Comments Thread For: Mansour: Povetkin is Capable of Beating Any Heavyweight

[No punch power]

dude is too small and old to cause any problem against joshua..povetkin vs jarrell miller is an interesting natchup..joshua stops him

Joshua's punches are a little too light to be anything more than a minor nuisance to someone with an iron chin like Alexander Povetkin. Joshua really doesn't punch that hard. The so called 'glass jawed' boxer in Wladimir Klitschko at the age of 41, with 2 years of inactivity, managed to get up after taking all of Joshua's most powerful punches. Even an old, already knocked out Carlos Takam was walking right through some of Joshua's most powerful punches like they were nothing.

Alexander Povetkin at his best, totally annihilates Joshua in just a few rounds.

[No punch power]

Povetkin showed he was better than Takam in their fight and we know Takam gave a good account of himself against Joshua, but he did still lose every round. If we're talking about the possibility of being dominant in the division, which in line with the article implies he is better than any other on his day, I think his size rather than his ability is his achilles heal in achieving this. I actually think he gives Wilder a very hard nights work though, even with the size differential, because his fundamentals are just soo good, even so, I think Wilders size/power might be a little too much. Joshua's boxing is very sound and he has every other attribute on his side, so thats the one I can see standing between Mansours claim and reality.

If size was as significant a factor as you're making it out to be. Then why didn't Anthony Joshua beat and knock out Carlos Takam more convincingly than Alexander Povetkin did? As in, why didn't he keep him down for the 10 count and do it taking fewer rounds than the number of rounds Povetkin needed? That's also not even taking into consideration that Carlos Takam by the time he faced Joshua, was 37 years old, far older than when he faced Povetkin and far more declined since he was already knocked out and damaged goods after his match against Povetkin. Yet, Joshua failed to even beat Povetkin's left over via a more convincing knock out and via inflicting more damage.

In other words, Povetkin with his smaller size did better than Joshua did with his bigger size. Joshua's bigger size didn't help him much in his performance comparatively speaking.

Anthony Joshua doesn't even punch with that much power. He failed to keep the so called 'glass jawed' Wladimir Klitschko down for the 10 count and his punches looked like they had the power of a 10 year old little girl when the 6 foot 1, midget Carlos Takam was taking the mockery out of Joshua's pathetically weak punches and his pathetic attempts at a KO. Joshua needed a 'typical British stoppage' to have his misleading 100% knock out record maintained.

Deontay Wilder isn't even that big in size (weight). He is roughly the same as Povetkin in that department. Height and reach are only advantages if one is skilled at using them. Wilder isn't necessarily more skilled at using his longer / taller height and reach than Alexander Povetkin is at using his shorter height and reach.

What I stated about Joshua, also applies to Wilder. If Wilder's size was so significant and such an advantage, then he should be able to do better than Povetkin in every bout by using those size advantages. That isn't the case! Johan Duhapas walked through Wilder's best punches / most powerful punches with minimal signs that they had any KO potential in them. Yet, Povetkin blasted the same Duhapas in 6 rounds. So why didn't Wilder's bigger size enable him to do better in that bout? Considering how some are overstating the significance of Joshua's or Wilder's bigger size? Or maybe their size advantages aren't that significant or much of an advantage in the first place?

Joshua, nor Wilder (especially Joshua though) give very little impression that they perform significantly better in their bouts than Povetkin does in his bouts, despite their bigger size. Some of the comments makes it seem like Joshua looks 100 times more powerful and 100 times stronger in his bouts against his opponents than Alexander Povetkin does in his bouts, against his opponents. And we all know this to be false after watching his pathetic punches being ineffective and a minor nuisance to a 6 foot 1 midget in Carlos Takam, who was walking right through all of Joshua's most powerful punches like they were nothing and was only knocked down when he was off balanced.

If Joshua were to KO Takam in 1 round via a brutal concussive KO, then an argument can be made that Joshua's size might be too much. However, this is at all not the case.

