Tyson fury

[Greb147 6,810]

9 minutes ago, JDHUNTING said:

It doesn't the pinnacles always the pinnacle i.e the top of the sport

Of course it does, the pinnacle in one era could be an also-ran in another era. 

So you're trying do say that fighters get better with every era? 

No one in the business would say that the HW's of the 80's were better than the fighters of the 70's, the same for the 00's over the 90's.

Speaking of today and the supposed myth of bigger is always better, most of the HW's today are huge because they are fat and out of shape. 

Fighters that you would call fat 20 or more years ago would look like Mr Olympia compared to those of today. 

Edited September 5, 2020 by Greb147

[shaaark 11,378]

1 hour ago, JDHUNTING said:

Course it does but when your talking about two people at the very pinnacle of their sport then they both clearly have ability, one of them has a 6 inch height and 60lb weight advantage though.

Haye beat valuev, easily. Valuev was 9 inches taller than haye, and outweighed him by 99lb

[JDHUNTING 1,817]

Just now, shaaark said:

Haye beat valuev, easily. Valuev was 9 inches taller than haye, and outweighed him by 99lb

And if valuev was 6'2" he wouldn't have got a job boxing at the fairground, thanks for proving my point. Valuev had practically no boxing talent whatsoever yet was world champ due to size alone. Haye wouldn't fight fury though, because he knew he had enough talent to go with his size to beat him. klitchsko didn't have as much talent as haye but beat him handily though eh. 

[JDHUNTING 1,817]

Why aren't all the top welters to lhw's stepping up to heavyweight and claiming the greatest prize in sport then? They're all much much more skilled than every heavy out there? A big welter compared to a small heavy is the kind of size difference were talking about between Ali and fury

Edited September 5, 2020 by JDHUNTING

[Greb147 6,810]

6 minutes ago, JDHUNTING said:

Why aren't all the top welters to lhw's stepping up to heavyweight and claiming the greatest prize in sport then? They're all much much more skilled than every heavy out there? A big welter compared to a small heavy is the kind of size difference were talking about between Ali and fury

There's obviously a point where size is the only factor, I don't think that is the case in HW though as history as shown. 

You have examples of welters going up in weight and beating bigger men throughout the sports history. 

Humans have a point in where size becomes a hindrance instead of a benefit, where that cut off point is anyone's guess but if you're good enough you're big enough. 

Edited September 5, 2020 by Greb147

[shaaark 11,378]

Just now, JDHUNTING said:

And if valuev was 6'2" he wouldn't have got a job boxing at the fairground, thanks for proving my point. Valuev had practically no boxing talent whatsoever yet was world champ due to size alone. Haye wouldn't fight fury though, because he knew he had enough talent to go with his size to beat him. klitchsko didn't have as much talent as haye but beat him handily though eh. 

If you're going to pedantic, let's have things right. 

Fury's two 'biggest' wins.

1st one against klitshko, where klitshko hardly threw a punch, and fury ran around the ring. Yeah, really impressive.

2nd fight against wilder, who can't fight going backwards, or forwards, and has just relied on punch power to blast through, well, no-one really. Fury is the only half decent opponent he's actually fought, and only agreed to the 1st fight because he thought fury was washed up lol.

Yeah, what brilliant heavyweights at the pinnacle of their sport.

Fury and wilder have fought no-one really.

You fury fans crack me up lol

[JDHUNTING 1,817]

4 minutes ago, Greb147 said:

There's obviously a point where size is the only factor, I don't think that is the case in HW though as history as shown. 

You have examples of welters going up in weight and beating bigger men throughout the sports history. 

Humans have a point in where size becomes a hindrance instead of a benefit, where that cut off point is anyone's guess but if you're good enough you're big enough. 

There's not many really though is there? There's a f***ing boat load of instances of a lesser fighter beating the crap out of someone due to being bigger than them though

[JDHUNTING 1,817]

5 minutes ago, shaaark said:

If you're going to pedantic, let's have things right. 

Fury's two 'biggest' wins.

1st one against klitshko, where klitshko hardly threw a punch, and fury ran around the ring. Yeah, really impressive.

2nd fight against wilder, who can't fight going backwards, or forwards, and has just relied on punch power to blast through, well, no-one really. Fury is the only half decent opponent he's actually fought, and only agreed to the 1st fight because he thought fury was washed up lol.

Yeah, what brilliant heavyweights at the pinnacle of their sport.

Fury and wilder have fought no-one really.

