|
||||||||
Boxing |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#1326 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 17,848
|
Quote:
Plenty of great fighters have been sparkoed, the obsession with undefeated records and/or "never been stopped" is a very modern thing, really.
The thing I worry about with Groves is that he *always* ends up making mistakes. He's got very good one punch power, has a great jab and is an excellent finisher, but at every stage of his career he's shown that he easily gets ragged. |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#1327 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 11,140
|
Great KO. Not sure where Groves goes from here, probably vs Degale. Froch will be going back to look at that payday vs Chavez jnr or Golovkin in Vegas.
Martinez vs Cotto next week
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1328 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,662
|
Quote:
Was one of those fights where almost all the rounds could have been scored either way without much complaint.
It would have been rediculous to give either man the first round. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1329 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 3,662
|
Quote:
Sparkoed = Herol Bomber Graham, par excellence
Didn't you see it? |
|
|
|
|
|
#1330 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 9,539
|
Doesn't froch have to fight DeGale since he's mandatory challenger and do you think DeGale can beat him?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1331 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 19,941
|
Tremendous KO by Froch.
I really hope Froch goes out on a high & calls it day. I'm certain that he appeared to be slurring his words after the fight, if ever so slightly & that could be indicative of all the hard fights he's had in the last 5 years. He is never going to beat Andre Ward & he has nothing left to prove to anybody; what better to bow out? |
|
|
|
|
|
#1332 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 3,803
|
Quote:
Doesn't froch have to fight DeGale since he's mandatory challenger and do you think DeGale can beat him?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1333 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2004
Posts: 9,907
|
DeGale is an awkward nights work and doesn't sell nearly as well as the Groves fight. I think Froch would probably win, but it'd be close and ugly. If he does drop it, looking at the IBF rankings the next highest rated after DeGale and Gonzalez is this fella http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hum...9555&cat=boxer, who DeGale would gladly fight for a world title.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1334 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Manchester
Posts: 11,140
|
Schaefer has left GBP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1335 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The Sixth Circle of Hell
Posts: 20,172
|
[quote=Flat Matt;72923314] Quote:
Don't be silly. The prime Tyson flattened everyone they put in front of him when he was no more than a kid. Champion of the world at 20-years-old. The prime Tyson could do 1 round or 12 rounds no problem because the guy lived in the gym and lived the life. The prime Tyson destroyed Larry Holmes in 4 rounds and is the only person to have knocked him out. Holmes fought on for years after that fight and took very good fighters the full distance, including Holyfield. A very old Holmes also best Mercer who gave Lennox Lewis absolute hell. Unbeaten conqueror of Holmes, Michael Spinks, lasted 90 seconds with him. His peak was short lived because he was and still is a head case who completely lost the plot. If you cast your mind back, people predicted his demise even when he was undefeated and undisputed champion because it was always going to happen. By the time he fought Douglas he was already a busted flush. Totally unprepared and he was a mess emotionally. He was never the same again. Went to prison and came out a shadow of his former self and was pretty much finished by the time he fought Holyfield. He was absolutely shot and fat by the time he fought Lewis and Williams and only fought for money. Holding those defeats against Tyson is like holding Ali's loss to Trevor Berbick against him. You know as well as I do that both Lewis and Williams wouldn't have lived with young Tyson. If Rahman and McCall can blow Lewis away with one punch, prime Tyson sure as hell would have done. There are some who think Tyson is the greatest of all time. I don't. He was a frontrunner who lost to the first bloke (Douglas) who stood up to him. Ali would have made him look foolish. Prime Holmes at his very best outpoints him. Stewards version of Lewis would beat him every time. He could never defeat Holyfield and prime Foreman (73-4) would have removed his head clean from his shoulders. Frazier (71) and Liston (58) are toss ups. He belongs in the top ten but his prime was far too short and he never defeated another great heavyweight. Oh and he was a rapist, a brutal thug and a bully. Biting part of Holyfield's ear off because he knew he could not win the rematch was the most disgusting thing I have ever seen in a boxing ring. Mugging old women in his youth, attacking people in public and being a 'gangsta' do not impress me either. