Controversial Fantasy Fight Picks

First topic message reminder :

Saw this elsewhere and seemed like a good idea.

Basically you pick someone who you think would be able to upset a superior boxer. The idea is you can justify it based on styles/precedents and you should try and be as controversial as possible.

Good idea if we stick to roughly similar eras I think.

I'll start. I think Forrest gives Mayweather nightmares with his reach, jab and power.

Kelly or Lockbridge. Take your pick. Spinks lands the jinx and its goodnight vienna.

azania wrote:Kelly or Lockbridge. Take your pick. Spinks lands the jinx and its goodnight vienna.

Which Rocky was Kelly or Lockbridge in? Was that Rocky 5?

To stop being deliberately awkward - there's an argument that Spinks uses movement and a decent jab to keep Rocky off him and take a points decision.

However - saying Spinks lands the big punch and that's it - is akin to predicting Haye to KO 03' Tua because he's got a good punch. Possible - but unlikely given the respective skills and abilities of the 2 contestants involved.

My bad. The controversial pick was Rocky M to beat Spinks.

True. Small swarming fighters struggled against Spinks. Like Tyson did.

RE: Manos and Azania
Mhm, I had Cus's testimony in mind as that's what makes it controversial. The thing with having two guys with such heavy hands is that any result is possible at any moment, despite how tough they are. It maybe shows how much higher I rate Dempsey's boxing ability and movement over Frazier's.

Dempsey also has more of a chance to win as the fight gets longer given Foreman's tendency to shoot his bolt, so to speak.

John Bloody Wayne wrote:RE: Manos and Azania
Mhm, I had Cus's testimony in mind as that's what makes it controversial. The thing with having two guys with such heavy hands is that any result is possible at any moment, despite how tough they are. It maybe shows how much higher I rate Dempsey's boxing ability and movement over Frazier's.

Dempsey also has more of a chance to win as the fight gets longer given Foreman's tendency to shoot his bolt, so to speak.

Ahem...

You make a reasonable point JBW. Back on the beeb - we had a Foreman-Marciano discussion. The received wisdom was always that Foreman does very well - Marciano is a come forward fighter with "no defence" who gets blasted out of there by the monstrous power of Foreman's hooks and straight punches.

However - (LRR I think) pointed out an alternative hypothesis - which pointed out that if Marciano could survive the first 5-7 rounds - and whether Foreman's storm - Foreman would wilt. LRR reckoned that Marciano had enough defence and chin to manage it - but not without some scares along the way.

I'm not sure - but I would say - if Dempsey is still there after 7 rounds - he'd go from underdog to a favourite in my book.

I can't see any Heavyweight beating Foreman by coming at him with a swarming style, actually I don't think anyone would make it past the half way stage with that kind of style. I do think Liston would beat him however.

Foreman KOs Dempsey and makes it look easier than it was agaisnt Frazier.

Tua KO Tyson LKO

oxring wrote:

John Bloody Wayne wrote:RE: Manos and Azania
Mhm, I had Cus's testimony in mind as that's what makes it controversial. The thing with having two guys with such heavy hands is that any result is possible at any moment, despite how tough they are. It maybe shows how much higher I rate Dempsey's boxing ability and movement over Frazier's.

Dempsey also has more of a chance to win as the fight gets longer given Foreman's tendency to shoot his bolt, so to speak.

Ahem...

You make a reasonable point JBW. Back on the beeb - we had a Foreman-Marciano discussion. The received wisdom was always that Foreman does very well - Marciano is a come forward fighter with "no defence" who gets blasted out of there by the monstrous power of Foreman's hooks and straight punches.

However - (LRR I think) pointed out an alternative hypothesis - which pointed out that if Marciano could survive the first 5-7 rounds - and whether Foreman's storm - Foreman would wilt. LRR reckoned that Marciano had enough defence and chin to manage it - but not without some scares along the way.

I'm not sure - but I would say - if Dempsey is still there after 7 rounds - he'd go from underdog to a favourite in my book.

My most sorriful sorries!

Did Foreman regularly gas out?

oxring wrote:True. Small swarming fighters struggled against Spinks. Like Tyson did.

Ha. The difference being that Tyson had skill.

John Bloody Wayne wrote:RE: Manos and Azania
Mhm, I had Cus's testimony in mind as that's what makes it controversial. The thing with having two guys with such heavy hands is that any result is possible at any moment, despite how tough they are. It maybe shows how much higher I rate Dempsey's boxing ability and movement over Frazier's.

Dempsey also has more of a chance to win as the fight gets longer given Foreman's tendency to shoot his bolt, so to speak.

