Tyson Fury is classless!

[Primo Carnera]

When I saw the heading of this thread, I thought it was missing something. Like "oh yeah, and Rain is wet!!!!" Of course he's classless, no disrespect to him, but he's a pikey with probably no formal education. But say what you like, he is funny and he is very entertaining to watch. Yes he's crap, and yes he'd have no chance against Klitschko. But I have no doubt that he'll have no problem disposing of Chisora. He is not much different to all the so-called top British fighters, they all do far too much talking than do-ing. Froch, even Groves, Khan, Brook, Haye, Macklin, Chisora, Haye, Bellew, even Frampton and Quigg.

What a load of nonsense. The other "so called top British fighters" have far more dedication, respect, ability, gumption, common sense, courage and experience at a level Fury will never reach.

That may be so, but it doesn't stop them talking up the big fights and the BIG MONEY that they don't merit.
Khan - why should he fight Mayweather based on what he's done the last 2 years?
Froch - Banging on about all his "options" and clearly in denial about what ACTUALLY happened against Groves. And don't get me started about his Legacy nonsense!
Groves - he's caught the bug, trying to get a no contest.
Haye - how many times is he's he going to insult his fans?
Macklin - why should he get another shot at Sturm after his performance against GGG?
Do I need to go on? I could write a book about Bellew! Chisora is poor , Brook needs to actually fight for a title and Frampton and Quigg are good but they both admit they're not in Rigondeaux's class yet probably earn double because they talk a lot.

Yes please go on. For each listed you could name 20 american fighters guilty of the same thing. Macklin deserves a shot because most think he beat him in the 1st fight. So getting beat by possibly the best middleweight in the planet and actually being willing to fight him when noone else will you shouldnt get another shot on the back of that. Your logic is poor dude.

You are a highly insulting and condescending poster.

No more condescending then how Americans talk down about Euro fighters. I try call everything straight. I obviously have biased views sometimes and most of the time Ill admit to them. But saying a guy doesnt deserve a title shot after having a 50/50 fight with a world champ in Sturm, and pushing a future HOFr in Martinez to need KDs to win the fight and then getting stopped by one of the most avoided fighters in the planet is poor logic. He also just beat an unbeaten prospect

Sorry if the truth hurts, but that's the way it is. What I'm saying about Macklin is that he has had 3 shots at 3 different champions. Yes , he may have been a bit unlucky and yes he might have put up a good show in 2 of the fights, but he LOST! Who gets a 4th shot? If he keeps getting opportunities, what motivation is there for up and coming fighters and other top 10 ranked guys . If he is to get another shot, he should be fighting other contenders in eliminators. Beating a "prospect" , who in reality is a relative novice And not ranked in any governing body's top 10 is not good enough to justify yet another shot. Andy Lee, Murray, Geale, N'Dam N'Jikam, Lemieux , Nielsen, Stevens, Saunders, Fight any of those . I'm not saying he can't beat those guys, but prove it and EARN it.

[Silkeyjoe]

When I saw the heading of this thread, I thought it was missing something. Like "oh yeah, and Rain is wet!!!!" Of course he's classless, no disrespect to him, but he's a pikey with probably no formal education. But say what you like, he is funny and he is very entertaining to watch. Yes he's crap, and yes he'd have no chance against Klitschko. But I have no doubt that he'll have no problem disposing of Chisora. He is not much different to all the so-called top British fighters, they all do far too much talking than do-ing. Froch, even Groves, Khan, Brook, Haye, Macklin, Chisora, Haye, Bellew, even Frampton and Quigg.

What a load of nonsense. The other "so called top British fighters" have far more dedication, respect, ability, gumption, common sense, courage and experience at a level Fury will never reach.

That may be so, but it doesn't stop them talking up the big fights and the BIG MONEY that they don't merit.
Khan - why should he fight Mayweather based on what he's done the last 2 years?
Froch - Banging on about all his "options" and clearly in denial about what ACTUALLY happened against Groves. And don't get me started about his Legacy nonsense!
Groves - he's caught the bug, trying to get a no contest.
Haye - how many times is he's he going to insult his fans?
Macklin - why should he get another shot at Sturm after his performance against GGG?
Do I need to go on? I could write a book about Bellew! Chisora is poor , Brook needs to actually fight for a title and Frampton and Quigg are good but they both admit they're not in Rigondeaux's class yet probably earn double because they talk a lot.

Yes please go on. For each listed you could name 20 american fighters guilty of the same thing. Macklin deserves a shot because most think he beat him in the 1st fight. So getting beat by possibly the best middleweight in the planet and actually being willing to fight him when noone else will you shouldnt get another shot on the back of that. Your logic is poor dude.

You are a highly insulting and condescending poster.

No more condescending then how Americans talk down about Euro fighters. I try call everything straight. I obviously have biased views sometimes and most of the time Ill admit to them. But saying a guy doesnt deserve a title shot after having a 50/50 fight with a world champ in Sturm, and pushing a future HOFr in Martinez to need KDs to win the fight and then getting stopped by one of the most avoided fighters in the planet is poor logic. He also just beat an unbeaten prospect

Sorry if the truth hurts, but that's the way it is. What I'm saying about Macklin is that he has had 3 shots at 3 different champions. Yes , he may have been a bit unlucky and yes he might have put up a good show in 2 of the fights, but he LOST! Who gets a 4th shot? If he keeps getting opportunities, what motivation is there for up and coming fighters and other top 10 ranked guys . If he is to get another shot, he should be fighting other contenders in eliminators. Beating a "prospect" , who in reality is a relative novice And not ranked in any governing body's top 10 is not good enough to justify yet another shot. Andy Lee, Murray, Geale, N'Dam N'Jikam, Lemieux , Nielsen, Stevens, Saunders, Fight any of those . I'm not saying he can't beat those guys, but prove it and EARN it.

