That one Klitschko fight, and who was at fault

Ok everyone,

I want to talk about something that is probably going to bring back a lot of painful memories for most of us here, but bear with me. I feel we need to have this talk.

This is about the Wladimir Klitschko vs Alexander Povetkin fight :cool:

If you haven't seen it, or are just a masochist, or need to verify the points I'm about to try to make, then here is the full fight.

Ok,

the point I want to make here is that Wladimir is not as much to blame for how awful this fight was as we may have initially been thinking. Ok. I admit, Wlad is about 30% guilty, but the rest is simply misfortune, and here is why.

#1 - Povetkin's most effective fighting range is between mid and close range to his opponent. Usually this doesn't prevent such a big problem when he fights someone of similar size.

#2 - Povetkin usually wins by accumulation of many punches over the course of many rounds. He doesn't typically have 1 punch knock out power except in very rare instances.

#3 - Povetkin has a somewhat short reach

#4 - Klitschko, however, has decently long reach and is tall and rangy

#5 - Klitschko seems to clinch impulsively when a shorter opponent gets into "infighting" or close range.

#6 - And the biggest issue, and probably the most unfortunate of all is, Povetkin's best effective fighting range just happens to be the exact range at which Klitschko is programmed to clinch.

#7 - Kept at long range, Klitschko has the total advantage with longer reach and stronger punches in general.

Basically what I am getting at is that the horrible fight we witnessed was actually mostly just due to a styles clash/mismatch, one that mainly favored Klitschko. There is no need to ever have a rematch between these two, because there is little to no chance the fight will ever end much better for Povetkin. I don't think there is any way on earth to stop Klitschko from starting the clinch when Povetkin gets into Povetkin's fighting range, and I'm not sure you can really blame Klitschko for some clinching. Now what Klitschko definitely should not have done was all that leaning directly onto Povetkin's back and also the Judo throws were completely out of order. But other than that, I think we can chalk most of that fight up to unfortunate, bad luck.

So, what do you think? Does anyone agree or see it differently?

There is a difference between clinching and mauling/leaning/grappling/whatever the hell Wlad was doing that night. Pushing Povetkin down the way he did was hideous to watch and clearly not within the rules. You're basically saying because it was a bad style for him, he shouldn't have been expected to try and box? The ref deserves most of the blame imo, as he never attempted to get control of the fight and clean up the action at all. Wlad is a great and dominant champion, but this fight was really embarrassing on his behalf.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p4pking

There is a difference between clinching and mauling/leaning/grappling/whatever the hell Wlad was doing that night. Pushing Povetkin down the way he did was hideous to watch and clearly not within the rules. You're basically saying because it was a bad style for him, he shouldn't have been expected to try and box? The ref deserves most of the blame imo, as he never attempted to get control of the fight and clean up the action at all. Wlad is a great and dominant champion, but this fight was really embarrassing on his behalf.

---

No, actually I agree with you that pushing down on Povetkins back and neck were definitely out of order, and throwing/pushing him down. And yes, the referee was definitely on vacation during that fight. There were maybe a few times when a point deduction may have been in order.

But looking at the fight as a whole, I think it was a bad styles match. Klitschko could have refrained from the above mentioned antics and still have gotten the win with merely normal clinching and tying Povetkin up. And I don't even like to see clinching personally, but I must admit that the size difference between these two combined with their fighting styles almost leads to clinch situations by itself. Alternately Klitschko could have tried to jab while stepping back more often, although I do think Povetkin was a tricker target to use that method. -- Oh, and Klitschko could have tried the uppercut as well. Almost forgot about that one.

It was an ugly fight no doubt about it but that is what it looks like when the bigger guy is the bully in the ring. Wlad fought smart, Povetkin was still able to cause a few issues, but all that did was make the fight ugly it didn't help Povetkin win rounds or anything.

Evander Holyfield used tactics to make fights ugly on the regular because it benefitted his style, ditto Bernard Hopkins, ditto Mike Tyson. Only with the smaller statured fighters as a fan you EXPECT to see them make things ugly so they have a better chance of winning. When Lennox Lewis would grab on to an opponent and make a fight ugly in order to best utilize his style he typically won.

If the ref doesn't call it, it's not a foul. If the ref allows the clinching and holding, then a fighter is naturally going to push the envelope with those tactics if they feel it helps their cause. Referees can positively or negatively effect a fight for the fans and for the boxers. It's very important to know what type of ref you're dealing with in a fight, some are lenient, some are strict, and some are fucking clueless. This ref was very lenient, he let a lot go, but he did eventually deduct a point from Wlad in the 11th after the fight was well out of reach for Povetkin (on points).

Had Wlad been warned for excessive holding and had a point deducted earlier in the fight I believe the action may have been a little smoother, but in the end I don't think what the ref called or did not call helped or hurt Povetkin as he was getting hammered, down once in the 2nd, 3 times in the 7th...Povetkin just didn't have enough to beat Wlad simple as that.

I agree Povetkin wasn't going to win, and he deserves some of the blame for accepting the clinches the way he started to, but it still could have been a decent fight if the rules were enforced at all. No two styles inherently make for something that ugly unless you are talking about shit fighters. Wlad hurt him quite early clean if I remember, I would have liked to see him keep Povetkin off with punches and fight with a little fire as he did against Pulev. Povetkin IS very good and probably the best infighter Wlad would have faced in a long time, but he didn't have to come up with any answers for that with what he was allowed to do in there. How could it possibly NOT have been a better fight if warnings were given or a point was taken when first warranted?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p4pking

I agree Povetkin wasn't going to win, and he deserves some of the blame for accepting the clinches the way he started to, but it still could have been a decent fight if the rules were enforced at all. No two styles inherently make for something that ugly unless you are talking about shit fighters. Wlad hurt him quite early clean if I remember, I would have liked to see him keep Povetkin off with punches and fight with a little fire as he did against Pulev. Povetkin IS very good and probably the best infighter Wlad would have faced in a long time, but he didn't have to come up with any answers for that with what he was allowed to do in there. How could it possibly NOT have been a better fight if warnings were given or a point was taken when first warranted?

