|
|
Post by Riotous on Apr 6, 2020 3:13:14 GMT -5
Guys, i’ve Just found this and I love your passion.
I’ll keep this short because I’m in mobile and will reply in full tomorrow.
I watch sport to be entertained, this can be via excitement or by demonstrating exceptional skills. For example Calzaghe had to win through skills because of his hands but Froch could lose 11.99 rounds and win with one punch.
However, I’m totally against drugs in sport and particularly combat sport, where lives have and will be lost. For this reason I’ll never accept Canelo and I have grave concerns about Fury, but in boxing money is king and therefore drugs are accepted and worked around, most fights are one sided, belts are easy to come by and results are decided before the first bell rings.
To end on a positive, Lomachenko, Inoue and Usyk are as good as any from any era.
|
|
|
|
Post by Riotous on Apr 6, 2020 8:55:58 GMT -5
Seriously, what has happened to the heavyweight division? I was lucky, being very old, to be able to watch Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Norton, Shavers, and others, then on to Lewis, Holyfield, Bowe etc, but the quality today and for a good decade has really gone downhill. I like Fury, he is good for the sport but let's face it, his arse would be handed to him by any of the above. Just to return to the OP.. I’m afraid that I disagree with you Peter, as noted previous era HW’s were far smaller and modern training/nutrition means the best guys of the last 10 to 15 years would beat anyone from before that time. That’s not to say I think Fury is anything special, he’s not. In the early days he’d often be knocked down before knocking out his journeyman opponent, his deserved victory against the bully Klitschko was a snooze fest, it wasn’t great skills but he beat Vlad at his own game. His opponents have been ordinary but credit where it’s due he beat a dangerous Wilder (twice in my opinion). What I would say about Fury is he doesn’t have that silly loss on his record that so many others have, Joshua, both Klitschko’s, Lewis, Tyson have all lost to far lesser opponents when in their prime. What has happened to the HW scene... There are great fights to be made but money/TV/belts/politics are in the way, these guys can all fight and ideally would be fighting 3 or 4 times a year against one another.... Fury/Joshua/Wilder/Whyte/Usyk/Dubois/Povetkin/Parker/Ortiz I think we can look back with rose tinted glasses on previous era’s or believe the hype/reports without actually seeing the evidence. I’d love to say Ali would’ve beat them all but he was smaller than David Haye without the One punch knock threat that Haye possessed. |
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Apr 6, 2020 9:20:42 GMT -5
Not sure "often" is right for fury being knocked down.
I remember one journeyman knocking him down, (pajkic) and think there was one more. He got knocked by Steve Johnson, but he was WAY better than a journeyman. Good fighter. And fury destroyed him after that.
Fury had a sensible career build-up to the Klitschko fight, arguably even fought him a bit eaely,; then completely befuddled one of the best HW post 80s, and the only blot on his career is that he then didn't fight for 3 years after.
I said before, I'm not trying to suggest fury is a "great," but like you said, with his size, he has a huge advantage, plus has excellent defensive skills and a good variety on his punches. My big issue with him was always knockout power, but he even seems to have improved that.
I rate him very highly. I think him against Lewis would be an incredible fight.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 6, 2020 14:35:24 GMT -5
Seriously, what has happened to the heavyweight division? I was lucky, being very old, to be able to watch Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Norton, Shavers, and others, then on to Lewis, Holyfield, Bowe etc, but the quality today and for a good decade has really gone downhill. I like Fury, he is good for the sport but let's face it, his arse would be handed to him by any of the above. Just to return to the OP.. I’m afraid that I disagree with you Peter, as noted previous era HW’s were far smaller and modern training/nutrition means the best guys of the last 10 to 15 years would beat anyone from before that time. That’s not to say I think Fury is anything special, he’s not. In the early days he’d often be knocked down before knocking out his journeyman opponent, his deserved victory against the bully Klitschko was a snooze fest, it wasn’t great skills but he beat Vlad at his own game. His opponents have been ordinary but credit where it’s due he beat a dangerous Wilder (twice in my opinion). What I would say about Fury is he doesn’t have that silly loss on his record that so many others have, Joshua, both Klitschko’s, Lewis, Tyson have all lost to far lesser opponents when in their prime. What has happened to the HW scene... There are great fights to be made but money/TV/belts/politics are in the way, these guys can all fight and ideally would be fighting 3 or 4 times a year against one another.... Fury/Joshua/Wilder/Whyte/Usyk/Dubois/Povetkin/Parker/Ortiz I think we can look back with rose tinted glasses on previous era’s or believe the hype/reports without actually seeing the evidence. I’d love to say Ali would’ve beat them all but he was smaller than David Haye without the One punch knock threat that Haye possessed. Obviously I can't agree, nor could I possibly compare a fighter like Haye favourably with a great like Ali. As to size, if that is so important ( which Tyson's success doesn't point to , or Holyfield's ) Foreman was 6'4. Modern, training/nutrition - How much better is it? Joe Frazier was non stop, Ali in his prime danced for 15 rounds. Take a look at the incredible 15 round war between Holmes and Norton from the late seventies. These were incredibly well trained athletes. We can go back much further to the likes of Marciano practically living in the gym and able to sustain non stop attack against anyone he fought. A protein shake and electrolyte drink isn't going to make any difference, though steroids no doubt will. Tyson wasn't mentioned by me but as you did, which lesser opponents did he lose to in his prime? Douglas and Holyfield? Douglas was a superb talent who lacked will, until he totally wiped out Tyson, Holyfield was simply a better fighter. By the way, Ali was 6'3, so bigger than Haye by quite a margin. |