Andy Lee has called GGG and is likely to get a shot.
Martin Murray got 2 shots and failed twice, why should he be different then Mack? At least Mack would fight the most dangerous middleweight.
Geale just lost to Barker and turned down an offer to fight GGG
Since his loss Ndam has fought journey men in Fitzgerald and Ramallo, not exactly fights that have impressed.
Lemieux lost to a guy Mack beat in one round
Stevens lost to GGG and is calling out Quillin, likely to get a shot. Has also lost any time he has stepped up. No more deserving then Mack.
Saunders still fighting at domestic level. Hell get a shot when his promoter wants him too.
Pretty much as above for Nielson.

I get why you think he doesnt deserve a shot but in all fairness hes just as worthy as most of the others. After his losses he came back and beat decent opposition to earn another shot. If you lose you dont get put to the bottom again.

[Primo Carnera]

When I saw the heading of this thread, I thought it was missing something. Like "oh yeah, and Rain is wet!!!!" Of course he's classless, no disrespect to him, but he's a pikey with probably no formal education. But say what you like, he is funny and he is very entertaining to watch. Yes he's crap, and yes he'd have no chance against Klitschko. But I have no doubt that he'll have no problem disposing of Chisora. He is not much different to all the so-called top British fighters, they all do far too much talking than do-ing. Froch, even Groves, Khan, Brook, Haye, Macklin, Chisora, Haye, Bellew, even Frampton and Quigg.

What a load of nonsense. The other "so called top British fighters" have far more dedication, respect, ability, gumption, common sense, courage and experience at a level Fury will never reach.

That may be so, but it doesn't stop them talking up the big fights and the BIG MONEY that they don't merit.
Khan - why should he fight Mayweather based on what he's done the last 2 years?
Froch - Banging on about all his "options" and clearly in denial about what ACTUALLY happened against Groves. And don't get me started about his Legacy nonsense!
Groves - he's caught the bug, trying to get a no contest.
Haye - how many times is he's he going to insult his fans?
Macklin - why should he get another shot at Sturm after his performance against GGG?
Do I need to go on? I could write a book about Bellew! Chisora is poor , Brook needs to actually fight for a title and Frampton and Quigg are good but they both admit they're not in Rigondeaux's class yet probably earn double because they talk a lot.

Yes please go on. For each listed you could name 20 american fighters guilty of the same thing. Macklin deserves a shot because most think he beat him in the 1st fight. So getting beat by possibly the best middleweight in the planet and actually being willing to fight him when noone else will you shouldnt get another shot on the back of that. Your logic is poor dude.

You are a highly insulting and condescending poster.

No more condescending then how Americans talk down about Euro fighters. I try call everything straight. I obviously have biased views sometimes and most of the time Ill admit to them. But saying a guy doesnt deserve a title shot after having a 50/50 fight with a world champ in Sturm, and pushing a future HOFr in Martinez to need KDs to win the fight and then getting stopped by one of the most avoided fighters in the planet is poor logic. He also just beat an unbeaten prospect

Sorry if the truth hurts, but that's the way it is. What I'm saying about Macklin is that he has had 3 shots at 3 different champions. Yes , he may have been a bit unlucky and yes he might have put up a good show in 2 of the fights, but he LOST! Who gets a 4th shot? If he keeps getting opportunities, what motivation is there for up and coming fighters and other top 10 ranked guys . If he is to get another shot, he should be fighting other contenders in eliminators. Beating a "prospect" , who in reality is a relative novice And not ranked in any governing body's top 10 is not good enough to justify yet another shot. Andy Lee, Murray, Geale, N'Dam N'Jikam, Lemieux , Nielsen, Stevens, Saunders, Fight any of those . I'm not saying he can't beat those guys, but prove it and EARN it.

Andy Lee has called GGG and is likely to get a shot.
Martin Murray got 2 shots and failed twice, why should he be different then Mack? At least Mack would fight the most dangerous middleweight.
Geale just lost to Barker and turned down an offer to fight GGG
Since his loss Ndam has fought journey men in Fitzgerald and Ramallo, not exactly fights that have impressed.
Lemieux lost to a guy Mack beat in one round
Stevens lost to GGG and is calling out Quillin, likely to get a shot. Has also lost any time he has stepped up. No more deserving then Mack.
Saunders still fighting at domestic level. Hell get a shot when his promoter wants him too.
Pretty much as above for Nielson.

I get why you think he doesnt deserve a shot but in all fairness hes just as worthy as most of the others. After his losses he came back and beat decent opposition to earn another shot. If you lose you dont get put to the bottom again.

That proves my point. I'm not saying just Macklin, obviously others are in the same boat, exactly why they should fight each other first to get another shot if they've lost a title fight already. I don't think that is going to the bottom of the pile.