Printable View
Look at the fighters in the last five years. Is any of them worth a damn. I'll be 59 Saturday. I was in the Ali era. I remember when he beat Liston the first time. That was a very good era. Lennox Lewis also fought in a good era. Fighters like Bowe Holyfield Tyson mercer and others made it a tough era. After Lewis retired there hasn't been one guy you can say was great or even very good. The K brothers has never been tested against other good fighters. If I'm wrong please tell me why.
Wlad and Vitali have fought and beaten fighters who would be good fighters in any era. The usual drones of praise for past generationsQuote:
Originally Posted by mrbig1
I used to think that wlad would beat any hw fighters of the past but then another part of me started thinking the 15 rd era would be bad news for him.
You are right MrBig. HW division has never been this bad. If HW division was the only division in boxing, I would look for another sport.
Agree 100%.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamita
Its pretty crap, still. Decent young guns in the distance maybe with Perez, Jennings, Wilder, Ruiz jr, Glazkov, TBA, Dusty Trunks, Kenhe Getup, etc...but maybe thats just putting lipstick on a pig. I think it'll open up when the brothers move on.
I miss the 90's
Even though 90s wasnt such a great era , I still miss it.. guys like lewis, bowe, holy, and even ruddock were just on a whole different level compared to the guys today..Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
If these guys were around in the 90s, Mike perez would be a banana boat maker in cuba, and wilder... who gives a fuck about him, glazkov would be fighting on Thunderbox, Ruiz jr would be the mexican pillsberry doughboy selling hotdogs at fight events, and arreola would be taking our orders at Dell Taco..
That's how irrelevant they would be in the boxing world.
I miss everything about the 90s..
I was just pulling random shit off the shelf the other night, must have been something in the water then with explosive heavys but thin chins ;D Jeremy Williams, Phil Jackson, Seldon, Morrison, Stewart etc. It was just exciting, even the second tier guys below a Holyfield, Lewis, Bowe. Young contenders/pretenders FOUGHT each other :o;DQuote:
Originally Posted by FinitoElDinamitaEven though 90s wasnt such a great era , I still miss it.. guys like lewis, bowe, holy, and even ruddock were just on a whole different level compared to the guys today..Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
If these guys were around in the 90s, Mike perez would be a banana boat maker in cuba, and wilder... who gives a fuck about him, glazkov would be fighting on Thunderbox, Ruiz jr would be the mexican pillsberry doughboy selling hotdogs at fight events, and arreola would be taking our orders at Dell Taco..
That's how irrelevant they would be in the boxing world.
I miss everything about the 90s..
Heavyweight boxing will always have the perception of being weak untill a crop of top Americans emerge.
The Larry Holmes era wasn't great. The 20's and parts of 50's weren't great either.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrbig1
How do you measure eras? It's subjective. I agree with you though that this is not a great era. How many "greats" have there been over the last 10 years? Not too many. It clearly doesn't compare to the 70's or 90's. I'm not sure it is the worst though.
Frankly, it's been said since the beginning of boxing that the then-current era of heavyweights is the worst. None of these guys could compare to Jack Johnson, could compare to Jack Dempsey, could compare to Joe Louis, Rocky Marciano etc.
There's a good argument the heavyweight division has been overrated and there have only been a few really good eras, and most of the rest are mediocre.
That is true for most Americans but not me. I love David Haye and Lennox Lewis. I'm not putting Haye on the same level as Lewis but he does have the goods. It just he hasn't fought very often over the years. I don't care where you're from. If you can fight you're the man in my eyes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bo-Bo24
I think you can make a case for the 90's era being stronger or the 00's. And Mike Tyson would have always been a factor.
All other eras prior would be completely decimated imo by the current generation.
Max let me say this again this era could beat most eras from the 60's back because most were not heavyweights. The 90's shits on this division it is by far the best era even with the 70's if not better. But yet again Foreman and Holmes competed in there fucking 40's with 90's guys and the best guy of the 00's could not beat a ageing Lewis so i don't think this era would destroy the 70's 80's and only people the 60's that be good enough to win are Liston and Ali thats about it. People underrate this time now but that doesnt mean you got to overrated it to balance it out. Shit i think people like Brock acutal think the Rock could hang now which is even worse he would of got his ass kicked. Saying that he was great for his time be a good cw now which is his weight class if not lhw.
You can't compare one era vs another. People are bigger and stronger today. Fighters today can beat 188 pound Rocky. With todays diet and training could they beat a 225 pound Rocky or a 235 pound Joe Louis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
When Lewis had his ass handed to him by Vitali, THAT was the start of the end for HW boxing... Lewis cleaned it up, but there were no more fights to be made.
Wlad and Vitali just beat up on guys Lewis would mop the effing floor with. If Wlad, Vitali, took 5 rounds, Lewis would do it in 2.
