Does anybody think Valuev won?

[ross]

what would you have changed in Holyfields plan, or what do you feel Holyfield failed to do in his strategy?

He failed to work, he didnt get anyones attention with any eye catching work, or just......work, the best anyone could say about Holyfield is that he managed to move well on his legs for a 46 year old for the full 12 rounds but then he wasnt under any real pressure.

Valuev did more than Holyfield which gives him the win.

[killersheep]

what would you have changed in Holyfields plan, or what do you feel Holyfield failed to do in his strategy?

He failed to work, he didnt get anyones attention with any eye catching work, or just......work, the best anyone could say about Holyfield is that he managed to move well on his legs for a 46 year old for the full 12 rounds but then he wasnt under any real pressure.

Valuev did more than Holyfield which gives him the win.

This is where we disagree, Valuev didn't do anything.

[ross]

Should have gone to specsavers

If you watch the fight objectively and not nostalgicly for a 46 year old legend and actually noted just the punches im sure youd see it different, whether anyone would want to admit that is another matter

[killersheep]

Should have gone to specsavers

If you watch the fight objectively and not nostalgicly for a 46 year old legend and actually noted just the punches im sure youd see it different, whether anyone would want to admit that is another matter

Are you saying I didn't watch it objectively? I have clearly stated my case. You still have not made a convincing argument that Valuev won.
I noted only ONE exchange in that fight that Valuev got a shot in without getting countered.

Explain your views on the four criteria of judging a round as I did, that way we can have an apples to apples argument

[ICB]

Should have gone to specsavers

If you watch the fight objectively and not nostalgicly for a 46 year old legend and actually noted just the punches im sure youd see it different, whether anyone would want to admit that is another matter

Are you saying I didn't watch it objectively? I have clearly stated my case. You still have not made a convincing argument that Valuev won.
I noted only ONE exchange in that fight that Valuev got a shot in without getting countered.

Explain your views on the four criteria of judging a round as I did, that way we can have an apples to apples argument

Why do you even bother ? its well known Ross is the most biased Evander Holyfield hater on here, in every Evander Holyfield thread he mentions the steroids, even though there is no 100 percent proof, and its well known he is the biggest Mike Tyson nut hugger on here.

Now i don't think you have to a rocket scientist to work out, why he hates Evander Holyfield. I mean i maybe looking to far into this but it couldn't possibly, be because Evander Holyfield whooped his boys ass ?

[ross]

I haave watched the bout and Holyfield didnt land as much as Valuev did plane and simple.

I appreciate Holytfield was a very good fighter but he is a walking contradiction and drug cheat and at 46 has nothing to offer boxing as a competitor as this fight proved, he didnt try to fight, he tried his best to avoid one.

[killersheep]

I haave watched the bout and Holyfield didnt land as much as Valuev did plane and simple.

I appreciate Holytfield was a very good fighter but he is a walking contradiction and drug cheat and at 46 has nothing to offer boxing as a competitor as this fight proved, he didnt try to fight, he tried his best to avoid one.

I guarantee Holyfield landed more often than Valuev. The very thing you accuse Holyfield of doing Valuev is equally guilty of, he did very little to initiate the action at any point.

Do I understand correctly that the entire basis of your argument is that Valuev outlanded Holyfield?

[ross]

Well, that is how you win a boxing match, not be skipping sideways or throwing a couple of shots to arms for an entire match.