[sportbuddha]

If size was as significant a factor as you're making it out to be. Then why didn't Anthony Joshua beat and knock out Carlos Takam more convincingly than Alexander Povetkin did? As in, why didn't he keep him down for the 10 count and do it taking fewer rounds than the number of rounds Povetkin needed? That's also not even taking into consideration that Carlos Takam by the time he faced Joshua, was 37 years old, far older than when he faced Povetkin and far more declined since he was already knocked out and damaged goods after his match against Povetkin. Yet, Joshua failed to even beat Povetkin's left over via a more convincing knock out and via inflicting more damage.

In other words, Povetkin with his smaller size did better than Joshua did with his bigger size. Joshua's bigger size didn't help him much in his performance comparatively speaking.

Anthony Joshua doesn't even punch with that much power. He failed to keep the so called 'glass jawed' Wladimir Klitschko down for the 10 count and his punches looked like they had the power of a 10 year old little girl when the 6 foot 1, midget Carlos Takam was taking the mockery out of Joshua's pathetically weak punches and his pathetic attempts at a KO. Joshua needed a 'typical British stoppage' to have his misleading 100% knock out record maintained.

Deontay Wilder isn't even that big in size (weight). He is roughly the same as Povetkin in that department. Height and reach are only advantages if one is skilled at using them. Wilder isn't necessarily more skilled at using his longer / taller height and reach than Alexander Povetkin is at using his shorter height and reach.

What I stated about Joshua, also applies to Wilder. If Wilder's size was so significant and such an advantage, then he should be able to do better than Povetkin in every bout by using those size advantages. That isn't the case! Johan Duhapas walked through Wilder's best punches / most powerful punches with minimal signs that they had any KO potential in them. Yet, Povetkin blasted the same Duhapas in 6 rounds. So why didn't Wilder's bigger size enable him to do better in that bout? Considering how some are overstating the significance of Joshua's or Wilder's bigger size? Or maybe their size advantages aren't that significant or much of an advantage in the first place?

Joshua, nor Wilder (especially Joshua though) give very little impression that they perform significantly better in their bouts than Povetkin does in his bouts, despite their bigger size. Some of the comments makes it seem like Joshua looks 100 times more powerful and 100 times stronger in his bouts against his opponents than Alexander Povetkin does in his bouts, against his opponents. And we all know this to be false after watching his pathetic punches being ineffective and a minor nuisance to a 6 foot 1 midget in Carlos Takam, who was walking right through all of Joshua's most powerful punches like they were nothing and was only knocked down when he was off balanced.

If Joshua were to KO Takam in 1 round via a brutal concussive KO, then an argument can be made that Joshua's size might be too much. However, this is at all not the case.

Saying things like height/reach aren't significant kind of invalidates all your further arguments, I'm going to just assume you don't know much about the sport.

As for comparing and overlaying fight results the way you are doing, again another rookie error as a spectator, everyone knows it doesn't work like that.

As for AJ's power..LOL is all I have to say. A guy that has never been KO'd in his professional career is apparently glass jawed and he has KO'd all of his opponents, so unless the 10 year old girl you have in mind is a 6' 6" athletic specimen with an olympic boxing background, which given your views could be possible (as it appears you might be on mushrooms), then that's just a troll comment with no real basis.

Also, I just love how all you 12 year old boxing newbs think KO's and the nature of KO's is the measure of every boxers ability, get back to world of warcraft or whatever you kids do these days, waste of time talking about boxing.

[No punch power]

Saying things like height/reach aren't significant kind of invalidates all your further arguments, I'm going to just assume you don't know much about the sport.

As for comparing and overlaying fight results the way you are doing, again another rookie error as a spectator, everyone knows it doesn't work like that.

As for AJ's power..LOL is all I have to say. A guy that has never been KO'd in his professional career is apparently glass jawed and he has KO'd all of his opponents, so unless the 10 year old girl you have in mind is a 6' 6" athletic specimen with an olympic boxing background, which given your views could be possible (as it appears you might be on mushrooms), then that's just a troll comment with no real basis.

Also, I just love how all you 12 year old boxing newbs think KO's and the nature of KO's is the measure of every boxers ability, get back to world of warcraft or whatever you kids do these days, waste of time talking about boxing.