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1336 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,704
|
[quote=Keyser_Soze1;73000919] Quote:
I have to disagree with this. There are some who think Tyson is the greatest of all time. I don't. He was a frontrunner who lost to the first bloke (Douglas) who stood up to him. Ali would have made him look foolish. Prime Holmes at his very best outpoints him. Stewards version of Lewis would beat him every time. He could never defeat Holyfield and prime Foreman (73-4) would have removed his head clean from his shoulders. Frazier (71) and Liston (58) are toss ups. He belongs in the top ten but his prime was far too short and he never defeated another great heavyweight. Oh and he was a rapist, a brutal thug and a bully. Biting part of Holyfield's ear off because he knew he could not win the rematch was the most disgusting thing I have ever seen in a boxing ring. Mugging old women in his youth, attacking people in public and being a 'gangsta' do not impress me either. He has always had people aroun him who were no good for him, but he didn't know any better. Imagine how good he would have been if he was focused on his in ring activities rather than women. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1337 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The Sixth Circle of Hell
Posts: 20,172
|
[quote=Super Dog Man;73002076] Quote:
Read Tysons book. He has always had people aroun him who were no good for him, but he didn't know any better. Imagine how good he would have been if he was focused on his in ring activities rather than women. ![]() If he concentrated on his career with the intensity of say a Joe frazier he could have been a legend. But excuses do not matter in boxing which is why true greats like Hearns never whined about their bad luck. Tommy came in dehydrated and overtrained for the first Leonard fight and broke his right hand with that uppercut he hurt Hagler with in the opening seconds of round 1. How do we know this? Not from Hearns who wanted no excuses, it was only many years later Steward revealed these facts. Imagine the Hagler fight with Hearns with a fully functioning right hand. ![]() The crowd would all have have died of heart failure before the fight ended! ![]() ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1338 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,704
|
[quote=Keyser_Soze1;73009089] Quote:
I am not going to contribute towards his bank balance. ![]() If he concentrated on his career with the intensity of say a Joe frazier he could have been a legend. But excuses do not matter in boxing which is why true greats like Hearns never whined about their bad luck. Tommy came in dehydrated and overtrained for the first Leonard fight and broke his right hand with that uppercut he hurt Hagler with in the opening seconds of round 1. How do we know this? Not from Hearns who wanted no excuses, it was only many years later Steward revealed these facts. Imagine the Hagler fight with Hearns with a fully functioning right hand. ![]() The crowd would all have have died of heart failure before the fight ended! ![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#1339 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The Sixth Circle of Hell
Posts: 20,172
|
[quote=Super Dog Man;73009480] Quote:
Support your local services then and get it from the library. The Klitschko brothers are worth a thousand of him whatever you think of them as fighters (and they are vastly underrated in my opinion). However as we will have to agree to disagree on Tyson what do you think of the Fabulous Four of the '80's? Hearns was my favourite.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1340 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 1,266
|
Froch gets brutally stopped by Golovkin
|
|
|
|
|
#1341 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 7,975
|
Froch did better than in the last fight , had Groves boxed in (in the small ring) .
