Comments Thread For: Joshua-Klitschko II: There Will Be HBO, Showtime Collaberation

[JimRaynor]

I wish Klitschko would just retire, Joshua is going to come in with too much confidence. At 41 Klitschko can hang it up with dignity and respect as one of the greatest heavyweight boxers of all time. Even if Klitschko beats Joshua, it's bad for boxing, he'll damage the young mans prospects and then he retires shortly thereafter anyways.

[Marchegiano]

I've lost interest tbh. There are more interesting matchup out there for both men. I understand it will probably make good money, but as a fan I don't see why I should give a **** about that. All that means is it interests people who don't normally watch boxing. Which just means more know nothings will sign up to places like this to tell me all about what they don't know, aggressively.

Besides that Wlad's kind of ****ty, always has been. He's never done anything impressive and his sole accolade is not losing to the most unimpressive rabble to ever box since 686 BC. I'm pretty sure all the current champions kick his ass and would have in his prime. AJ is a little better than Sanders, Wlad never beat anyone at that level or even all that close to it. At least if he's fighting someone who isn't AJ or Fury then it's worth questioning. Off the back of that KO it's silly to think AJ's not going to put him down quickly this time. I like AJ but I'm not paying him to watch him brutalize an old man who never accomplished much and has no good wins to stand up to the ATG resumes of the past.

[juggernaut666]

I've lost interest tbh. There are more interesting matchup out there for both men. I understand it will probably make good money, but as a fan I don't see why I should give a **** about that. All that means is it interests people who don't normally watch boxing. Which just means more know nothings will sign up to places like this to tell me all about what they don't know, aggressively.

Besides that Wlad's kind of ****ty, always has been. He's never done anything impressive and his sole accolade is not losing to the most unimpressive rabble to ever box since 686 BC. I'm pretty sure all the current champions kick his ass and would have in his prime. AJ is a little better than Sanders, Wlad never beat anyone at that level or even all that close to it. At least if he's fighting someone who isn't AJ or Fury then it's worth questioning. Off the back of that KO it's silly to think AJ's not going to put him down quickly this time. I like AJ but I'm not paying him to watch him brutalize an old man who never accomplished much and has no good wins to stand up to the ATG resumes of the past.

You need to go crawl back into the history section...YDKSAB....REAL TALK....

i did find your boxing champions listing a good read though so theres that

[Marchegiano]

You need to go crawl back into the history section...YDKSAB....REAL TALK....

i did find your boxing champions listing a good read though so theres that

Before I address the Wlad nonsense, Thank you for checking out the champions list. I plan to do posts on the individual ancient champions and bareknuckle champions in the future so look out for those. It'll bring a lot of context to the list.

------


I must be two ****** thoughts from full blown tarded because I don't understand what you're trying to say to me.

This basically amounts to " I recognize you're historically sound but still think your opinion of this boxer's historical significance is silly" from my perspective.

Everytime I say Wlad's **** I get someone telling me 'nuh-uh' followed by an whole lot of not **** to say. What am I meant to do with that? That's not a retort, counterpoint, or even a half assed response. if you've nothing to say that addresses my claim that Wlad lacks resume and uses an amatuer formula then wtf are you doing talking to me? I don't mean to be mean I'm honestly curious. Why do you guys go out of your way to ignore my claims but still let me know you disagree. Wtf do you expect me to say to that ****? Good for you? Enjoy the ignorance? I've researched boxing from antiquity to today, but yeah...since you say I'm wrong **** what I think. I'm all about that juggernaut666 opine now? Honestly, what kind of response were you thinking I might leave to that ****? My own version of nuh-huh?

What is it youse guys talk about? Just a long circle jerk of unsubstantiated opinions some meshing some conflicting but none explored? I got no problem with you jugs, but obviously I'm a bit annoyed by this style response. I'm very interested in being told why people are so taken with having not lost to a **** stain like Mormeck, but all y'all ever have to say is "Nah, you wrong, him good"

[JimRaynor]

I've lost interest tbh. There are more interesting matchup out there for both men. I understand it will probably make good money, but as a fan I don't see why I should give a **** about that. All that means is it interests people who don't normally watch boxing. Which just means more know nothings will sign up to places like this to tell me all about what they don't know, aggressively.

Besides that Wlad's kind of ****ty, always has been. He's never done anything impressive and his sole accolade is not losing to the most unimpressive rabble to ever box since 686 BC. I'm pretty sure all the current champions kick his ass and would have in his prime. AJ is a little better than Sanders, Wlad never beat anyone at that level or even all that close to it. At least if he's fighting someone who isn't AJ or Fury then it's worth questioning. Off the back of that KO it's silly to think AJ's not going to put him down quickly this time. I like AJ but I'm not paying him to watch him brutalize an old man who never accomplished much and has no good wins to stand up to the ATG resumes of the past.

The present, nor the history will agree with you. No matter how you look at it, you cannot claim that a heavyweight champion who reigned for 10 years (the longest reign since 60 years) did not accomplish much, that is about as an asinine statement as you can make.

[Deus]

Why was a guy who was the B side, coming off a loss, 17 months of inactivity, and no belts given a mandatory rematch clause in the first place against the reining champion??? What kind of leverage did Klitschko have if Joshua told him to kick rocks on the rematch clause?

If Joshua wants to fight a 41 year old he knocked out already that's on him, but if the WBA doesn't strip him for not fighting his mandatory King Kong Ortiz they lose all credibility.

Strip him when they've already said they are likely to give him a voluntary? That'd be a good way to lose all credibility... rather than stripping him for not fighting a mandatory that is second in line to the IBF mandatory.

Even if Klitschko has a change of heart and retires Joshua v Ortiz is not happening next, period.

[Raonic]

Hope a rematch happens. That was a great fight.

[johnnycontrolet]

Great news, hope the rematch happens! This was one of the best heavyweight fights in the last 30 years.

[vitali1999]

This is ridiculous. What a pointless fight.

[AL_Camino]

The first fight was great, of course the rematch makes sense. Wlad is gonna have to be even more on his toes though because I have a feeling Joshua will try to blitz him the second time around.