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Apr 6, 2020 14:49:19 GMT -5
Just to return to the OP.. I’m afraid that I disagree with you Peter, as noted previous era HW’s were far smaller and modern training/nutrition means the best guys of the last 10 to 15 years would beat anyone from before that time. That’s not to say I think Fury is anything special, he’s not. In the early days he’d often be knocked down before knocking out his journeyman opponent, his deserved victory against the bully Klitschko was a snooze fest, it wasn’t great skills but he beat Vlad at his own game. His opponents have been ordinary but credit where it’s due he beat a dangerous Wilder (twice in my opinion). What I would say about Fury is he doesn’t have that silly loss on his record that so many others have, Joshua, both Klitschko’s, Lewis, Tyson have all lost to far lesser opponents when in their prime. What has happened to the HW scene... There are great fights to be made but money/TV/belts/politics are in the way, these guys can all fight and ideally would be fighting 3 or 4 times a year against one another.... Fury/Joshua/Wilder/Whyte/Usyk/Dubois/Povetkin/Parker/Ortiz I think we can look back with rose tinted glasses on previous era’s or believe the hype/reports without actually seeing the evidence. I’d love to say Ali would’ve beat them all but he was smaller than David Haye without the One punch knock threat that Haye possessed. Obviously I can't agree, nor could I possibly compare a fighter like Haye favourably with a great like Ali. As to size, if that is so important ( which Tyson's success doesn't point to , or Holyfield's ) Foreman was 6'4. Modern, training/nutrition - How much better is it? Joe Frazier was non stop, Ali in his prime danced for 15 rounds. Take a look at the incredible 15 round war between Holmes and Norton from the late seventies. These were incredibly well trained athletes. We can go back much further to the likes of Marciano practically living in the gym and able to sustain non stop attack against anyone he fought. A protein shake and electrolyte drink isn't going to make any difference, though steroids no doubt will. Saying stuff about fighters going 15 rounds is nonsensical, because their opponents were on the same level as them. Of course they were incredible physical specimens, that's obvious. Any of the people we're talking about here, from any era, are in the top 1% genetically and training wise, of the human race; but nutrition is WAY better now, and training methods (mostly recovery strategies actually,) are also quite a bit better. I remember stories about fighters eating steaks before fights and smoking! Look at Jake LaMotta! You still have some people like that now, eg Ricky Hatton used to balloon in weight between fights, but they get found out. (And they were still in better overall shape.) |
|
|
|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 6, 2020 14:53:04 GMT -5
Hmm, not nonsensical, fighters today don't go 15 rounds at all. Fury too ballooned in weight. Holmes vs Norton, yes on the same high level, we are not talking Joshua and Ortiz ( correct name?, the Mexican 'athlete' ) which was 12 rounds of sheer boredom - they too on the same level.
|
|
|
|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 6, 2020 14:58:49 GMT -5
It doesn't have to be purely a discussion about heavyweights. Hagler would be middleweight champ today, Duran ( who regularly ballooned ) would still be great, as would Leonard. Modern training, whatever that is? Do you truly think these fighters would be better for it? I don't. They trained for 15 rounds and often had to fight that long. They weren't smoking or drinking, they were dedicated athletes when training for a fight. Of course there are exceptions like Duran, who let himself get out of shape, there will always be. they also were not stupid, they recovered and rested before a fight, as they do today. Nutrition is not better today it is just easier, a protein shake instead of raw eggs, is how i would put it - big deal  |
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Apr 6, 2020 15:03:24 GMT -5
Hmm, not nonsensical, fighters today don't go 15 rounds at all. Fury too ballooned in weight. Holmes vs Norton, yes on the same high level, we are not talking Joshua and Ortiz ( correct name?, the Mexican 'athlete' ) which was 12 rounds of sheer boredom - they too on the same level. They don't go 15 rounds because the fights are 12 rounds?! My point is they looked like they were super fit going 15 rounds because the other guy was also exhausted! Look at foreman when Ali knocks him out. He went down partly due to punching himself out! Fury used to have weight issues, and I think it's what affected his punch power. His training now has raised his level. Ruiz is a very good boxer. He's clearly not a good athlete, and it's holding him back. You trying to say there weren't fatty HWs in the old era?? |
|
|
|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 6, 2020 15:06:15 GMT -5
Of course there were fatties, they just didn't win titles. I know they only go 12 rounds, this is a good thing, my point is fighters did, see once again Holmes/Norton, superbly trained and fit. Holmes was a great fighter, you can't seriously believe Fury would stand a chance??
