Sam Peter: Anybody?

[erics44]

wlad is very good at holding, and when he does he is very good at leaning and sapping the strength of his opponents, this wins him the fights

I don't think this is as big a factor as you say. In the Povetkin fight it was horrendous, but usually Wlad stays on the outside and boxes. I don't remember ever seeing him jumping in to hold and lean like he did with Povetkin. He ties guys up when they try to bum rush him, but that's the same stuff Floyd and Bhop do. It's going to happen more at HW because these are much bigger, slower, less agile guys.

You seem to be telling me that Wlad doesn't have elite boxing skill and simply uses his size to hold and lean to win fights, and that just doesn't mesh with what I've seen of him over the years.

And in the Povektin fight, in the early stages Wlad was doing all the holding IMO, but at the midway point onward Povetkin was hurt, tired and resigned to the fact that he was going to lose the fight and I remember many times him initiating the clinches on the inside and holding onto Wlad while Wlad held his arms in the air to prove he wasn't holding.

That's how I remember it, but there's no way in hell I'm going back to rewatch it to confirm my memory

believe me it is absolutely everything, take it away he wouldnt still be champ, no doubt at all

its also a completely different thing holding/surviving when youre hurt, provetkin did that in the 9th or something, the shocking thing about that fight wasnt the amount wlad was holding (coz he always does that), it was amount he was still holding at a point the the fight when a fart would have finished it

[erics44]

I think most of the blame for that fight goes to David, who talked a big game about him knocking Wlad's head up and then fought a sissy fight.

Yup, Haye talked waaaaaaay too much considering how he fought and he's STILL talking. He's like Steve Buscimi in Fargo.


I understand the frustration at the Sultan and Povetkin fights, I too was frustrated watching those waiting for a KO, but to whine about Wlad being a "corrupt champ" is fucking idiotic and just typical of erics44 who is 100% hater

i am a 100% hater, i have very good reason , your only argument in all this is that i am a hater tho

let me ask you a couple of questions

was the outcome of the burns / beltram fight acceptable? do you believe that that was a hometown decision?

were the outcomes a lot of the sven ottke fights acceptable? do you believe that there was any corrutpness involved in those decisions?

that burns fight and more recently the froch/groves fights suggest to me that some of the eddie hearn fighters are given some privaledges in fights, why would eddie not do all he can to ensure his cash cows remain champions

wlad generates more money in any one of his fights than ottke did in all of his title fights put together, probably more than the ricky burns fights plus the froch groves fight

why would the people behind his fights not do all they can to keep him as champ?

consider this and look at the fact that he extremely excessively holds in all his fights (more than he punches for the majority of the fight) and is only ever suprficially warned for it

nice cash cow that isnt it, all they have to do is let him hold

to me mate it is absolutely plainly obvious it is happening

[Beanflicker]

believe me it is absolutely everything, take it away he wouldnt still be champ, no doubt at all

Well we must part company there

I never understood why people would let hate of certain fighters cloud their better judgement.

[El Kabong]

i am a 100% hater, i have very good reason , your only argument in all this is that i am a hater tho

let me ask you a couple of questions

was the outcome of the burns / beltram fight acceptable? do you believe that that was a hometown decision?

were the outcomes a lot of the sven ottke fights acceptable? do you believe that there was any corrutpness involved in those decisions?

that burns fight and more recently the froch/groves fights suggest to me that some of the eddie hearn fighters are given some privaledges in fights, why would eddie not do all he can to ensure his cash cows remain champions

wlad generates more money in any one of his fights than ottke did in all of his title fights put together, probably more than the ricky burns fights plus the froch groves fight

why would the people behind his fights not do all they can to keep him as champ?

consider this and look at the fact that he extremely excessively holds in all his fights (more than he punches for the majority of the fight) and is only ever suprficially warned for it

nice cash cow that isnt it, all they have to do is let him hold

to me mate it is absolutely plainly obvious it is happening

never saw Burns-Beltran so I won't comment on it.

Ottke had some very questionable "wins" but those are by decision and judges have been known to make poor decisions. Also there was the Reid fight where Reid was warned for punching Ottke....have you seen that happen in a Klitschko fight? I haven't and I unlike YOU watch those fights.

