Charles Martin's performance yesterday compelled me to make this thread.
Printable View
Charles Martin's performance yesterday compelled me to make this thread.
True. Martin won a title by injury, fighting club fighters to get into that position and sold the title to the highest bidder. Good luck to him but that is the best of Martin.
AJ has still got to go the distance and get some experience before he fights a genuine world class fighter.
Wilder is a champ but still vulnerable.
Fury won the title by throwing more than 4 punches per round to beat an old champion.
This is the golden age of heavyweight boxing, we have never had it so good.
Charles Martin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom
Same thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by ykdadamajaCharles Martin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom
Bruce Seldon... Charles Martin... these two guys are awful. I mean, I wouldn't even rank John Ruiz with them because Ruiz was a helluva lot better than them. When John Ruiz is rated higher than you, that's saying something!!Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterSame thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by ykdadamajaCharles Martin.Quote:
Originally Posted by Freedom
Did anyone else notice the stare down , Martin had that just glad to be here look about him.
Roy Jones because it was 1 and done. But without a doubt Charles Martin who should be ashamed of himself to be even called a champion.
I think it's pretty clearly Martin, who will almost certainly never do anything again in his career, to seal this title.
Prince charles martin.
His hairstyle annoyed me and the way he likes to flick it in interviews!
wlad
the ruiner of hw boxing for 10+ years
I never noticed the flicking but his hair is alright, its just dreadsQuote:
Originally Posted by imp
Wlad ensured that phoneys like Martin never won the title. i would rather endure 10 years of Wlad than 1 fight Martin.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
4 and a half ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
My vote is John Ruiz. Seldon, Kirk Johnson, and Sam Peter are up there as well. Rahman also, but he was actual champ (not just Titlist).
Never seen such bollox pretending to be a title fight ....EVERQuote:
Originally Posted by mikeeod
Shannon Briggs, and Liakovich were also really really poor. I'm not sure either of those guys the night they fought each other would be clear favourites over Charles Martin:p
John Ruiz wasn't that bad. Yes he stunk to watch and was never near the top guy, but he was also a perennial contender who knew how to handle himself and was consistently good over years. He looked worse against Jones and Toney because he wasn't a puncher and just couldn't box with them, but he was effective against some bigger and stronger guys than himself, at the very least he was a solid pro. I'm pretty sure I scored both Valuev fights(along with maybe every Valuev fight I ever watched for that matter) against the giant freak, who is also a good mention for this really.
Basically everyone since Lewis aside from the Klits and with the exception of a few hopefuls now, has been fairly poor to have been called a HW champion.
Valuev belongs in this group.
Martin takes the cake, but Valuev was pretty bad as well.
Sultan Ibragimov sucked too n briefly had the WBO I think.
Michael Bent.
wlad was a phoney (why are we talking in American), he held more than he punched (and that's not an exaggerationQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterWlad ensured that phoneys like Martin never won the title. i would rather endure 10 years of Wlad than 1 fight Martin.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
better to have Wlad than Martin and the other phoneys that will follow. at least Wlad tidied the crap an kept some order.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44wlad was a phoney (why are we talking in American), he held more than he punched (and that's not an exaggerationQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterWlad ensured that phoneys like Martin never won the title. i would rather endure 10 years of Wlad than 1 fight Martin.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
perhaps he did tidy up the crap, but a lot of his wins were based on cheatingQuote:
Originally Posted by Masterbetter to have Wlad than Martin and the other phoneys that will follow. at least Wlad tidied the crap an kept some order.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44wlad was a phoney (why are we talking in American), he held more than he punched (and that's not an exaggerationQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterWlad ensured that phoneys like Martin never won the title. i would rather endure 10 years of Wlad than 1 fight Martin.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
the day he first won the title in his most recent reign he should have been DQ'd by the second round
All the challengers that Wlad has beaten, none of them would I have wanted as champion, even Haye.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44perhaps he did tidy up the crap, but a lot of his wins were based on cheatingQuote:
Originally Posted by Masterbetter to have Wlad than Martin and the other phoneys that will follow. at least Wlad tidied the crap an kept some order.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44wlad was a phoney (why are we talking in American), he held more than he punched (and that's not an exaggerationQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterWlad ensured that phoneys like Martin never won the title. i would rather endure 10 years of Wlad than 1 fight Martin.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
the day he first won the title in his most recent reign he should have been DQ'd by the second round
I've probably got to go with Charles Martin. Genuinely pathetic. Couldn't fight a lick.
Mind you, all the guys who Deontay has defended against would probably be worse, if Wilder was to have popped his knee during the fights.