|
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Apr 6, 2020 15:07:07 GMT -5
It doesn't have to be purely a discussion about heavyweights. Hagler would be middleweight champ today, Duran ( who regularly ballooned ) would still be great, as would Leonard. Modern training, whatever that is? Do you truly think these fighters would be better for it? I don't. If you mean purely on how fit they were, Hagler would be at a disadvantage. But if you gave him 6-12 months of modern methods, of course he'd catch up. His skill levels were exceptional. "Whatever that is" I've given you some pointers, I'm not an expert, but literally everyone says it, even fighters from the old days! Recovery is a huge part of it. Nutrition is a huge part of it. Listen to players who played for arsenal in late 80s and early 90s and then when Wenger became manager. They literally called it a revolution in their training and nutrition. You can see stories like throughout sport. |
|
|
|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 6, 2020 15:11:18 GMT -5
Ali took incredible punishment to the body vs Foreman, a tremendous puncher, it wasn't as if he just lay on the ropes and laughed, knowing he would survive it. This is a very dangerous strategy, and he paid for it later, but it worked, Foreman did exhaust himself. Most fighters could not attempt such a thing let alone make it work. Ali's condition was superb for that fight, training the 'old way' as you might see it.
|
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Apr 6, 2020 15:11:28 GMT -5
Of course there were fatties, they just didn't win titles. I know they only go 12 rounds, this is a good thing, my point is fighters did, see once again Holmes/Norton, superbly trained and fit. Holmes was a great fighter, you can't seriously believe Fury would stand a chance?? It's really hard to be sure. But yeah, he'd certainly give him a great fight. No early knockout, for sure. Probably go the distance. Fury is 6'9 and technically a very good fighter, defence and offence. There is nobody in the history of boxing who would easily beat him. That might sound crazy to you, and to be sure you understand, I'm not saying fury is a confirmed "great" of boxing, I'm saying he's a VERY good fighter, who's better than almost every single fighter those greats ever faced. Go and look at the records of Holmes, ali, foreman, Frazier, guys they often went the distance with, and tell who out of those are better than fury? |
|
|
|
Post by LKeet6 on Apr 6, 2020 15:13:36 GMT -5
Ali took incredible punishment to the body vs Foreman, a tremendous puncher, it wasn't as if he just lay on the ropes and laughed, knowing he would survive it. This is a very dangerous strategy, and he paid for it later, but it worked, Foreman did exhaust himself. Most fighters could not attempt such a thing let alone make it work. Ali's condition was superb for that fight, training the 'old way' as you might see it. Mate, I don't deny any of what you say, but you're refusing to accept my point that Ali was facing someone who had the SAME methods as him! Those punches were no doubt extreme punches, Ali was urinating blood for weeks after the fight, but those punches got softer quicker because foreman got tired quicker. Boxers bodies (on average) are stronger now, yes. |
|
|
|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 6, 2020 15:14:58 GMT -5
I agree, partly, but there are exceptions. Going to football, Bobby Charlton was lightning quick and played 700+matches, and still has all of his cartilages. At 33 in 1970 he was the fittest man in the world cup squad based on their fitness trials. My point is, in talking about Ali/Holmes etc we are talking exceptions, not the norm, and Hagler too. I simply don't believe that in 20/30 years great progress in training methods has happened ( in boxing )
|
|
|
|
Post by BillySastard976 on Apr 6, 2020 15:22:49 GMT -5
Shavers, not a world champion but he went the distance with an old Ali, Shavers too was no longer young, and hurt him very badly. He also fought Holmes twice and hit him with a punch I'm confident Fury would have no chance of getting up from. Ken Norton went the distance three times with Ali and also with Holmes. He could not take a great punch but didn't have to versus those two, and wouldn't have to versus Fury. There are two right there.
No need to go back that far - Tim Witherspoon is another fighter I'd bet my house on beating Fury ( if he got in condition )
|
|