---

All valid points there.
I think maybe we just have to accept that a small-sized infighter is not going to fair well at all in less he has major speed and major power. But he would definitely need both.

Actually I take that back. A small infighter has no chance against Klitschko at this point.
To be honest, I think that this fight was a realistic example of what would happen to even Mike Tyson had he fought Klitschko at this skill level. Sure, Mike was fast and strong, but he was even shorter than Povetkin. That means his most effective range is also right where Klitschko would tie him up. I know Povetkin is no Tyson, but still, size and fighting style do matter a lot.

I think your opinion on the fight is very accurate.

IMO Klitschko was responsible for most of the holding in the earlier rounds, but as the fight went on I saw Povetkin initiating more of the clinching. I think as the rounds wear on, a lot of Klitschko's opponents begin to initiate clinches, or at the very least begin to accept the clinches. Wlad is always dangerous at range and I think a lot of guys start getting happy to be held because it means they aren't catching jabs, right hands or left hooks for the moment.

All that being said, Klitschko is the #1, he's the draw, and it's literally his show. He is always the guy who is controlling the fight, so fair or not he will always catch the most blame for fights being boring and ugly. He did a lot of unnecessary clinching against Povetkin and deserves shame for it.

On the other side again, everyone who fights Klitschko knows his game. They know he's going to clinch on the inside and hold. I also think his opponents should prepare themselves better to deal with such tactics, because like it or not this isn't the amateurs and holding is a part of boxing. All the great HW's utilized holding to their advantage it seems.

Can't blame Povetkin much for accepting the clinch really because as the shorter fighter he needed to get inside, but once there if punches don't land then you have to have an exit plan which is either circle out (which requires a lot of leg work and thus saps your power) or tie up and wait for the ref to break.

Had Povetkin NOT held as well, then it's quite possible he would have been knocked out either due to being tired or due to Wlad just punishing him for going from INSIDE to out of range, which Wlad could have achieved by a pushoff, side step, and unleashing a 1-2 or (as he did with Pulev) a massive left hook.

Watch Tyson, he'd work in bobbing and weaving behind the jab and peek-a-boo defense, rip off some punches and either his opponent ran away and he'd reset his attack or he would tie up and either get in some dirty work (elbows and forearms to the throat) or walk his opponent into the ropes in hopes that his pressure would drive them into a corner where he could get in his easiest work (see Tyson vs Marvis Frazier)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ninjaspy3

Ok everyone,

I want to talk about something that is probably going to bring back a lot of painful memories for most of us here, but bear with me. I feel we need to have this talk.

This is about the Wladimir Klitschko vs Alexander Povetkin fight :cool:

If you haven't seen it, or are just a masochist, or need to verify the points I'm about to try to make, then here is the full fight.

Ok,

the point I want to make here is that Wladimir is not as much to blame for how awful this fight was as we may have initially been thinking. Ok. I admit, Wlad is about 30% guilty, but the rest is simply misfortune, and here is why.

#1 - Povetkin's most effective fighting range is between mid and close range to his opponent. Usually this doesn't prevent such a big problem when he fights someone of similar size.

#2 - Povetkin usually wins by accumulation of many punches over the course of many rounds. He doesn't typically have 1 punch knock out power except in very rare instances.

#3 - Povetkin has a somewhat short reach

#4 - Klitschko, however, has decently long reach and is tall and rangy

#5 - Klitschko seems to clinch impulsively when a shorter opponent gets into "infighting" or close range.

#6 - And the biggest issue, and probably the most unfortunate of all is, Povetkin's best effective fighting range just happens to be the exact range at which Klitschko is programmed to clinch.

#7 - Kept at long range, Klitschko has the total advantage with longer reach and stronger punches in general.

Basically what I am getting at is that the horrible fight we witnessed was actually mostly just due to a styles clash/mismatch, one that mainly favored Klitschko. There is no need to ever have a rematch between these two, because there is little to no chance the fight will ever end much better for Povetkin. I don't think there is any way on earth to stop Klitschko from starting the clinch when Povetkin gets into Povetkin's fighting range, and I'm not sure you can really blame Klitschko for some clinching. Now what Klitschko definitely should not have done was all that leaning directly onto Povetkin's back and also the Judo throws were completely out of order. But other than that, I think we can chalk most of that fight up to unfortunate, bad luck.

So, what do you think? Does anyone agree or see it differently?

---

100% disagree.

You literally just said that Povetkin was at fault because Klitchko clinched him.

Its not Povetkins fault that his perfect range and reach disadvantages happen to make it easy for Wlad to hold.

I agree however that it was because of these things (reach, range, etc) that allowed WK to grab and push him down..

..but you cannot say its APs fault, WK was horridly breaking the rules.

I think the concept of context plays a huge role here.

If Wlad was another type of fighter... one who rarely, if ever, was given to clinching and mauling and leaning.... I could be more sympathetic with the points brought up here. But we all know this is not the case. This is one fight of many with a similar pattern. This one just happens to be one of the worst offenders. Compounded by the fact that we're talking about one of the very few opponents who actually came into the ring with the intention of engaging Wlad and beating him.

Wlad should be ashamed of that fight. He was getting the biggest purse of his career and his performance was awful. Wlad could have beaten Povetkin without all that holding and mauling. It was all Wlad's fault.