Haito wrote:Yeah come on Dave your better than that, picking Richie to dispatch of Benn inside 2 isn't controversial. Its a certainty.

One-handed though?

ShahenshahG wrote:Did Foreman regularly gas out?

He said so - I remember him citing his earlier career being full of nervous tension when he fought - and his more relaxed fighting style when he came back meant he was better at going the distance.

I get the feeling its more of a psychological thing - that Zaire has remained in his concious as well as all of ours. Stifling humidity, loose ropes, foremans impatience and anger and Ali sitting back and taking it - not trying to stop him in his tracks - even managing to outpoint him in some rounds with cleaner work. Foreman punched himself out - no breaks between his barrage of punches because ali stood there to take it. From what I've seen - he didnt throw too much punches until he had his man hurt - mostly pushing people off when attacked and throwing uppercuts when threatened.

Also - can't really see him gassing out against swarmers - as they have to come to him to win.

ShahenshahG wrote:Also - can't really see him gassing out against swarmers - as they have to come to him to win.

Now that is a good point. However - if they can get inside, use leverage to push him back whilst throwing hooks to body and head - they have a chance. Although I'd be inclined to back your point, as mentioned above.

That's true - and I think George knew that - its why he pushed Frazier off when he got near and decked him when he got the chance

It makes sense for Foreman to beat Dempsey, but of all the fighters classed as "swarmers" I find Dempsey's skillset was the most diverse.

DAVE667 wrote:Marquez to beat Naz at either FW or SFW.

Marquez to climb off the canvas a couple of times a still put on a clinic against Hamed who struggles with Marquez's counterpunching

Would disagree with you there Dave.

In my opinion, the Hamed of 95 - 97 focused and trained on boxing rather than power punching all the time would beat MAB, JMM and Erik.

He'd also have a rollercoster with Manny.

Here's the caveat, or at least give them hell of a match up, as opposed to the Hamed in 2001 against MAB.

TumblingDice wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:Marquez to beat Naz at either FW or SFW.

Marquez to climb off the canvas a couple of times a still put on a clinic against Hamed who struggles with Marquez's counterpunching

Would disagree with you there Dave.

In my opinion, the Hamed of 95 - 97 focused and trained on boxing rather than power punching all the time would beat MAB, JMM and Erik.

He'd also have a rollercoster with Manny.

Here's the caveat, or at least give them hell of a match up, as opposed to the Hamed in 2001 against MAB.

That's why it's a controversial pick

No I think Barrera had Naz number and Marquez was probably the same...

All this focused garbage....Naz was a pot shoter who confounded fighters by giving them angles and fighting off-balance and off the wrong foot..

Sure he took Barrera lightly but his tactics were the same!!!

Barrera just coverd up well and countered him to death..just like Marquez would have done...

HAGLER VS CURRY 1986/87
----------------------------------

My fantasy fight which was close to being signed.....Think Curry beats an old Hagler.....becomes a superstar.....he should've been..

Agree with Truss and Dave regarding Marquez-Hamed. Had a similar discussion on here last week. Although marquez was abit more raw back when Hamed was a viable fight I still think his superior work rate and counter's would frustrate Hamed and see him take a decision. Hamed never worked for the full round. Hamed would as always have a punchers chance purely because of his power.

Haito wrote:Agree with Truss and Dave regarding Marquez-Hamed. Had a similar discussion on here last week. Although marquez was abit more raw back when Hamed was a viable fight I still think his superior work rate and counter's would frustrate Hamed and see him take a decision. Hamed never worked for the full round. Hamed would as always have a punchers chance purely because of his power.

Before Naz started relying on the bombs he was a very good boxer who had a high work rate. When he won the euro bantam title against bescastro or whatever his name was, he threw many punches.

Against Robbo his work rate was very high. He reminded me of a sawn off Camacho with more power. I reckon he would have beaten JMM.

He never worked for the full round though. Guys like Mccullouch showed that if Hamed didnt get it all his own way his output would drop and he was then prone to showing frustation and getting wild even in his early days. Hamed on top form was sensational, fantastic combinations. Speed, power but a frustrated Hamed would leave big opportunities and Marquez has always been a clever busy fighter and his counters would cause Hamed a lot of problems.

Hamed was a bully let's face it.....vile person who liked it when the cards were stacked up for him....

Certainly great fighter though..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Hamed was a bully let's face it

Nail well and truly struck on its head - although I notice you've been more critical of Hamed since you met him - he must have made one hell of an impression.

