Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Eric not getting better when they leave dude just going to fighters worse then them pretty much. Might get more exciting i guess but in truth the level will go down. I may just disagree with you hear but out of all Walds fights i only think maybe 15 percent of them were he really over did but to each his own.
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Eric not getting better when they leave dude just going to fighters worse then them pretty much. Might get more exciting i guess but in truth the level will go down. I may just disagree with you hear but out of all Walds fights i only think maybe 15 percent of them were he really over did but to each his own.
yep, if you dont think that what wlad is doing is extreme blatent cheating then each to their own as you say
ill have to disagree with on your opinion that it wont get better once hes gone too
i think its will get a lot better, there might be a short low period, but once that is done we could have some exciting title fights again, only sticking point is if we get another wlad opperation taking over
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Not many big men are like the Brothers for there size they are way fast and can really box when they feel like it only Bowie and Lewis were like them. I am pretty sure there won't be a reigning champ but the talent pool right now is not a good one really and the eastern Europeans are kinda kings of hws now.
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
Your a hardline on that Wlad cheating thing aren't you eric..
Yes, Wladimir doesn't know how to box. I would say that nobody revolutionised boxing like Wladimir did. He proved that all those things that those previous champs did were unnecessary in the case of himself and next to worthless in the case of his opponents.
Every opponent has the same plan. They're going to move, they're going to feint, they're going to go to the body blah blah and then when the fight comes, it's not that they aren't good. It's that they can't!
Did you watch the Thompson and Wach fights again? MOST of Wladimir's fights are boxing matches with only a little wrestling.
Povetkin and Peter are the worst examples, nothing else is that bad.
He's had some stinkers like Ibragimov but that was about as pure a boxing match as you can get.
He just unfortunately doesn't have a crowd pleasing style at best, but why would he want to jeapordise his titles by being a reckless brawler if he doesn't have to?
absolutely pal
boxing is a corrupt sport, we see that week in week out
but in my memory, wlads is the most consistently extended blatently corrupt reign in history, more corrupt than sven ottke, I long for the day he gets into some trouble and we'll see the lengths the refs and officials go to to keep him in the fight
mind you they go to pretty extreme lengths everytime he fights any way
and every fight of wlads I have watched since his second reign has consisted of extreme holding, not just those two, if youd like me to watch another, one you feel he didn't bass his strategy on holding then let me know :)
and for the record, Im not saying wlad cant box, he definitely can, and if he had have been made to fight within the rules all his carear he would have become champ and lost it and probably won it and lost it again, he wouldn't have had the reign he has had
What about Muhammad Ali eric?
You cannot bash Wlad for cheating when most would agree that he would win most anyway.
Muhammad was gifted almost half an entire career, I would say that tops Wlad.
You cannot bash Wlad for cheating when most would agree that he would win most anyway. we will never know and its a daft point anyway, might as well give united a couple of penalties head start, theyd win the game anyway
and i dont think he would have won all of those fights had he been stopped from cheating, maybe he would have gone in to them all as the better boxer? maybe he wouldnt, but at the very least one of his opponents would have got to him and the fights would have been a lot more entertaining in the main
Muhammad was gifted almost half an entire career, I would say that tops Wlad. I am too young to really appreciate the Ali era, i wasnt around to watch it whilst it was happening, the fights i have seen i havent seen any gifts, point me out one that is a gift and ill watch it. I know ali also fought subpar opposition, but i havent seen any excessive cheating
so i dont think it is anywhere near the reign of wlad in terms of consistent prolonged excessive corruption
His 70's fights. His version of holding is not just a clinch and a reset, it's wrestling with grabbing behind the neck and pushing the head down. His signature move was pushing the head down. Check out all the clinches in Ali/Frazier 1 and watch him do this. It's a lot worse than Wlad's style.
As for gifts, there are numerous examples but probably the most obvious would be Ali vs Young. He was pretty soundly beaten, yet awarded the victory only a little shame facedly.
I don't consider any of Wlad's fights cheating personally with the exception of a grey area in the Povetkin fight. That COULD be considered cheating.
Even his next most clutchy fight Sam Peter, there was only half as much grappling as Ali's most grabby affair vs Frazier and as noted the clinching for Wlad was legal there, for Ali it would today lead probably to disqualification.