You fury fans crack me up lol

I could start picking Ali's best wins apart aswell so what.

I'm not a fury fan

[shaaark 11,378]

2 minutes ago, JDHUNTING said:

I could start picking Ali's best wins apart aswell so what.

I'm not a fury fan

You could pick Ali's best wins apart? Be my guest, go on then. I'll wait for your reply

[Greb147 6,810]

8 minutes ago, JDHUNTING said:

There's not many really though is there? There's a f***ing boat load of instances of a lesser fighter beating the crap out of someone due to being bigger than them though

But you can't really distinguish the two. 

Take for example Holyfield/Bowe. 

Bowe defeated Holyfield in their first bout, yes he was 30lb heavier but his skills set and inside fighting was world class. 

Would you say that it was the size or skill of Bowe that defeated Holyfield? 

Now in their rematch Holyfield won on points and fought a different fight, picking his moments and not brawling as readily. 

In their rubber match Bowe stopped Holyfield after tasting the canvas for the first time himself in their trilogy. 

As you can see it's not just size you have to put in to the equation, there's that many permutations in boxing it's not black & white like that. 

Fury likely wouldn't be as successful as he is if he were a regular sized HW but he is what he is and that's part of his package. 

Edited September 5, 2020 by Greb147

[JDHUNTING 1,817]

Just now, shaaark said:

You could pick Ali's best wins apart? Be my guest, go on then. I'll wait for your reply

Foreman, ropes loosened everything in Ali's favour and foreman fought a stupid fight that's his best win. It proves nothing either way. 

Saying a modern world champ who is so much bigger than Ali would have literally zero chance is ridiculous if you don't agree then that don't bother me one bit, no one can win this argument so just chip your opinion in and crack on with life.

[JDHUNTING 1,817]

5 minutes ago, Greb147 said:

But you can't really distinguish the two. 

Take for example Holyfield/Bowe. 

Bowe defeated Holyfield in their first bout, yes he was 30lb heavier but his skills set and inside fighting was world class. 

Would you say that it was the size or skill of Bowe that defeated Holyfield? 

Now in their rematch Holyfield won on points and fought a different fight, picking his moments and not brawling as readily. 

In their rubber match Bowe stopped Holyfield after tasting the canvas for the first time himself in their trilogy. 

As you can see it's not just size you have to put in to the equation, there's that many permutations in boxing it's not black & white like that. 

Fury likely wouldn't be as successful as he is if he were a regular sized HW but he is what he is and that's part of his package. 

Er he took an industrial amount of steroids and came in a stone heavier there's a 2 inch height difference between the to also not 6 inches. If size don't matter why did Holyfield even bother with the roids at all. Your not doing well here give it up

[shaaark 11,378]

5 minutes ago, JDHUNTING said:

Foreman, ropes loosened everything in Ali's favour and foreman fought a stupid fight that's his best win. It proves nothing either way. 

Saying a modern world champ who is so much bigger than Ali would have literally zero chance is ridiculous if you don't agree then that don't bother me one bit, no one can win this argument so just chip your opinion in and crack on with life.

Foreman was Ali's best win?! Ok mate, you win lol

[Greb147 6,810]

7 minutes ago, JDHUNTING said:

Er he took an industrial amount of steroids and came in a stone heavier there's a 2 inch height difference between the to also not 6 inches. If size don't matter why did Holyfield even bother with the roids at all. Your not doing well here give it up

Are you ignorant enough to believe Holyfield was the only one on the gear in the 90's?

Ironic that you're calling Holyfield for his drug taking when in fact it's Fury who's tested positive for steroids. 

So Holyfield put on about a stone but so did Bowe, he still outweighed him by about 30lb.

Again my point still stands, the much smaller Holyfield beat a good fighter in Bowe. 

Edited September 5, 2020 by Greb147

[JDHUNTING 1,817]

5 minutes ago, Greb147 said:

Are you ignorant enough to believe Holyfield was the only one on the gear in the 90's?

So Holyfield put on about a stone but so did Bowe, he still outweighed him by about 30lb.

Again my point still stands, the much smaller Holyfield beat a good fighter in Bowe. 

Your point stands for f**k all, a more skilled smaller fighter lost to a less skilled bigger fighter so went on the gear to get BIGGER then won(just) hence proving as if we don't already know that size matters as much if not more than skill. 

Whose more skilled Lomachenko or Callum Smith? Who'd you put your dough on if they fought?