What's obvious to me is Wlad wins decisively by UD or KO.....what fight should he have lost?

[erics44]

believe me it is absolutely everything, take it away he wouldnt still be champ, no doubt at all

Well we must part company there

I never understood why people would let hate of certain fighters cloud their better judgement.

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

[erics44]

i am a 100% hater, i have very good reason , your only argument in all this is that i am a hater tho

let me ask you a couple of questions

was the outcome of the burns / beltram fight acceptable? do you believe that that was a hometown decision?

were the outcomes a lot of the sven ottke fights acceptable? do you believe that there was any corrutpness involved in those decisions?

that burns fight and more recently the froch/groves fights suggest to me that some of the eddie hearn fighters are given some privaledges in fights, why would eddie not do all he can to ensure his cash cows remain champions

wlad generates more money in any one of his fights than ottke did in all of his title fights put together, probably more than the ricky burns fights plus the froch groves fight

why would the people behind his fights not do all they can to keep him as champ?

consider this and look at the fact that he extremely excessively holds in all his fights (more than he punches for the majority of the fight) and is only ever suprficially warned for it

nice cash cow that isnt it, all they have to do is let him hold

to me mate it is absolutely plainly obvious it is happening

never saw Burns-Beltran so I won't comment on it.

Ottke had some very questionable "wins" but those are by decision and judges have been known to make poor decisions. Also there was the Reid fight where Reid was warned for punching Ottke....have you seen that happen in a Klitschko fight? I haven't and I unlike YOU watch those fights.

What's obvious to me is Wlad wins decisively by UD or KO.....what fight should he have lost?

if you accept excessive holding is within the rules then no this has never happened in a klit fight, its not tho

the judges giving ottke questionable decisions fight after fight is cheating and shows the corrupt nature of his reign

the ref allowing klitchko to excessively foul fight after fight is cheating and shows the corrupt nature of his reign

so although the situations are different, there is very clear similarities

why would you accept otkke fights as corrupt when ottke brings in a million at the most every fight yet klitchkos couldnt be who brings tens of millions in every fight

[Beanflicker]

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.

[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

[erics44]

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.

just one more point mate, im not throwing any accusations at you, id appreciate you keep it to the topic we are talking about

if i was to throw an accusation at you i might say you seem to have a purpose to single out "haters" and discredit their opinion because of that

this in turn gives you no credibility in discussing this topic with me

[El Kabong]

if you accept excessive holding is within the rules then no this has never happened in a klit fight, its not tho

the judges giving ottke questionable decisions fight after fight is cheating and shows the corrupt nature of his reign

the ref allowing klitchko to excessively foul fight after fight is cheating and shows the corrupt nature of his reign

so although the situations are different, there is very clear similarities

why would you accept otkke fights as corrupt when ottke brings in a million at the most every fight yet klitchkos couldnt be who brings tens of millions in every fight

It is up to the referee to call fouls

How fucking dense are you? Get it through your retarded ginger head

[erics44]

if you accept excessive holding is within the rules then no this has never happened in a klit fight, its not tho

the judges giving ottke questionable decisions fight after fight is cheating and shows the corrupt nature of his reign

the ref allowing klitchko to excessively foul fight after fight is cheating and shows the corrupt nature of his reign

so although the situations are different, there is very clear similarities

why would you accept otkke fights as corrupt when ottke brings in a million at the most every fight yet klitchkos couldnt be who brings tens of millions in every fight

It is up to the referee to call fouls

How fucking dense are you? Get it through your retarded ginger head

Like Ive said to you lots of times this is an utterly stoopid argument

Suppose it was up to the judges in the ottke fights? If they said ottke won it must have been legit

[El Kabong]

Like Ive said to you lots of times this is an utterly stoopid argument

Suppose it was up to the judges in the ottke fights? If they said ottke won it must have been legit