You call me a 'troll', but my position is backed up by facts. So if what I did makes me a 'troll', then you potentially rejecting / denying facts makes you deluded and I'd rather be what you call me to be than be deluded.

I never claimed height and reach advantages aren't 'significant'. That's a straw man fallacy you've committed. My point is that being taller and having longer reach isn't a default advantage. It's only an advantage if someone has the skills to be able to use them properly. Likewise, the same applies to someone being short and having a shorter reach. It isn't a default disadvantage. As such, Joshua hasn't proven that he is necessarily more skilled at using his taller / longer height and reach than Povetkin is at using his shorter height and reach.

You're complaining about me comparing match results. Well, how else can we infer how dominant either boxer is, if not by their performances in actual bouts? Yours and many other Joshua rooter's claims makes it seem like because Joshua is taller and has a longer reach than Povetkin and some of the other shorter skilled boxers, that therefore, it's some kind of a huge mismatch and that factor alone makes him the huge favourite.

Well, where are the results of his longer reach and taller height that somehow makes him so much superior to shorter skilled boxers like Povetkin? It doesn't make Joshua 10x more powerful. Nor does it provide Joshua 10x the better punch resistance. Since that's what it seems like. As if somehow, Joshua's bigger size provides him with a significant strength, power and punch resistance advantage when it evidently doesn't.

Rather than considering the possibility that Wladimir Klitschko, at 6 foot 6, 240+ pounds may just be a supremely skilled boxer, combined with his physical size and a rare specimen at that. Instead, we have deluded individuals (much like yourself) assuming that nearly any and every boxer that is similar to the Klischkos in terms of physical dimension are all going to be equally good and possess the same advantages.

Anthony Joshua didn't show anything to suggest he was even better than a 41 year old Wladimir Klitschko, never mind a younger Wladimir Klitschko.

Here are the facts:

1) Wladimir Klitschko was 41 years old when he faced Joshua.

2) Wladimir Klitschko was inactive for 2 years when he faced Joshua.

3) Wladimir Klitschko was coming off a loss when he faced Joshua.

4) Wladimir Klitschko was facing Joshua in Joshua's home arena.


Yet, despite not just one disadvantage, but quadruple disadvantages, Anthony Joshua still failed to prove he was clearly superior to a totally shot and washed up Wladimir Klitschko. It was close to 50 / 50 all along and the scorecards were very close at the time of the premature stoppage where some had Klitschko ahead.

Wladimir Klitschko dropped Joshua with a single right hand, showing real punch power. On the other hand, Joshua needed sloppy combinations to drop a washed up Wladimir Klitschko and still couldn't keep him down. Even after Joshua landed his best punch (uppercut), he still needed to follow up and Klitschko still managed to get back up. And he then needed a premature 'typical British stoppage' to win the fight despite Wladimir Klitschko being up and blocking every punch Joshua was throwing at him, because Joshua would've likely gassed out again and probably would've been stopped by a totally shot and washed up 41 year old Wladimir Klitschko.

This shows not only how pathetic Joshua's punching power is, but also his quality as a boxer. Wladimir Klitschko has already been stopped, far more convincingly by Corrie Sanders who was closer in size to Povetkin at 6 foot 4 inches tall possessing a 77 inch reach. And Corrie Sanders stopped a younger, far better version of Wladimir Klitschko far quicker. So if size was so significant, why couldn't Joshua stop a much older and faded version of Klitschko more convincingly with his bigger size?

Also, it's not me who is claiming Wladimir Klitschko has a 'glass jaw'. It's majority of those who picked Joshua to beat Wladimir Klitschko, claiming that Wladimir Klitschko is going to suffer his most devastating KO loss and that Wladimir Klitschko's chin won't allow him to survive. Now rather than reassessing and questioning Joshua's punching power, those same group of individuals are somehow making it seem like Wladimir Klitschko now all of a sudden, always possessed a monstrous chin when they never claimed that to be the case before.