These guys ain't real. The realest dude out here is Arreola... followed by Pulev... and then Wilder and Tony Thompson right after.... and that's not saying it's all grande, either.
If you actually think about it HW boxing has been a bit hit and miss for some time, which probably says why the main american interest is on intermediate weights now. Quality heavyweights as follows, the rest are pub debates.
Joe Louis (arguably the best)
Rocky Marciano (argualbly the luckiest because all his contempories were over 40 years old)
Cassius Clay
Mike Tyson (until his hype bubble burst)
Lennox Lewis
Vitali Klitschko (may well have retired now, good luck to him after his featherbedded reign)
Vladimir Klitschko (getting more silly but the results are there)
The rest of the heavyweights for the last 60 years are just pub argument fodder, and long may the arguments continue! As a brit I still reckon our best chance was David Haye (in 50 years of watching our heavyweights), but we've now lost our bragging rights.
Shame really, the middleweights are looking good though!
Lewis didn't get his ass handed to him by Vitali.Quote:
Originally Posted by ykdadamaja
He fought a terrible sloppy fight n won.
Mr140 I have to disagree with the whole thread really.
What exactly is your criteria for saying this is a shit HW era?
Because for a books worth of reasons this era is definitely better than virtually all others in any aspects like talent of the fighters involved or their h2h capabilities against them.
The 70's was a really weak era, no doubt. At the time of Frazier vs Ali, the crowd BOOED Ali for a stinker of a fight! Now it's regarded as the FOTC! Ha!
The 80's was considered a very weak era early on with Holmes, Witherspoon, Smith shining bright but nothing really special, Later that decade was boosted by Mike Tyson who saved it somewhat.
Sure, the 90's was probably the best era but your perception of Vitali v s Lewis is way different than mine. Vitali did retire Lewis, and he went on to carry the flag for some further dominant and prominent beatdowns of dangerous 00's fighters.
I feel the 00 era was of comparable calibre to the 90's, the only difference imo is that a lot of the fighters involved and the dominant forces in it were NOT American or even British.
Further if you want to call Manny Stewards version of Wladimir Klitschko boring and label that as a reason why HW boxing has become shit, I can buy that.
But trying to do the same for Vitali I don't understand, his fights are every bit as exciting as Lewis's and equally bloody.
other than the klits, everybody else is a C class fighter at best.
The current heavyweight division is a joke!
If you believe otherwise you're probably a stupid fucking moron from Australia who thinks he knows about boxing but not enough to involve himself in the current prediction contest.
its is absolutely the worst HW era that i have lived through because the main champion is allowed to fowl to the excessive levels that he does in every fight
The HW championship is so driven by money at the moment that it is all that counts and the importance of the fighting as entertainment comes a long long way behind, to the extreme that it doesnt matter
wlad makes lots of people very rich everytime he fights, as long as he wins these people dont care how he does it
look at the HW champs last big fights, haye and ibragimov or whatever. simply pathetic!!!
sorry, but wlad sucks ass!!! chris arreola? garbage!! so yes, this era is terrible.
i respect vitali, but those long telephone pole arms are what got him out of the way of shots. that is no talent of his own, that is just long arms, longer than anybody can penetrate thru. that is not a real all time great. you can go find a 7 foot 7 inch basketballer who can flail his arms and backpeddle and never get hit, and the other guy will die trying to hit him, then he can cautiously slowly pick him apart after the guy is ehxhausted,
that is ALL the klits are. ITS ALL ABOUT THEIR SIZE. PERIOD. AND THAT IS NOT TALENT. THAT IS JUST SIZE.
i also respect vitaliQuote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
with wlad its about the money he generates, he wouldnt still be champ if that wasnt the case
Truthfully, I don't care, I'm not going to waste time dwelling on the past and bemoaning the present. I'm having trouble and fun keeping up with what's happening in boxing now.
The focus is on the smaller weights, where all the action is and where it should be.
The challengers are truly awful, out of shape and could not give a toss if they win because it will be their turn again soon.
Vitali has retired but Wlad will remain and keep the titles together. It would be far worse without the Klit brothers keeping it all together.
The Klit brothers are the best but they are not great.
Well max you say the 70's and 80's are so weak but Foreman and Holmes both did quite well on the come back in there 40's in the best era. Sanders was not shit in the 90's got knocked the fuck out by Rahaman look what happen with him and Wald. Vitali did ok but still lost to a fucking 38 year old Lewis a fat one at that just saying this era not the worst but think to somehow it is great is total different thing. The borthers are top 20 somewhere right now Wald keeps winning maybe higher i really don't know if he will hit the top 10.