The ref let's Wladimir's clinching go, he doesn't punish Wlad, but he doesn't keep Wlad's opponent from holding, he doesn't keep Wlad's opponent from throwing punches, he doesn't keep Wlad's opponent from fighting back, etc. With Sven Ottke the ref punished Robin Reid for PUNCHING Ottke, that's keeping an opponent from fighting back, that's not a fair fight because 1 fighter has an advantage over the other because the rules of the ref are biased in favor of Ottke. The judges as well could be biased in favor of a certain fighter....though in Wladimir's case you'd be very hard pressed to find a fight where Wladimir landed fewer punches than his opponent, got hit more times than his opponent, etc...but I BEG you to find me a fight Wladimir CLEARLY lost just based on boxing, not on fouls you ASSUME were fouls, just 100% boxing. Punches thrown and landed, ring generalship, etc...find me a fight Wlad lost based on that otherwise stop fucking wasting my time you ignorant little bastard

What you're arguing is 100% of boxing is corrupt erics44, every decision is corrupt, every single title holder is corrupt.......but you still watch boxing and post on a boxing site because why? Riddle me that idiot

[erics44]

Like Ive said to you lots of times this is an utterly stoopid argument

Suppose it was up to the judges in the ottke fights? If they said ottke won it must have been legit

The ref let's Wladimir's clinching go, he doesn't punish Wlad, but he doesn't keep Wlad's opponent from holding, he doesn't keep Wlad's opponent from throwing punches, he doesn't keep Wlad's opponent from fighting back, etc. With Sven Ottke the ref punished Robin Reid for PUNCHING Ottke, that's keeping an opponent from fighting back, that's not a fair fight because 1 fighter has an advantage over the other because the rules of the ref are biased in favor of Ottke. The judges as well could be biased in favor of a certain fighter....though in Wladimir's case you'd be very hard pressed to find a fight where Wladimir landed fewer punches than his opponent, got hit more times than his opponent, etc...but I BEG you to find me a fight Wladimir CLEARLY lost just based on boxing, not on fouls you ASSUME were fouls, just 100% boxing. Punches thrown and landed, ring generalship, etc...find me a fight Wlad lost based on that otherwise stop fucking wasting my time you ignorant little bastard

What you're arguing is 100% of boxing is corrupt erics44, every decision is corrupt, every single title holder is corrupt.......but you still watch boxing and post on a boxing site because why? Riddle me that idiot

nope i am arguing wladimir klitchko would not have had and where near as fruitful reign if he would have been made to fight within the rules

i also feel that he is allowed to hold to the extreme amounts that he does because his fights bring in multiples of millions of pounds and make a lot of people very rich

i also gave you similar examples where money has driven the outcome of fights, sven ottke, burns beltram

[Beanflicker]

Clinching is a part of boxing. When was the last time you saw ANYONE get DQed or even have a point taken away for clinching? The only time that happens is when guys refuse to break when the ref asks them to break (something Wlad never does). It's become a legit technique in boxing, something a lot of the greatest of the great fighters (Ali, Bhop, Floyd, ect) have utilized to great success.

You still haven't addressed Ali: do you feel Ali's legacy would not be near what it is if he wasn't allowed to hold? Because he would tie guys up on the inside in much the same way Wlad does. Was he also the benefactor of corrupt officials who let him "cheat"? If you don't think so, that right there shows you are inconsistent with your views and therefore have no credibility in this matter.

[erics44]

Clinching is a part of boxing. When was the last time you saw ANYONE get DQed or even have a point taken away for clinching? The only time that happens is when guys refuse to break when the ref asks them to break (something Wlad never does). It's become a legit technique in boxing, something a lot of the greatest of the great fighters (Ali, Bhop, Floyd, ect) have utilized to great success.

You still haven't addressed Ali: do you feel Ali's legacy would not be near what it is if he wasn't allowed to hold? Because he would tie guys up on the inside in much the same way Wlad does. Was he also the benefactor of corrupt officials who let him "cheat"? If you don't think so, that right there shows you are inconsistent with your views and therefore have no credibility in this matter.

your persistence to try and undermine my credibility in the argument with accusations and consitently using words like hater shows you are quite heavily emotionaly involved in this discussion, you havent posted one post without an emotional outburst like that for some time, therefore you have no credibility when continuing this discussion