So no I don't really understand where your going with Wlad cheating because otherwise you'd have to say the same for Ali for one.
And what about Ruiz, he held a lot. Foreman.. Foreman pushed ppl all the time.
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
Your a hardline on that Wlad cheating thing aren't you eric..
Yes, Wladimir doesn't know how to box. I would say that nobody revolutionised boxing like Wladimir did. He proved that all those things that those previous champs did were unnecessary in the case of himself and next to worthless in the case of his opponents.
Every opponent has the same plan. They're going to move, they're going to feint, they're going to go to the body blah blah and then when the fight comes, it's not that they aren't good. It's that they can't!
Did you watch the Thompson and Wach fights again? MOST of Wladimir's fights are boxing matches with only a little wrestling.
Povetkin and Peter are the worst examples, nothing else is that bad.
He's had some stinkers like Ibragimov but that was about as pure a boxing match as you can get.
He just unfortunately doesn't have a crowd pleasing style at best, but why would he want to jeapordise his titles by being a reckless brawler if he doesn't have to?
absolutely pal
boxing is a corrupt sport, we see that week in week out
but in my memory, wlads is the most consistently extended blatently corrupt reign in history, more corrupt than sven ottke, I long for the day he gets into some trouble and we'll see the lengths the refs and officials go to to keep him in the fight
mind you they go to pretty extreme lengths everytime he fights any way
and every fight of wlads I have watched since his second reign has consisted of extreme holding, not just those two, if youd like me to watch another, one you feel he didn't bass his strategy on holding then let me know :)
and for the record, Im not saying wlad cant box, he definitely can, and if he had have been made to fight within the rules all his carear he would have become champ and lost it and probably won it and lost it again, he wouldn't have had the reign he has had
What about Muhammad Ali eric?
You cannot bash Wlad for cheating when most would agree that he would win most anyway.
Muhammad was gifted almost half an entire career, I would say that tops Wlad.
You cannot bash Wlad for cheating when most would agree that he would win most anyway. we will never know and its a daft point anyway, might as well give united a couple of penalties head start, theyd win the game anyway
and i dont think he would have won all of those fights had he been stopped from cheating, maybe he would have gone in to them all as the better boxer? maybe he wouldnt, but at the very least one of his opponents would have got to him and the fights would have been a lot more entertaining in the main
Muhammad was gifted almost half an entire career, I would say that tops Wlad. I am too young to really appreciate the Ali era, i wasnt around to watch it whilst it was happening, the fights i have seen i havent seen any gifts, point me out one that is a gift and ill watch it. I know ali also fought subpar opposition, but i havent seen any excessive cheating
so i dont think it is anywhere near the reign of wlad in terms of consistent prolonged excessive corruption
His 70's fights. His version of holding is not just a clinch and a reset, it's wrestling with grabbing behind the neck and pushing the head down. His signature move was pushing the head down. Check out all the clinches in Ali/Frazier 1 and watch him do this. It's a lot worse than Wlad's style.
As for gifts, there are numerous examples but probably the most obvious would be Ali vs Young. He was pretty soundly beaten, yet awarded the victory only a little shame facedly.
I don't consider any of Wlad's fights cheating personally with the exception of a grey area in the Povetkin fight. That COULD be considered cheating.
Even his next most clutchy fight Sam Peter, there was only half as much grappling as Ali's most grabby affair vs Frazier and as noted the clinching for Wlad was legal there, for Ali it would today lead probably to disqualification.
So no I don't really understand where your going with Wlad cheating because otherwise you'd have to say the same for Ali for one.
And what about Ruiz, he held a lot. Foreman.. Foreman pushed ppl all the time.
just watched it
i couldnt put in words how far from being as bad as wlads style it is :)
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Mr140
Not many big men are like the Brothers for there size they are way fast and can really box when they feel like it only Bowie and Lewis were like them. I am pretty sure there won't be a reigning champ but the talent pool right now is not a good one really and the eastern Europeans are kinda kings of hws now.
thats an opinion, mine is much more positive on the state of the division without wlad
like ive said a number of times i think wlad would have been beaten off at least one of his opponents over the last several years if he was made to fight within the rules
but lets say wlads cheating isnt cheating, lets say holding is in the rules, id rather have 5 years of less tallent and more excitement, id like to enjoy a HW title fight again
mind you the main reason i dont enjoy them is because wlad is allowed to cheat so much, if he wasnt his fights would undoubtably more exciting
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Forget the Povetkin fight for a minute, we know that was the worst right.