Inbox me what to do, when and how often and I'm in then you smug bastard! :) Everytime you best me THEN I'll listen to your cheap shots mate!!Quote:
Originally Posted by ruthless rocco
An opinion that I somewhat share in part and a completely valid argument!! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
Lewis didn't have a fight plan... and that's why he got his ass handed to him. He won, but took the worst end of it- a Pyrrhic victory!Quote:
Originally Posted by HulkLewis didn't get his ass handed to him by Vitali.Quote:
Originally Posted by ykdadamaja
He fought a terrible sloppy fight n won.
Seems like a fair argument and has merits... The Klits DO out-range most of their opponents both of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by brocktonblockbust
However just a moments thought on this reveals that the Klitschko's are not alone at all here. Lennox Lewis, faced I think only 2 ppl taller than himself!!! Larry Holmes was an outranger and was seriously challenged and some would say gifted when he was not outranging, Muhammad Ali faced only a couple of non-bummy opponents who were taller than himself also Foreman being the most famous and dangerous). So if you use that argument then you must use it against them also.
Further, the records show that very tall boxers historicall did not perform so well, only recently have they come to the fore. So there must be some other reason why the Klitschko's have been so successful apart from their height given the fact only few were before... Quality! Lennox had it too. And the Klits are only 6'6 and 6'7, only 1 and 2 inches taller than Lewis!!
The boxer and boxer-puncher style is usually heavily dependent on height. Vitali is also an exceptional counterpuncher and an expert judge of distance.
This is probably my most important reply to this whole thread but tell me something.Quote:
Originally Posted by #1FightFan
Prior to the 90's, and excluding Mike Tyson, who from the past do you think could beat..
David Haye?
Sultan Ibragimov?
Chris Arreola?
The first choices that come to mind are LArry Holmes, George Foreman and Muhammad Ali as best possible candidates.
Haye- I think he could have some danger against Georges power given the weak chin BUT Haye moves so well and so fast and hits so sharp that I think he would box rings around George. I think Haye takes George the distance or young George might gas out and get KO'd late most likely for me. I think he would outbox/outpunch Holmes and KO Ali who did not have the punch to trouble him.
Sultan Ibragimov- Again I see Foreman being the most dangerous of the 3 but that's via punchers chance. Sultan is not slick like Haye but is much tougher, this guy stood up to and punched the shit out of giant Lance Whitaker as if he were a piece of shit! Never have the 3 faced a southpaw as cunning and tough as Ibragimov. I would tip Ibragimov.
And Arreola- I think he KO's all 3, regarding the older (smarter) Foreman I think he would cruise to a UD. A guy the height of Foreman, with a 10lb (fair) advantage, but instead of unco slogs left and right, fast and relentless combinations also with crushing power and the stamina to go 12 like young George never had. Yeah that guy is nothing! lol
You get the picture, what's your take?
Want to put them in the 90's, fine. All 3 are equal to or better than most of the opponents of Lennox Lewis!!
To put in perspective.
Foreman lost to Ali and Young, light side HW's by todays standards with no punch and no chin tested against superHW punchers. Why? Trouble with movement, he couldn't box. Haye, Ibragimov both move too well, Arreola like Lyle on steroids for George.
Ali lost to Frazier and Norton, easy KO's in the modern era for any of the 3, no way in any universe would any of them lose to cruiser bum Spinks.
Holmes lost to fucking Michael Spinks! 2ce! Enough said!
Foreman and Holmes coming back to be competitive in the 90's is not that stunning really. Boxing is a sport where experience and ring intelligence can play a greater role than athleticism when an athlete ages. Few sports are like boxing in that regard. Also they were far heftier in their comeback than they were in there younger days.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
Young Holmes and young Foreman would have been no better than the others of the 90's, they would have been light and inexperienced, but faster and more output of course to compensate.
Just a quick glance at their opponents in the 90's, Foreman lost to all good contenders, even Axel Schulz. He was extremely lucky against Moorer who had dodge chin and no fucking brains. The most stunning "victory" imo was against Shannon Briggs who he was robbed against. I did not see him fight a Riddick Bowe or a Lennox Lewis or a Mike Tyson. Holmes lost to all good contenders except his stunning upset against Ray Mercer, good HW and win but reaality, Ray was a tanker, he hit hard and could take a lot of punches. He was devoid of skill and was outboxed by Morrison and Damiani as well as others until he scored good punchers chance. The shrewd experienced Holmes at 235lbs was not gonna be so silly. I did not see him fight a Riddick Bowe or a Lennox Lewis and when I seen him fight Mike Tyson it was like "a bull in an antique shop" ;D
Sanders vs Rahman, even fight. Sanders had upper hand early on, gassed a bit, Rahman turned tides and scored a stoppage. I see this an even contest that could go either way anytime. Rahman was a tough opponent too (fuck he KO'd Lewis!) Sanders had a particular combination of features that surprised Wlad who wasn't prepared, I don't think he'd be able to replicate that. Vitali punched Sanders up in a wild shootout right?
