The Klitschko Brothers.

First topic message reminder :

Would they get more respect if they were Americans? They've been described as boring and robotic who dont bring any drama into the HW division. Would the press reaction be the same if they hailed from across the pond? Imo they would be lauded as ATGs if they were American.

Thoughts?

Americans do not want to know about foreigners, especially Russians, beating the best US fighters. If it happened in the 60/70's US media coverage would decrease rapidly and before you know it the era would be labelled the worst ever.

So I'm imagining the terribly shallow level of contenders?

If The Klitschko Brothers.....
were renamed as the Kennedy Brothers...
and were brought up in America.. two white guys ruling the world at a sport
they would be Uber Super doober stars.. they would the most famous people on the planet... and how ironic it would be when the president of today asked them to dinner....
You do know what i mean A black president ill at ease with a white heavyweight champion of the world...

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Americans do not want to know about foreigners, especially Russians, beating the best US fighters. If it happened in the 60/70's US media coverage would decrease rapidly and before you know it the era would be labelled the worst ever.

The Klitschkos aren't Russian.

John Bloody Wayne wrote:Not if they had the same fights. Great fights are great fights no matter where you're from.

I tend to agree with this way of thinking. American as a nation has a bit of history with both Mexico and Cuba, but that doesn't stop their boxers being appreciated in the States.

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:Americans do not want to know about foreigners, especially Russians, beating the best US fighters. If it happened in the 60/70's US media coverage would decrease rapidly and before you know it the era would be labelled the worst ever.

The Klitschkos aren't Russian.

Ok then, the former USSR, for whatever difference it makes.

Joshsmith wrote:If The Klitschko Brothers.....
were renamed as the Kennedy Brothers...
and were brought up in America.. two white guys ruling the world at a sport
they would be Uber Super doober stars.. they would the most famous people on the planet... and how ironic it would be when the president of today asked them to dinner....
You do know what i mean A black president ill at ease with a white heavyweight champion of the world...

Exactly. They'd be the most famous sports men on the planet. Imagine two great white hopes that turn out to actually be the real deal.

If they were American we would be buying cornflakes with their images on the boxes. As a matter of fact they would be everywhere. Sky would show all their fights on box office. It would be a circus act.

azania wrote:If they were American we would be buying cornflakes with their images on the boxes. As a matter of fact they would be everywhere. Sky would show all their fights on box office. It would be a circus act.

Not really, the americans go for excitement which is why Holmes was never a huge name along with all the american heavyweights of the 80's, if they were american it would make very little difference

Think I agree with Atom here, as when Lewis was the champ, all his fights were on PPV and sold pretty well. The lack of competition, boring styles and perhaps maybe a small factor that they are ukranian, which some old folks might still consider them the enemy.

Having a large KO percentage doesn't make some one exciting. Jabbing and crossing some one repeatedly aint so hot.

OK then answer this.

Why did Holmes earn more against Cooney than in probably all his other title defences combined?

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:OK then answer this.

Why did Holmes earn more against Cooney than in probably all his other title defences combined?

Good publicity & marketing, Don King at the helm, lots of unsavoury racial tension...

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:OK then answer this.

Why did Holmes earn more against Cooney than in probably all his other title defences combined?

Good publicity & marketing, Don King at the helm, lots of unsavoury racial tension...

What was so special about this fight that it got good publicity?

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:OK then answer this.

Why did Holmes earn more against Cooney than in probably all his other title defences combined?

Good publicity & marketing, Don King at the helm, lots of unsavoury racial tension...

What was so special about this fight that it got good publicity?

Nothing. That's why it had good marketing and good publicity. I don't know much about it, but I've read that there was lots of racial tension surrounding it. That alone garners a LOT of media attention.

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:OK then answer this.

Why did Holmes earn more against Cooney than in probably all his other title defences combined?

Good publicity & marketing, Don King at the helm, lots of unsavoury racial tension...

What was so special about this fight that it got good publicity?

Nothing. That's why it had good marketing and good publicity. I don't know much about it, but I've read that there was lots of racial tension surrounding it. That alone garners a LOT of media attention.

Cooney was seen as the great new white hope, that is the sole reason that fight sold well and gained such publicity

As Atom said, the Holmes/Cooney fight was on racial terms because Cooney was seen as the great white hope. Now if the K bros were American their skin colour would play a much larger role and as such they would be the most popular athletes in the world and on every cereal box available. Unfortunately that is the reality we live in.

That they are Ukrainian and I believe genuinely nice guys, they remain anonymous in USA and outside of Germany and Ukraine.

I can't get over the irony of the American Great White Hope called Cooney............

Michaels, Sean wrote:I can't get over the irony of the American Great White Hope called Cooney............

Bravo Sir.

Michaels, Sean wrote:I can't get over the irony of the American Great White Hope called Cooney............

Again, I don't normally do these, but :

The Mighty Atom wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:OK then answer this.

Why did Holmes earn more against Cooney than in probably all his other title defences combined?

Good publicity & marketing, Don King at the helm, lots of unsavoury racial tension...