Just so you know, I personally don't think Wladimir Klitschko has a 'glass jaw' but I also don't think his chin was ever really that good. Definitely nowhere near as good as his brother Vitali Klitschko's chin and punch resistance. As far as I'm concerned, Wladimir Klitschko's punch resistance is about average or probably below average. And if Joshua failed to keep someone like Wladimir Klitschko down with his punches and if his punches weren't that effective on someone like Wladimir Klitschko, then a true iron chinned boxer like Povetkin is going to laugh at Joshua's relatively weak ass punches.

You complain that I compare Joshua's punching power to a 10 year little girl. That's exactly what individuals like you do, without even realizing it. You discriminate against shorter boxers like Carlos Takam and Alexander Povetkin, making it seem like they are little children in comparison to taller boxers which taller boxers like Joshua can just run over. However, Joshua's performance against Takam (a 6 foot 1 midget) proved otherwise and it would also prove against Alexander Povetkin, that he can't just run over them effortlessly, only because he is bigger in size.

Don't start getting all defensive when I start holding you lot to your own standards. You lot are the ones who have been overrating Joshua's abilities beyond what he possesses. And now because I am holding Joshua to the standards that you lot have raised him to, it'd be hypocritical to get overly defensive now when someone is criticial of Anthony Joshua when you lot were the ones who starting off overrating and over praising Anthony Joshua in the first place. Now, the reverse is happening and you obviously don't appear to like it.

In summary, Anthony Joshua's bigger size doesn't give him any significant advantage over Alexander Povetkin. Not punching power, not physical strength, not punch resistance and not stamina. The only advantage that it may give him is the appearance of a modern day herculean god which fan boys and girls may ****** over. But to rational individuals, Joshua isn't as good as he's claimed to be.

[alexguiness]

Povetkin is a very capable HW but maybe just too small and inactive.

The PEDs issues cannot be ignored either.

[oscar9992]

Joshua's punches are a little too light to be anything more than a minor nuisance to someone with an iron chin like Alexander Povetkin. Joshua really doesn't punch that hard. The so called 'glass jawed' boxer in Wladimir Klitschko at the age of 41, with 2 years of inactivity, managed to get up after taking all of Joshua's most powerful punches. Even an old, already knocked out Carlos Takam was walking right through some of Joshua's most powerful punches like they were nothing.

Alexander Povetkin at his best, totally annihilates Joshua in just a few rounds.

Wow man!

Pedvetkin can't go near AJ without PED's, that's fact.

Even his promoter Andrey Riabinsky admitted that.

https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=768645

[No punch power]

Wow man!

Pedvetkin can't go near AJ without PED's, that's fact.

Even his promoter Andrey Riabinsky admitted that.

https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/s...d.php?t=768645

Pedvetkin can't go near AJ without PED's, that's fact.

Actually, it's the other way around. Juicua without PED's can't go anywhere near Alexander Povetkin. When Juicia was competing in amateur boxing and went through Olympic style drug testing, he was getting stopped by the likes of Mihai Nistor and some other inferior boxers compared to Alexander Povetkin.

On the other hand, Alexander Povetkin has never been stopped in his amateur or pro career combined, spanning hundreds of bouts. And he also won his Olympic gold medal in a foreign land uncontroversially unlike Anthony Joshua, who needed a home town cooking by winning a robbery in his home country.

In the modern artificial / unnatural world, there isn't any such thing as a hundred 100% clean athlete. Remove PED's from modern boxers, and none of them will look much different from the boxers in the 1970's, 1960's, 1950's and before that. The main reason why boxers like Anthony Joshua look the way they look and perform the way they can perform at their size is because of modern PED's which enhances athletes.


But sure, if you want to remain in fantasy land by remaining delusional, be sure to keep believing that a chubby 6 foot 2 Alexander Povetkin is more enhanced by PED's than a 6 foot 6, 250+ pound athlete like Joshua with artificially looking roided gut and muscles.

Even his promoter Andrey Riabinsky admitted that.

https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/s...d.php?t=768645

Not being in shape simply means he isn't in the best condition yet. Doesn't mean much! Inactivity can do that to even the best boxers.

[oscar9992]

Actually, it's the other way around. Juicua without PED's can't go anywhere near Alexander Povetkin. When Juicia was competing in amateur boxing and went through Olympic style drug testing, he was getting stopped by the likes of Mihai Nistor and some other inferior boxers compared to Alexander Povetkin.