His mentality for me stops him from reaching elite level - he always could come unstuck with a Barrera like performance from a Barrera like fighter.

Here's a controversial fight pick.

Were Benitez to face off against Cotto at 140 - with Benitez being about 18 and already showing signs of cutting corners in training - whilst he'd be favourite - I'd put a sneaky bet on Cotto. Not necessarily because I'd expect Cotto to win - but he has all the tools - and you'd get a god reward for your money.

I think Hamed v Marquez would be interesting.

Much would depend on at what stage they fought. But stylewise Marquez is a pure counter puncher and Hameds tendancy to sit back at times, lowish output and willingness to throw singles would make it tricky for Marquez to find much to counter effectively. Hes much better with an opponent coming walking onto him aggressively and throwing a higher volume of punches because it gives him more opportunities to counter effectively and capitalise on mistakes. When Marquez has to initiate the action himself, hes only half the fighter I feel and has never looked all that good on the front foot.

Hameds tactics would be imortant because I think if he could stay on the outside and use his speed advantage just to potshot Marquez or try and pick Marquez off he could win. Even better if he could make Marquez chase the fight. But if he stands in front of him and tries to go toe to toe hes far to open I think and Marquez would enjoy that. So I think it would depend on the tactics Hamed employed. He never struck me as a particularly adaptive or clever fighter - unlike Marquez who has great ring intelligence and ability to spot weakness. So I dont know Hamed could both produce the right tactics and stick to them.

Also, it depends when the fight takes place. The earlier for Hamed the better. Peak v peak from what I have seen of both fighters I think Marquez gets it done and tactically outmanouvers Hamed but Hamed with right gameplan, or against an early version of Marquez would definately have a chance.

Haito wrote:He never worked for the full round though. Guys like Mccullouch showed that if Hamed didnt get it all his own way his output would drop and he was then prone to showing frustation and getting wild even in his early days. Hamed on top form was sensational, fantastic combinations. Speed, power but a frustrated Hamed would leave big opportunities and Marquez has always been a clever busy fighter and his counters would cause Hamed a lot of problems.

Hamed was starting to slide by the time of the McCullouch fight, he didn't have many top performances after that.

Agree with Azania that Hamed did used to work much harder and box much more.

Also agree with Truss, he is a horrid character.

manos de piedra wrote:I think Hamed v Marquez would be interesting.

Much would depend on at what stage they fought. But stylewise Marquez is a pure counter puncher and Hameds tendancy to sit back at times, lowish output and willingness to throw singles would make it tricky for Marquez to find much to counter effectively. Hes much better with an opponent coming walking onto him aggressively and throwing a higher volume of punches because it gives him more opportunities to counter effectively and capitalise on mistakes. When Marquez has to initiate the action himself, hes only half the fighter I feel and has never looked all that good on the front foot.

Hameds tactics would be imortant because I think if he could stay on the outside and use his speed advantage just to potshot Marquez or try and pick Marquez off he could win. Even better if he could make Marquez chase the fight. But if he stands in front of him and tries to go toe to toe hes far to open I think and Marquez would enjoy that. So I think it would depend on the tactics Hamed employed. He never struck me as a particularly adaptive or clever fighter - unlike Marquez who has great ring intelligence and ability to spot weakness. So I dont know Hamed could both produce the right tactics and stick to them.

Also, it depends when the fight takes place. The earlier for Hamed the better. Peak v peak from what I have seen of both fighters I think Marquez gets it done and tactically outmanouvers Hamed but Hamed with right gameplan, or against an early version of Marquez would definately have a chance.

I'd say that's an excellent analysis....

As this thread was called controversial, my only slight disagreement would be that a peak Hamed does employ better tactics than to just stand toe to toe.

My gut instinct is Hamed had a lot more to give and was a wasted (all his own fault) talent. I'd certainly never argue that JMM should be ranked far far higher for his career. Just a thought that a Hamed who realised his potential, could have picked up wins against the great Mexican trio.

i would have any of the three 3 mexicans to do naz, the biggest difference is the mindset, naz could get frustrated something i think all three could do to him and when things would start going against him the fight would turn to his oppenents advantage. say all you want about him not training but that shows weak mental strength in my book something that would be found out by each of jmm, mab and morrales

Marciano knocks Tyson out in the later rounds

DaveVDK wrote:Marciano knocks Tyson out in the later rounds

Not that controversial Dave. I entirely agree with it, ergo its received wisdom

AlexHuckerby wrote:Aaron Pryor beats Ray Leonard at 147.

Jesus christ this is a perfect thread for azania!!