What was so special about this fight that it got good publicity?

Nothing. That's why it had good marketing and good publicity. I don't know much about it, but I've read that there was lots of racial tension surrounding it. That alone garners a LOT of media attention.

Cooney was seen as the great new white hope, that is the sole reason that fight sold well and gained such publicity

Exactly.

And surely if the Klits were American they'd be viewed in the same light. And after proving they were more than just 'hopes' their popularity would sky rocket.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:OK then answer this.

Why did Holmes earn more against Cooney than in probably all his other title defences combined?

Good publicity & marketing, Don King at the helm, lots of unsavoury racial tension...

What was so special about this fight that it got good publicity?

Nothing. That's why it had good marketing and good publicity. I don't know much about it, but I've read that there was lots of racial tension surrounding it. That alone garners a LOT of media attention.

Cooney was seen as the great new white hope, that is the sole reason that fight sold well and gained such publicity

Exactly.

And surely if the Klits were American they'd be viewed in the same light. And after proving they were more than just 'hopes' their popularity would sky rocket.

I pretty much agree, but I can't help feeling that part of the problem is that there are two of them and that, being brothers, there is no hope that they can ever meet in the ring.

HumanWindmill wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:OK then answer this.

Why did Holmes earn more against Cooney than in probably all his other title defences combined?

Good publicity & marketing, Don King at the helm, lots of unsavoury racial tension...

What was so special about this fight that it got good publicity?

Nothing. That's why it had good marketing and good publicity. I don't know much about it, but I've read that there was lots of racial tension surrounding it. That alone garners a LOT of media attention.

Cooney was seen as the great new white hope, that is the sole reason that fight sold well and gained such publicity

Exactly.

And surely if the Klits were American they'd be viewed in the same light. And after proving they were more than just 'hopes' their popularity would sky rocket.

I pretty much agree, but I can't help feeling that part of the problem is that there are two of them and that, being brothers, there is no hope that they can ever meet in the ring.

That would be a massive marketing ploy. The stuff of Holywood. A half decent PR guy would make them even bigger because they are brothers.

azania wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

The Mighty Atom wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:OK then answer this.

Why did Holmes earn more against Cooney than in probably all his other title defences combined?

Good publicity & marketing, Don King at the helm, lots of unsavoury racial tension...

What was so special about this fight that it got good publicity?

Nothing. That's why it had good marketing and good publicity. I don't know much about it, but I've read that there was lots of racial tension surrounding it. That alone garners a LOT of media attention.

Cooney was seen as the great new white hope, that is the sole reason that fight sold well and gained such publicity

Exactly.

And surely if the Klits were American they'd be viewed in the same light. And after proving they were more than just 'hopes' their popularity would sky rocket.

I pretty much agree, but I can't help feeling that part of the problem is that there are two of them and that, being brothers, there is no hope that they can ever meet in the ring.

That would be a massive marketing ploy. The stuff of Holywood. A half decent PR guy would make them even bigger because they are brothers.

To the casual fan, maybe, but hardcore fans would much rather see a single dominant fighter, in my opinion. If somebody could persuade them to face off it would be absolutely massive, and I'd bet that even the Americans would sit up and take notice.

Boxers hope to appeal to the casual fan and not the hardcore fan. Casual fans means more $$$ and that they are brothers (if american) would be the stuff of Holywood. You really couldn't get any better. Two white articulate brothers being the best fighters in the world? My goodness. They would be off the scale. Boxing income would be small fry in comparison to the endorsements they would generate.

azania wrote:Boxers hope to appeal to the casual fan and not the hardcore fan. Casual fans means more $$$ and that they are brothers (if american) would be the stuff of Holywood. You really couldn't get any better. Two white articulate brothers being the best fighters in the world? My goodness. They would be off the scale. Boxing income would be small fry in comparison to the endorsements they would generate.

Yes, but that's my point. They AREN'T American, so that's a strike against them and, in my opinion, it's a second strike against them that there are two of them.

HumanWindmill wrote:

azania wrote:Boxers hope to appeal to the casual fan and not the hardcore fan. Casual fans means more $$$ and that they are brothers (if american) would be the stuff of Holywood. You really couldn't get any better. Two white articulate brothers being the best fighters in the world? My goodness. They would be off the scale. Boxing income would be small fry in comparison to the endorsements they would generate.

Yes, but that's my point. They AREN'T American, so that's a strike against them and, in my opinion, it's a second strike against them that there are two of them.

Well quite. But the OP is IF they were Americans.

The Mighty Atom wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:OK then answer this.

Why did Holmes earn more against Cooney than in probably all his other title defences combined?

Good publicity & marketing, Don King at the helm, lots of unsavoury racial tension...

What was so special about this fight that it got good publicity?

Nothing. That's why it had good marketing and good publicity. I don't know much about it, but I've read that there was lots of racial tension surrounding it. That alone garners a LOT of media attention.