On the other hand, Alexander Povetkin has never been stopped in his amateur or pro career combined, spanning hundreds of bouts. And he also won his Olympic gold medal in a foreign land uncontroversially unlike Anthony Joshua, who needed a home town cooking by winning a robbery in his home country.

In the modern artificial / unnatural world, there isn't any such thing as a hundred 100% clean athlete. Remove PED's from modern boxers, and none of them will look much different from the boxers in the 1970's, 1960's, 1950's and before that. The main reason why boxers like Anthony Joshua look the way they look and perform the way they can perform at their size is because of modern PED's which enhances athletes.


But sure, if you want to remain in fantasy land by remaining delusional, be sure to keep believing that a chubby 6 foot 2 Alexander Povetkin is more enhanced by PED's than a 6 foot 6, 250+ pound athlete like Joshua with artificially looking roided gut and muscles.





Not being in shape simply means he isn't in the best condition yet. Doesn't mean much! Inactivity can do that to even the best boxers.

You are dumbass! AJ has been tested 13 times in 2017 by different Anti-Doping organizations & he never tested positive.

Povetkin on other hand was tested positive for PED's, Steroids & Meldonium.

BTW even Russians don't believe Povetkin can beat AJ...



He is literally saying: 'Povetkin shouldn't fight Joshua'

[No punch power]

You are dumbass! AJ has been tested 13 times in 2017 by different Anti-Doping organizations & he never tested positive.

Povetkin on other hand was tested positive for PED's, Steroids & Meldonium.

BTW even Russians don't believe Povetkin can beat AJ...



He is literally saying: 'Povetkin shouldn't fight Joshua'

You are dumbass! AJ has been tested 13 times in 2017 by different Anti-Doping organizations & he never tested positive.

Think it through properly dumbass. Drug testing is subjective and what constitutes as a legal or an illegal drug is totally subjective. And it isn't difficult to fake drug tests in the modern era.

Alexander Povetkin has never been popped for steroids. Only Meldonium and Ostarine (after his opponent initially failed his own drug test that happened to be Bermane Stivern). Meldonium isn't a steroid and there is no scientific evidence that proves Meldonium enhances an athlete any more than the legal drugs which athletes from Western countries already consume.

Drug testing has no credibility in today's world.

Anthony Joshua failed to keep an old, washed up 37 year old Carlos Takam down for the 10 count. Alexander Povetkin knocked prime Carlos Takam out cold. Anthony Joshua lacks punching power to hurt Povetkin if he couldn't hurt the inferior Carlos Takam.

Even Carlos Takam from 5 years ago beats current Anthony Joshua.

[Arthur Daley]

Actually, it's the other way around. Juicua without PED's can't go anywhere near Alexander Povetkin. When Juicia was competing in amateur boxing and went through Olympic style drug testing, he was getting stopped by the likes of Mihai Nistor and some other inferior boxers compared to Alexander Povetkin.

On the other hand, Alexander Povetkin has never been stopped in his amateur or pro career combined, spanning hundreds of bouts. And he also won his Olympic gold medal in a foreign land uncontroversially unlike Anthony Joshua, who needed a home town cooking by winning a robbery in his home country.

In the modern artificial / unnatural world, there isn't any such thing as a hundred 100% clean athlete. Remove PED's from modern boxers, and none of them will look much different from the boxers in the 1970's, 1960's, 1950's and before that. The main reason why boxers like Anthony Joshua look the way they look and perform the way they can perform at their size is because of modern PED's which enhances athletes.


But sure, if you want to remain in fantasy land by remaining delusional, be sure to keep believing that a chubby 6 foot 2 Alexander Povetkin is more enhanced by PED's than a 6 foot 6, 250+ pound athlete like Joshua with artificially looking roided gut and muscles.





Not being in shape simply means he isn't in the best condition yet. Doesn't mean much! Inactivity can do that to even the best boxers.

All serious boxers were on gear from the 50's onwards. That was the golden age of steroids after all.