Pryor is one of my favorite fighters, but i honestly cant see him pulling that one off.

oxring wrote:

DaveVDK wrote:Marciano knocks Tyson out in the later rounds

Not that controversial Dave. I entirely agree with it, ergo its received wisdom

Either someone is trying to wind me up this morning, you're having a wet dream or you're being a comedian. Later rounds? This fight wont go past the first round. It would be a two hit fight. Tyson hits Rocky and Rocky hits the deck. Easy night for Tyson in all seriousness.

Not as simple as that for me but a mid to late ko for Tyson

It is that simple. Tyson was at his best in the early rounds. Rocky was at his most vulnerable then. If Moore can put him down, the speed of tyson's punches coupled with its power will keep Rocky down. Very easy night's work for Rocky.

split personality mate?

azania wrote:It is that simple. Tyson was at his best in the early rounds. Rocky was at his most vulnerable then. If Moore can put him down, the speed of tyson's punches coupled with its power will keep Rocky down. Very easy night's work for Rocky.

"Very easy nights work"

And you wonder why you open yourself up to ridicule. Tyson didn't exactly have a granite chin, did he?

coxy0001 wrote:

azania wrote:It is that simple. Tyson was at his best in the early rounds. Rocky was at his most vulnerable then. If Moore can put him down, the speed of tyson's punches coupled with its power will keep Rocky down. Very easy night's work for Rocky.

"Very easy nights work"

And you wonder why you open yourself up to ridicule. Tyson didn't exactly have a granite chin, did he?

Absolute pick-em fight for me.

Both had concussive power and this would be a fight of who landed first.
Would give Tyson the edge in speed but on the flipside Tyso always struggled with guys who showed no fear in front of him.

If Holyfield had enough to outbully Tyson I can't see why Rocky couldn't do the same.

Would be a mouthwatering prospect whoever won.

On another note, why does it seem so quiet on here!!

coxy0001 wrote:

azania wrote:It is that simple. Tyson was at his best in the early rounds. Rocky was at his most vulnerable then. If Moore can put him down, the speed of tyson's punches coupled with its power will keep Rocky down. Very easy night's work for Rocky.

"Very easy nights work"

And you wonder why you open yourself up to ridicule. Tyson didn't exactly have a granite chin, did he?

Ha. And an old LHW could deck him. Tyson would absolutely slaughter rocky in a single round. It wouldn't even be fair. A slow moving, slow starting aganst a fast starting, powerful and fast punching Tyson would be a no contest.

As for granite chin or not, Tyson had a sturdy chin. The punches that stopped him would have flattened all HWs.

But carry on son.

Sir. badgerhands wrote:On another note, why does it seem so quiet on here!!

It's a welcome by-product of the recent Rabble-Eradication programme.

azania wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

azania wrote:It is that simple. Tyson was at his best in the early rounds. Rocky was at his most vulnerable then. If Moore can put him down, the speed of tyson's punches coupled with its power will keep Rocky down. Very easy night's work for Rocky.

"Very easy nights work"

And you wonder why you open yourself up to ridicule. Tyson didn't exactly have a granite chin, did he?

Ha. And an old LHW could deck him. Tyson would absolutely slaughter rocky in a single round. It wouldn't even be fair. A slow moving, slow starting aganst a fast starting, powerful and fast punching Tyson would be a no contest.

As for granite chin or not, Tyson had a sturdy chin. The punches that stopped him would have flattened all HWs.

But carry on son.

Would one of the biggest punchers there has been not have a chance of catching Tyson, though? You make out like there isn't even a margin of error in your theory...

Union Cane wrote:

Sir. badgerhands wrote:On another note, why does it seem so quiet on here!!

It's a welcome by-product of the recent Rabble-Eradication programme.

So some of our esteemed members are now taking part in a Siberian salt mine re-education program!!

I see your now a deputy sherriff as well Union

The punches that stopped him would have flattened all HWs.

Now Azania, i never said that Marciano would beat Tyson did i? The fact you think he gets blasted out inside a round is laughable and biased. It's a pick'em fight for me personally.

And as for the above quote, my my - can i ask what happened after Marciano got dropped? And i'm not re-writing history when i say that he jumped straight back up and handed out a beating, whereas you seem to twist facts to suit your arguement. Which is a joke to be honest.

It's one thing to be completely destroyed by a run of the mill heavy, it's another to be dropped (for what was what, a 3 count?) by one of the greatest LHWs who was on a 4 year win streak at heavyweight and then get up to hand out a beating. Isn't it?

