in the 00's?
2) The modern era has only begun. We are still yet to see how this era will unfold. Thus, we can't form any premature conclusions too early.
3) Even if Wladimir Klitschko's era isn't as good as the current era, it doesn't therefore mean it's the 'worst' era. It still is undoubtedly better than previous eras.
On what basis does 'Brezeale poses more threat than those guys'?Tony Thompson, Rahman, Ibragimov, Sam Peter, Mormeck, Chagaev, Austin, Brock, Byrd, look at them from a physical standpoint, pathetic. Even Breazeale's fat ass poses more of a threat than all of those guys.
Also, 'all of those guys' are more proven at modern heavyweight, thus better than all past era heavyweights who were competing below the current heavyweight starting weight (201 pounds and plus). So physical aesthetics aside, those boxers are simply better AT HEAVYWEIGHT than those past era boxers.
If you want to compare past era heavyweights to anybody, compare them to current cruiserweights or even light heavyweights. That's where they'll most likely be competiting today. Modern cruiserweights and light heavyweights have better physiques than past era heavyweights (even though that's irrelevant).
Muhammad Ali's era was full of boxers who would be considered cruiser weights or light heavyweights today. During Ali's era, the 'heavyweight' division started from 176 pounds (not heavyweight by modern standards).Ali and Tyson were fighting in divisions filled with in shape HW's, guys that weren't stationary targets, guys in proper condition to fight.
So it's a false equivalence to compare the conditioning, speed and stamina of a cruiserweight or a light heavyweight to a super heavyweight or modern sized heavyweight.
Manny Pacquiao is likely also more conditioned as an athlete and looks to be in better shape than some of those 00 era heavyweight boxers you've mentioned. Does that mean Pacquiao even stands a chance at beating them? Absolutely not!
Mike Tyson was a more modern heavyweight. However, the average weight of his opponents were a lot lighter than Wladimir Klitschko's era opponents. I don't see any evidence the boxers from Tyson's era were either more skilled, more elusive, better conditioned or better athletes than some of the boxers from Wladimir Klitschko's era. Eddie Chambers alone is faster than anybody Mike Tyson ever fought. So is David Haye, who is also more powerful than anybody he fought except Lennox Lewis.
[/QUOTE]It's an insult to compare Wlad to Ward, Ward has fought in some of the most stacked divisions in boxing history. Ward beat the best opponents he's fought, actual P4P quality material. He got schooled by Fury and the AJ fight was only competitive when AJ didn't properly pace himself.
Let's clarify boxing skills. Who would be the more skilled boxer between these two:
1) A boxer who rarely gets hit but still knocks out nearly every one of his opponents.
2) A boxer who rarely gets hit but rarely scores any knockouts
For me, it's clearly boxer 1. It takes actual skill to score knockouts. It's not just about power.
If Andre Ward was so skilled, why does he rarely knockout any of his opponent? Don't give me 'he lacks power'. Vasyl Lomachenko likely has the same amount of power or lack of compared to Andre Ward, but still gets plenty more knockouts / stoppages whilst getting hit less. Wonder why that is? Because Vasyl Lomachenko and Wladimir Klitschko are both more skilled boxers P4P. It's not even close!
Andre Ward's lack of boxing skills is the reason why he rarely gets any knockouts. Also, the fact that Ward needs to go to survival mode in order to protect himself from getting hit without being offensive is another sign of Ward's lack of boxing skills. The best defensive boxers are ones who can defend themselves even whilst they're in a position to attack and even in a position to KO their opponents. Andre Ward doesn't fulfil that criteria.
Also, Wladimir Klitschko has also fought every opponent, every mandatory, every number 1 contender. He's never ducked a single opponent. There's no evidence Andre Ward's divisions were any more stacked than Wladimir Klitschko's. Simply, Wladimir Klitschko dominates his opponents more lopsidedly than Andre Ward.Comment
-
100% no chance that Wlad threw that fight, lmao. He got caught with a massive, A+ uppercut that he didn't see coming. That's why he lost.Originally posted by Kosta View PostComment
-
Agree with you.Originally posted by Mike D View Post
It's been infuriating seeing all the negativity after such a great fight. First time in 15 years we have a great, compelling HWT title fight that resonates world wide. You'd think all the diehards would be celebrating this.Comment
-
It was a great fight, one of the best HW championship fights in a long time. Anyone who can't appreciate that is not a diehard fan of the sport.Originally posted by The Big Dunn View PostComment
-
Along with people complaining or stating Joshua was exposed when thats what usually happens when big punchers fight each other and knock outs are suppose to happen in boxing thats why we watch it ...what morons !Originally posted by SUBZER0ED View Post
Comment
-
Some really bizaare responses on this thread and generally to this fight. Wlad took a fall?!?! Do you only watch boxing in Hollywood film version or the actual sport?
Personally my hunch is that because Joshua is a young, black, non-American who is relatively incredibly inexperienced for what he's done it irritates some people into making some pretty illogical, petty comments.
The comments are so illogical that I can only presume they're fuelled by illogical reasons.Comment
-
If Wlad was taking a fall he would've laid down after that uppercut. It was almost superhuman to stay up, and keep going even though clearly that was the point where the fight was over.Comment
-
It was a good fight. But I don't get all this "fight of the century" and "brutal sugfest" talk. It wasn't even the most action packed HW fight this YEAR, let alone the last 10! Were there KDs? Yeah...but in between them were looooooooong lulls. Nothing happened in the first 4 rounds.
I like to bring fights up on my tablet to show my casual boxing buddies. I knew I had to skip the first 4 rounds, where they basically looked at each other.
The action starts in the 5th and 6th, with some exchanges, and the KDs. After that is another loooooong lull until the 11th round TKO. I could tell my work buddy was getting bored. Which never happened during Porter/Berto bell to bell brawl. OR the Dominic Breazeale/Izuagbe Uganoh fight! You're gonna tell me Wlad/Joshua was a better slugfest than that?!
It was a tacticle fight with some brief moments of action. In fact...I believe that had Joshua not knocked Wlad down in the 5th? Making Wlad desperate? What went on the first 4 rounds was what you were getting the ENTIRE fight! Wlad even started the holding in the championship rounds!
There were much more action packed HW fights, it's just that this particular one was fought in a stadium with 90,000 people!Comment
Comment