Correction: Valuev belongs in this group EXCEPT his fight with Monte Barrett.Quote:
Originally Posted by SlimTrae
He beat the guns off dude.
that's fine but wouldn't it have been better, for the last 10 years, to have a hw division based on who is the best boxer rather than who brings in the most money?Quote:
Originally Posted by MasterAll the challengers that Wlad has beaten, none of them would I have wanted as champion, even Haye.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44perhaps he did tidy up the crap, but a lot of his wins were based on cheatingQuote:
Originally Posted by Masterbetter to have Wlad than Martin and the other phoneys that will follow. at least Wlad tidied the crap an kept some order.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44wlad was a phoney (why are we talking in American), he held more than he punched (and that's not an exaggerationQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterWlad ensured that phoneys like Martin never won the title. i would rather endure 10 years of Wlad than 1 fight Martin.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
the day he first won the title in his most recent reign he should have been DQ'd by the second round
when in with any kind of threatening opponent klit would hold for 3 or 4 rounds (or more) before he started punching
in more than several of his fights he should have been dq'd, there is nothing good about that
Wlad beat the best heavyweights and was the best at the weight. It may have been a very poor standard but he was the best from it.
are you happy with his holding tactics during that time?
I hated Wlad holding but he was still the best fighter. Wlad did not have to hold but he was so scared about his vulnerable chin that he did it excessively.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
I don't think you can say that for sureQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterI hated Wlad holding but he was still the best fighter. Wlad did not have to hold but he was so scared about his vulnerable chin that he did it excessively.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
would he have beaten Peter in their second fight if he was stopped from holding?
he shouldn't have won the fight, he should have been DQ'd without a doubt
would he have beaten Provetkin?
would he have beaten haye?
haye was one of his best performances but he still held excessively
as soon as he was stopped from holding against any half decent opponent he looked terrible
I don't think we will ever know if wlad was the best boxer during that period, he was just the best at wlad rules
I hear what you're saying on most of that, and like you, I thought the Povetkin fight was a disgraceful fight from start to finish.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44I don't think you can say that for sureQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterI hated Wlad holding but he was still the best fighter. Wlad did not have to hold but he was so scared about his vulnerable chin that he did it excessively.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
would he have beaten Peter in their second fight if he was stopped from holding?
he shouldn't have won the fight, he should have been DQ'd without a doubt
would he have beaten Provetkin?
would he have beaten haye?
haye was one of his best performances but he still held excessively
as soon as he was stopped from holding against any half decent opponent he looked terrible
I don't think we will ever know if wlad was the best boxer during that period, he was just the best at wlad rules
But the Haye fight is a little different. Haye was so cautious that Wlad didn't have to hold that much. Haye was looking for a way in all night but didn't want to commit. He played right into Wlad's hands and then blamed his big toe.
Haye's performance against Wlad was similar to Wlad's performance against Fury. Smaller man , less reach, worried about getting tagged by the bigger guy to the extent that they went gun shy.
And I'm not a Haye basher, I quite like the guy. he fucked up big time that night and made himself look a cunt.
I shouldn't have brought up the Haye fight, its a touchy subjectQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraI hear what you're saying on most of that, and like you, I thought the Povetkin fight was a disgraceful fight from start to finish.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44I don't think you can say that for sureQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterI hated Wlad holding but he was still the best fighter. Wlad did not have to hold but he was so scared about his vulnerable chin that he did it excessively.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
would he have beaten Peter in their second fight if he was stopped from holding?
he shouldn't have won the fight, he should have been DQ'd without a doubt
would he have beaten Provetkin?
would he have beaten haye?
haye was one of his best performances but he still held excessively
as soon as he was stopped from holding against any half decent opponent he looked terrible
I don't think we will ever know if wlad was the best boxer during that period, he was just the best at wlad rules
But the Haye fight is a little different. Haye was so cautious that Wlad didn't have to hold that much. Haye was looking for a way in all night but didn't want to commit. He played right into Wlad's hands and then blamed his big toe.
Haye's performance against Wlad was similar to Wlad's performance against Fury. Smaller man , less reach, worried about getting tagged by the bigger guy to the extent that they went gun shy.
And I'm not a Haye basher, I quite like the guy. he fucked up big time that night and made himself look a cunt.
forget I said it
It wasn't just the Provetkin and Peter fights wlad held in, there were lots of them, I just brought those two up because the peter fight was the day he won the title. He should have been DQ'd so wouldn't have won it in the first place (then what would have happened?) and the provetkin fight was probably the worst, he should have been DQ'd several times over
I remember Matthew Barney fighting Carl Froch and Henry Akinwande fighting lennox lewis, Barney and Akinwande were DQ'd in those fights for holding, well done ref, yet they weren't a patch on many of wlad klits fights
Yeah , agree with all of that. I remember Akinwande. he basically got DQ'd for not wanting to fight. I always thought that that must be the most embarrassing way for any Boxer to lose a fight, to go in the ring and not want to fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44I shouldn't have brought up the Haye fight, its a touchy subjectQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraI hear what you're saying on most of that, and like you, I thought the Povetkin fight was a disgraceful fight from start to finish.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44I don't think you can say that for sureQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterI hated Wlad holding but he was still the best fighter. Wlad did not have to hold but he was so scared about his vulnerable chin that he did it excessively.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
would he have beaten Peter in their second fight if he was stopped from holding?