Compare it to Sam Peter fight, there are more and more dirtier clinches in the Frazier fight than there were in Wlad's first fight with Peter.
What is it about Wlad that constitutes cheating to you? I'm confused now.
The whole holding thing got massively exaggerated after Povetkin as if he ONLY won that way.
Yet BEFORE that fight he was accused of it only mildly and more criticised for his endless jabbing.
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
Forget the Povetkin fight for a minute, we know that was the worst right.
Compare it to Sam Peter fight, there are more and more dirtier clinches in the Frazier fight than there were in Wlad's first fight with Peter.
What is it about Wlad that constitutes cheating to you? I'm confused now.
The whole holding thing got massively exaggerated after Povetkin as if he ONLY won that way.
Yet BEFORE that fight he was accused of it only mildly and more criticised for his endless jabbing.
nope there definately wasnt
and i was of the opinion that wlad hurrendously excessively cheated by holding long before the provetkin fight, the provetkin fight was just funny
it amazes me that people actually defend it
it would be one thing if he adopted an exciting method of cheating, id accept people defending it because they enjoyed watching it
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Well I don't condone the Povetkin fights holding, that was a bit much for me. I will defend him in the light of Muhammad Ali and John Ruiz employing similar or in my opinion worse tactics to win regularly.
As I said once before, Wladimir only clinches those short ass opponents who rush at him. If they tried to BOX Wlad they would get their face punched in. Wlad's optimal place to have his opponent, where he wants them, is at the end of his jab and later his right.
Foreman pushed his opponents off him to get them there. Wladimir grabs them and then seperates. I don't think that's cheating. I think it's a legal clinch. You cannot eliminate it from boxing, you must learn to clinch to survive.
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
Well I don't condone the Povetkin fights holding, that was a bit much for me. I will defend him in the light of Muhammad Ali and John Ruiz employing similar or in my opinion worse tactics to win regularly.
As I said once before, Wladimir only clinches those short ass opponents who rush at him. If they tried to BOX Wlad they would get their face punched in. Wlad's optimal place to have his opponent, where he wants them, is at the end of his jab and later his right.
Foreman pushed his opponents off him to get them there. Wladimir grabs them and then seperates. I don't think that's cheating. I think it's a legal clinch. You cannot eliminate it from boxing, you must learn to clinch to survive.
look mate we are on opposite polls when it comes to opinion on this, i cant see how anyone could put what wlad does in anywhere near the same bracket as ali, forman, ruiz
you asked me to watch ali v frazier, i did and the two are so far apart, they resemble different sports
if an alien came down from mars and you explained boxing to him, gave him the rule book then showed him a wlad fight and you said "would you say that this is boxing?" i reckon the little green fellow would say nah
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Fair enough, your entitled to that opinion too eric (y).
I don't see it that way but fair enough.
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
Fair enough, your entitled to that opinion too eric (y).
I don't see it that way but fair enough.
good on you pal
good to have a discussion with someone on here who has a different opinion to me and not be called all sorts of names and be told i know nothing about boxing :)
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Did he hold much this last fight eric?
didnt watch it
The how about you shut the fuck up? Better yet...
| BLOCKED
|
|
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
El Kabong
Did he hold much this last fight eric?
didnt watch it
The how about you shut the fuck up? Better yet...
| BLOCKED
|
|
|
the how about you shut the fuck up instead? even better yet...:LOS:
Re: Subpar Foe Doesn't Mean Klitschko's Not An All-Timer
Quote:
Originally Posted by
erics44
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Max Power
Fair enough, your entitled to that opinion too eric (y).
I don't see it that way but fair enough.
good on you pal
good to have a discussion with someone on here who has a different opinion to me and not be called all sorts of names and be told i know nothing about boxing :)
Klitschko is not my favourite fighter to watch by any means but I do rate his abilities near the top. Of course I definitely understand some of the criticism as well!
I wouldn't say you know nothing of boxing because obviously I have nothing left to argue so you've done a great job LOL