See, i deal with facts. You twist those facts to suit your arguement. You then try to claim it would be easy for Tyson, yet when i say Buster Douglas was the first man to completely expose him you'll start blabbering on about excuse after excuse. That's why you're generally derided as a poster when it comes to commenting on anyone who fought pre 1960.

For me if Buster Douglas, one of the most mentally fragile heavies of all time, could stand up and break down Tyson i'd fancy Marciano to have an outstanding chance of coming back even if he was dropped early. And one thing he could do was seriously bang and had a heart that could break Tyson, as he was mentally knowhere near as strong.

And as for the quoted comment, i think Chuvalo (to name just one) would've stood up to those shots. Thus rendering your comment as another one of your sweeping, ignorant statements that should generally be ignored.

sodhat wrote:

azania wrote:

coxy0001 wrote:

azania wrote:It is that simple. Tyson was at his best in the early rounds. Rocky was at his most vulnerable then. If Moore can put him down, the speed of tyson's punches coupled with its power will keep Rocky down. Very easy night's work for Rocky.

"Very easy nights work"

And you wonder why you open yourself up to ridicule. Tyson didn't exactly have a granite chin, did he?

Ha. And an old LHW could deck him. Tyson would absolutely slaughter rocky in a single round. It wouldn't even be fair. A slow moving, slow starting aganst a fast starting, powerful and fast punching Tyson would be a no contest.

As for granite chin or not, Tyson had a sturdy chin. The punches that stopped him would have flattened all HWs.

But carry on son.

Would one of the biggest punchers there has been not have a chance of catching Tyson, though? You make out like there isn't even a margin of error in your theory...

He was too slow to even catch a cold. Even though Tyson would be there right in front of him, Tyson's upper body movement and very fast combinations would overwhelm Rocky. Tyson wouldn't be in any trouble. Plus I question Rocky's so called heavy hitting. The man was a big hitter for his weight. Tyson had taken big hits from bigger guys and still stood there.

It would be a pick em as much as Spinks/Tyson was a pick em.

Rocky wouldn't come out of the first round mate. Too slow and open for everything Tyson throws at him. Easy night's work for Iron Mike. Not even close.

The only prime HW in history Rocky could stand a chance again is Patterson. All else would cheww him up and spit him out before too long.

azania wrote:It would be a pick em as much as Spinks/Tyson was a pick em.

Rocky wouldn't come out of the first round mate. Too slow and open for everything Tyson throws at him. Easy night's work for Iron Mike. Not even close.

The only prime HW in history Rocky could stand a chance again is Patterson. All else would cheww him up and spit him out before too long.

Rocky wouldn't come out of the first round!!

We are taliking about Mike Tyson, the guy who was outbullied by Buster Douglas and Holyfield. Made to look quite ordinary against Bonecrusher Smith. The guy who was stopped by Lewis, Williams and McBride?

Just want to be sure that it's that Tyson we're talking about.

Granted the Williams and McBride fights were at a time when Tyson shouldn't have been fighting. But saying that Tyson would blow the Rock away in one round does him a disservice.

azania wrote:It would be a pick em as much as Spinks/Tyson was a pick em.

Rocky wouldn't come out of the first round mate. Too slow and open for everything Tyson throws at him. Easy night's work for Iron Mike. Not even close.

The only prime HW in history Rocky could stand a chance again is Patterson. All else would cheww him up and spit him out before too long.

Didn't Tyson get beaten up by a blown up cruiserweight by the way? Wasn't he stopped by one as well? Didn't he also lose to a guy that was a 40/1 underdog? How many 'prime' HOFs did he beat by the way?

Yeah, Marciano who had a chin would get dropped and stopped early doors. My god i've been forgetting the amount of times Marciano went in there and lost decisions, got stopped because he was such a poor fighter!

Give it a rest Az, you should be banned for commenting on such articles because you're biased - completely biased. You've been laughed at before for saying silly things like an average modern fighter beats pre 1960 ATGs and this time is no different.

Marciano had the resolve, heart and power to make Tyson think twice about charging in at him. Mike really liked it when people stood up to him, cough Douglas cough. It's a pick'em fight, which most others seem to allude to. I'm just going to discount your opinion on the matter and any others that crop up about pre 1960 as i don't particularly like wasting my time on posters who can't be objective, reasonable or extremely biased.

Many thanks Az

The only prime HW in history Rocky could stand a chance again is Patterson. All else would cheww him up and spit him out before too long.

I'm kind of with you on the idea that Tyson gets rid of Marciano quickly (inside 4 rounds at a guess) but that statement is ridiculous and rather hyperbolic - actually it's hyperbollicks.