Sam Peter: Anybody?

[erics44]

I can assure you this isnt happening and is a very weak defence in this discussion

give me one example in any of my posts about any other fighter where my judgement is clouded by my fellings towards the fighter

you are very wrong with this statement

to me its very simple

there is a lot of evidence to back up my claims, sam peter 2 round 1 for example (an exanple i didnt hand pick), klit holds more than he punches until he is in a very strong position, holding is against the rules yet he is never warned until it is superficial

to me the situation is all very corrupt and it is plainly obviously happening, i can understand how a boxing fan can find this difficult to believe/accept, i dont understand how anyone cant watch this and at least think there is something slightly wrong

What you're telling me is that Wlad has no real significant boxing skill to speak of, and he pays off the officials of all his fights to let him hold and lean on guys to win, because other than being 6'6'' and 250 he has no other tools that would let him beat the guys he beats.

That just reeks of hater, man. It's simply not true.

I've had this argument with people trying to discredit Wlad for years.

"WLADS ONLY GOOD BECAUSE HE'S SO TALL!!!"

Really? Well how come Ty Fields isn't the world champ? How come Mike "The Giant" White didn't win a world title back in the 90s?

You need the skill, knowledge and expertise to go along with the physical advantages. Wlad has a great jab, a great right hand and a mean left hook. He has great footwork for a heavyweight and knows how to control distance and range. That's a skill. That's the art of boxing.

Does he tie guys up on the inside a lot? Yeah. But so did Muhammad Ali. Tying guys up is a technique, it's not the be-all end-all of his fighting game.

To make a claim that he's only champ because he can hold completely discredits you. You're a hater. You have no credibility on this topic.

i fully admit i am a hater, i hate his reign (hate being a very strong word, i obviously dont hate but thats just a word the forum users put on it)

but you are putting far too much of this argument on that

wlad is a very good HW and during his whole carear he has been one of the best around and at times the best, without a doubt

i dont believe his reign would have been anywhere near as fruitful had he been stopped from holding

on the corruption side of things, lets be level headed about this, do you think sven ottke's reign was in any way corrupt? do you think the burns / beltram fight was in any way corrupt? there are plenty of other examples that smell a bit, so how every you say it (paying refs or what ever) corrupt fights exist, and the reason is money

wlad makes a lot of people very very rich every time he fights, do you not see it as even slightly suspicious that he is allowed to get away with extremely excessive fouling in the ring? and it isnt just a couple of fights like provetkin, its every single round of every single fight he has

as ive said many times i long for the day wlad gets into a bit of trouble in one of his fights, lets see the lengths the ref and the officials go to to keep him in the fight