Fairly even I thought until the knockdown and the ref was 100% right to stop that one but not to stop the last fight where Groves was ahead (on my count). |
|
|
|
|
|
#1342 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 1,771
|
[quote=Keyser_Soze1;73016229] Quote:
No, the man and his excuses just does not interest me at all. The Klitschko brothers are worth a thousand of him whatever you think of them as fighters (and they are vastly underrated in my opinion). However as we will have to agree to disagree on Tyson what do you think of the Fabulous Four of the '80's? Hearns was my favourite. ![]() They can only beat what is put in front of them and they've certainly been doing just that. Marvellous Marvin Hagler, what an absolute machine. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1343 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Manchester, England
Posts: 19,941
|
[quote=Keyser_Soze1;73009089] Quote:
I am not going to contribute towards his bank balance. ![]() If he concentrated on his career with the intensity of say a Joe frazier he could have been a legend. But excuses do not matter in boxing which is why true greats like Hearns never whined about their bad luck. Tommy came in dehydrated and overtrained for the first Leonard fight and broke his right hand with that uppercut he hurt Hagler with in the opening seconds of round 1. How do we know this? Not from Hearns who wanted no excuses, it was only many years later Steward revealed these facts. Imagine the Hagler fight with Hearns with a fully functioning right hand. ![]() The crowd would all have have died of heart failure before the fight ended! ![]() ![]() ![]() Hearns broke his hand trying to down the Marvellous one & barely budged him. Hagler had one of the finest chins in boxing history.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1344 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 4,704
|
[quote=Keyser_Soze1;73016229] Quote:
No, the man and his excuses just does not interest me at all. The Klitschko brothers are worth a thousand of him whatever you think of them as fighters (and they are vastly underrated in my opinion). However as we will have to agree to disagree on Tyson what do you think of the Fabulous Four of the '80's? Hearns was my favourite. ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#1345 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The Sixth Circle of Hell
Posts: 20,172
|
[quote=Super Dog Man;73024622] Quote:
Too young to remember them, but from what I have seen and read, Hagler. But only just. Hopkins v Hagler would have been interesting. ![]() And his whining at losing to Leonard got old decades ago. ![]() The others especially Ray and Tommy are good friends, Hagler should let the past go. Duran as a lightweight was incredible. If you are not called 'Sugar Ray' (Robinson or Leonard - although I think Tommy could perhaps have won the rematch) you are not beating Hearns at welterweight and he was the best light middleweight in history. Ray was astonishing as well. Mayweather should thank God he did not fight in their era.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1346 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 5
|
Even if Mayweather did box in their era he'd find an excuse not to fight them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1347 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The Sixth Circle of Hell
Posts: 20,172
|
Quote:
Even if Mayweather did box in their era he'd find an excuse not to fight them.
Can you imagine him wanting to fight the Hearns who had just destroyed Cuevas?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1348 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 6,436
|
[quote=Keyser_Soze1;73000919] Quote:
I have to disagree with this. There are some who think Tyson is the greatest of all time. I don't. He was a frontrunner who lost to the first bloke (Douglas) who stood up to him. Ali would have made him look foolish. Prime Holmes at his very best outpoints him. Stewards version of Lewis would beat him every time. He could never defeat Holyfield and prime Foreman (73-4) would have removed his head clean from his shoulders. Frazier (71) and Liston (58) are toss ups. He belongs in the top ten but his prime was far too short and he never defeated another great heavyweight. Oh and he was a rapist, a brutal thug and a bully. Biting part of Holyfield's ear off because he knew he could not win the rematch was the most disgusting thing I have ever seen in a boxing ring. Mugging old women in his youth, attacking people in public and being a 'gangsta' do not impress me either. His achievements and performances during his, admittedly short, prime speak for themselves. We're not talking about Tyson's character; we're talking about his boxing ability. He'd have had far too much for almost every great heavyweight with the possible exception of Holyfield and Ali. Frazier, Holmes and the like wouldn't have lasted long with him and Wlad would be lucky to get through a couple of rounds. Vitali would probably lose a very one sided decision. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1349 |
|
Inactive Member
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Portsmouth
Posts: 6,436
|
[quote=mcg3;73019101] Quote:
Agree that the Klitschko's are vastly underrated. They can only beat what is put in front of them and they've certainly been doing just that. Marvellous Marvin Hagler, what an absolute machine. |
|
|
|
|
|
#1350 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: The Sixth Circle of Hell
Posts: 20,172
|
[quote=Flat Matt;73034516] Quote:
The fact that you [I]hate[/i] Mike Tyson (as demonstrated by your posts here and in General Discussion) means that you can't be even begin to offer an objective assessment of his achievements or skills. His achievements and performances during his, admittedly short, prime speak for themselves. We're not talking about Tyson's character; we're talking about his boxing ability. He'd have had far too much for almost every great heavyweight with the possible exception of Holyfield and Ali. Frazier, Holmes and the like wouldn't have lasted long with him and Wlad would be lucky to get through a couple of rounds. Vitali would probably lose a very one sided decision. No I don't - I just have no interest in the thug's legion of excuses. Just because I do not think he was the best thing since sliced bread does not mean I am not objective about his boxing career. I think you vastly overstate his greatness as the second statement proves. He had his chance to land a spot in the all time top five - he did not take it. To say only Holyfield and Ali could beat him is just not tenable in my opinion. I think he is overrated, that is my view you have yours. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:55.