he shouldn't have won the fight, he should have been DQ'd without a doubt
would he have beaten Provetkin?
would he have beaten haye?
haye was one of his best performances but he still held excessively
as soon as he was stopped from holding against any half decent opponent he looked terrible
I don't think we will ever know if wlad was the best boxer during that period, he was just the best at wlad rules
But the Haye fight is a little different. Haye was so cautious that Wlad didn't have to hold that much. Haye was looking for a way in all night but didn't want to commit. He played right into Wlad's hands and then blamed his big toe.
Haye's performance against Wlad was similar to Wlad's performance against Fury. Smaller man , less reach, worried about getting tagged by the bigger guy to the extent that they went gun shy.
And I'm not a Haye basher, I quite like the guy. he fucked up big time that night and made himself look a cunt.
forget I said it
It wasn't just the Provetkin and Peter fights wlad held in, there were lots of them, I just brought those two up because the peter fight was the day he won the title. He should have been DQ'd so wouldn't have won it in the first place (then what would have happened?) and the provetkin fight was probably the worst, he should have been DQ'd several times over
I remember Matthew Barney fighting Carl Froch and Henry Akinwande fighting lennox lewis, Barney and Akinwande were DQ'd in those fights for holding, well done ref, yet they weren't a patch on many of wlad klits fights
Mills Lane was on fire that couple of months because he disqualified Tyson for the ear biting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraYeah , agree with all of that. I remember Akinwande. he basically got DQ'd for not wanting to fight. I always thought that that must be the most embarrassing way for any Boxer to lose a fight, to go in the ring and not want to fight.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44I shouldn't have brought up the Haye fight, its a touchy subjectQuote:
Originally Posted by Primo CarneraI hear what you're saying on most of that, and like you, I thought the Povetkin fight was a disgraceful fight from start to finish.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44I don't think you can say that for sureQuote:
Originally Posted by MasterI hated Wlad holding but he was still the best fighter. Wlad did not have to hold but he was so scared about his vulnerable chin that he did it excessively.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
would he have beaten Peter in their second fight if he was stopped from holding?
he shouldn't have won the fight, he should have been DQ'd without a doubt
would he have beaten Provetkin?
would he have beaten haye?
haye was one of his best performances but he still held excessively
as soon as he was stopped from holding against any half decent opponent he looked terrible
I don't think we will ever know if wlad was the best boxer during that period, he was just the best at wlad rules
But the Haye fight is a little different. Haye was so cautious that Wlad didn't have to hold that much. Haye was looking for a way in all night but didn't want to commit. He played right into Wlad's hands and then blamed his big toe.
Haye's performance against Wlad was similar to Wlad's performance against Fury. Smaller man , less reach, worried about getting tagged by the bigger guy to the extent that they went gun shy.
And I'm not a Haye basher, I quite like the guy. he fucked up big time that night and made himself look a cunt.
forget I said it
It wasn't just the Provetkin and Peter fights wlad held in, there were lots of them, I just brought those two up because the peter fight was the day he won the title. He should have been DQ'd so wouldn't have won it in the first place (then what would have happened?) and the provetkin fight was probably the worst, he should have been DQ'd several times over
I remember Matthew Barney fighting Carl Froch and Henry Akinwande fighting lennox lewis, Barney and Akinwande were DQ'd in those fights for holding, well done ref, yet they weren't a patch on many of wlad klits fights
Briggs was a shit champ i mean he barely won his title and then got completely owned right when he had to defended it as well. Not to mention that gift he got off Foreman for championship but i do not consider that because i have no idea how he even got that decision Foreman beat that dude.
Briggs knew he lost that one. It was all over his face and half way out of his mouth. Arguably the best Foreman had looked since winning the strap back. Slower and some stamina lapses but watching him put that phone pole jab in the back of Briggs neck repeatedly was a thing of beauty. Judges be damned, the old man went out on a quality win and walked away with class.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr140
There's been a few. Martin is up there, although it's impossible to tell how bad he actually is.
Seldon was before 2000.
Since 2000, it's Charles Martin if you're talking about trinket holders & Hasim Rahman if you're talking about linear champions.
He destroyed the sport.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
Agreed.
Going to tell you what ruined the sport of boxing pretty much America could not get a heavyweight champ the last man of the hw division was Evander Holyfeild. Tell you right now if US could of landed a champ since then not a trinket holder but a champ boxing be higher on the mountain.