Vitali vs Lewis is probably the most hotly controversial HW fight in all history, how that's proof of a bad era idk.
Perharps you should review the next fight Vitali vs Johnson, another top HW prospect and potential "Lewis beater" of the time. I particularly like the final thoughts of Larry Merchant...
"What must Lennox think if he is watching this? Does he see this as an opportunity for a mega fight.. Or does he see it as an opportunity, to "SAIL AWAY INTO THE SUNSET" and call it a day.
The Lennox Lewis of that fight was 250lbs, was training to fight another top HW so was fight ready. He had equal training for the specific opponent as Vitali did, chub isn't necessarily a disadvantGE at HW. Had the full experience of his entire career behind him and at 38, was not exactly ancient for a modern era HW boxer of his height and size especially.
The MAIN thing I see damaging to Lewis' performance here on paper is his years worth of ring rust. I think that was a non issue shortly after the opening of the fight. Lewis pre-fight interview was saying how good he felt and mocked Vitali at how easily he would dispatch him.
00's was not a "shit" era man. Not by a long shot.
You know people in this country don't give David Haye enough credit. He would have done very well in any era. He would have easily beat Foreman. His speed and power would have been hard to over come. Ali would have been the only one who could have beaten him. If Michael Moorer could beat Holyfield then Haye would have found it much easier. Vitali didn't even come close to hurting Chisora. Haye made it look easy. In the film I saw in training for the Fury fight Haye was taking Wilder to school. I only wish he would fight more often. When you made a ton of money like he has, it hard to have love for the sport anymore.
I have little faith in Haye beating the best in different eras when he won't even compete in his own. Seriously...Haye would have found beating Holyfield much easier??? Come on man. Really.
Max i didn't say the 00s was a shit era i said that it was not as great as you were saying. Holmes should of had the belt against McCall he won that fight and was robbed. Foreman gave Holyfeild a good fight and Briggs he should of got the nod have you seen the fight. When you are in 40's you are not at the top of your game and Larry was out for some time when he got in the ring with Tyson. Rahman was tough guy but i mean a old Holyfeild beat him up after his win with Lewis. Lennox was not shot but at 38 was on the slide and 250 i think was kinda heavy for him looked kinda fat in that fight but i watch it again. Anyhow i just saying that 00's arent bad but i don't think they shit on every era i feel there like the 80's only better because of the brothers pretty much thats about it.
I think Haye and Holyfield would have been a terrific match up as well. And yeah if Moorer can beat him, why not Haye who could bust Moorers ass into next week.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spicoli
Bloody look at Haye man, he is an excellent boxer. He's just injury prone, inactive and wants the fast road only. Shame on him there but.'
Holy has the chin but Haye has the punch. Haye is faster and longer and far slicker than Holyfield. Haye barely gets hit. Holyfield is a bit of a punch bag.
It's Holyfield's toughness and determination that makes him a difficult opponent for Haye, not his skills. I rate Holyfield higher obviously though because he did more.
@maxpower here's the link: http://www.saddoboxing.com/boxingfor...h-28-june.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by Max PowerInbox me what to do, when and how often and I'm in then you smug bastard! :) Everytime you best me THEN I'll listen to your cheap shots mate!!Quote:
Originally Posted by ruthless rocco
Alright maybe I overstate the case just a little bit. You seem to be reasonable about it. Sure we can view any era in both positive and negative light. I just get so sick of the "worst HW era ever" thing getting thrown around all the time, as if all the professional HW boxers don't even know how to box or don't train anymore, modern professional combat athletes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
I guess you are right I may have exaggerated my own claims a bit to counter the thread sorry. The overall principles of what I am saying do play factors though.
Your triangulation of fights does not really add up to evidence. You can triangulate to make Holmes look bad too etc.
I ain't taking anything away from George and Larry. They are great boxers no doubt and would be a factor in any era. Beaters of Lennox Lewis though they are not (unless they are lucky). Yeah I seen the Briggs Fo9reman fight and agree it was a robbery. Well done on that one, that should have been one of his best wins.
Ok good enough i am not one to say this era is that bad i agree both the brothers are great fighters. As for Haye vs Holyfeild kinda got to go with Holyfeild all day chin to good and workrate is way to high for Haye. Haye gets weak in later rounds and his chin not glass but not strong enough to take Holyfeild all day. Shit Holyfield i felt deserved a draw in the rematch with Lewis wish he was not 37 and kinda having hart problems for ever by the time they finally fought. Lennox was great but he got Tyson and Holyfeild at the right time.