Cooney was seen as the great new white hope, that is the sole reason that fight sold well and gained such publicity

That wasn't the sole reason. Cooney was indeed viewed as the great white hope, his promotors were shrewd enough to negotiate a 50/50 split despite Holmes being the long established champ. Holes in turn was quite bitter about this, partly because he'd never got the recognition his excellent career warranted and partly because he knew that if cooney was black he wouldn't be getting near a 50/50 split. Holmes talked an uncharacteristically large amount of smack during the build up and Don King manipulated the situtation into a race war - it was literally a sense of black vs white. I don't think the fight sold well solely because of cooney being seen as the great white hope but more because of the racial tension created in the build up in a country that has some of the greatest racial inequities and racially fragmented cities in the world.

azania wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:

azania wrote:Boxers hope to appeal to the casual fan and not the hardcore fan. Casual fans means more $$$ and that they are brothers (if american) would be the stuff of Holywood. You really couldn't get any better. Two white articulate brothers being the best fighters in the world? My goodness. They would be off the scale. Boxing income would be small fry in comparison to the endorsements they would generate.

Yes, but that's my point. They AREN'T American, so that's a strike against them and, in my opinion, it's a second strike against them that there are two of them.

Well quite. But the OP is IF they were Americans.

Well I already agreed with that two or three posts ago, but you picked up and developed my point about there being two of them.

With regard to the k bros I think if they were American and just as dominant then it stands to reason they would get more recognition in America, and given the way American publications have rated guys like berto and ward I should think they would be more highly rated there too. But that doesn't mean to say they would be hugely popular. Holmes was a dominant American HW champ when boxing was still a mainstream sport and never really caught the publics imagination. If the klitschkos weren't beating decent competition, and worse if they weren't doing it in exciting fashion the US public wouldn't take them to heart the same way they did with Tyson et al regardless of them being White. Exciting black fighters have been taken to heart time and again by the US public, generally when it comes to sport loyalty is more to entertainment and excitement than anything else.

Sugar Boy Sweetie wrote:With regard to the k bros I think if they were American and just as dominant then it stands to reason they would get more recognition in America, and given the way American publications have rated guys like berto and ward I should think they would be more highly rated there too. But that doesn't mean to say they would be hugely popular. Holmes was a dominant American HW champ when boxing was still a mainstream sport and never really caught the publics imagination. If the klitschkos weren't beating decent competition, and worse if they weren't doing it in exciting fashion the US public wouldn't take them to heart the same way they did with Tyson et al regardless of them being White. Exciting black fighters have been taken to heart time and again by the US public, generally when it comes to sport loyalty is more to entertainment and excitement than anything else.

The difference is that the K Bros would be white Americans. Being as dominant as they are now, that is a recipe for mega-bucks. Yes Tyson, Holy, Lewis et al made huge sums and drew massive PPV. If the Ks were American they would easily generate 2m PPV buys and if they had semi decent opponents or a rivalry, then that 2m figure would be dwarfed. Mayweather had to do do dancing with stars to become mainstream. The K bros would be everywhere.

If they were white americans they might be more famous but not by much. Holmes was more talented, more exciting and fought better competition and he was largely ignored.

Being white could only help them so much, especially in a diverse place like America where most white guys are watching MMA anyway.

Azania - if they were American they may well do 2m ppv's but that would be by virtue of the fact they are American, not because they are white. Mayweather and mosley did 2m plus, pacquiao sells 1.5m pp.'s and he's a Filipino, which shows the alliegence to entertainment value over patriotism. As has already been said, black fighters have been highly popular regardless of race and due to the entertainment factor which is peoples primary concern when buying sports events. Also, with the way boxing has become marginalised as a sport I don't think the desire for a great White hope exists the way it once did. The idea of the k-bros as a wholesome, all American white HW champion wouldn't resonate as much now as once it would. If they were just jab jab jabbing second rate opponents to death they would be no more popular than Holmes in his prime.

I don't think being black or white makes much difference in boxing nowadays nor does nationality to a large degree as shown by Hatton, Mayweather and Pacquiao the three biggest PPV names of the past 10 years, not a white american in sight.

Jones always sold far more than Hopkins despite his opposition being of a generally lower standard and was due to a more exciting style that sold well, the Klitschkos whether they were black, white, american or ukranian would never do big numbers because they are too dull and very safety first.

Mayweather did big numbers because of being incredibly skilled and brash before anyone brings up his apparent safety first approach.

You would have to change too much of what the K Bros are before they would sell well, it's not just down to their nationality.

Presumably, a large proportion of the population of the US is African-American or a member of a minority group. In California or Chicago they may not be chearing for a great white hope. In the US, since the 1960s almost all of the top boxers have been African-American, i'm not sure if a 'great white hope' exists anymore. Apparently, this guy was elected to a high office in the US and he doesn't have a 'traditional' American name.

There is always a bit of patriotism, but American sports fans aren't known for being the most biased. They may assess the Klitschko's or any fighter in the exact same way. I have a suspicion the fans would prefer excitement and edge of the seat contests. The Klistchko's are not known for their exciting fights or for being especially charismatic. I'm not convinced that the perspective on the Klitschko's would differ if they were American. Sports history in the US is littered with unpopular competitors.

ArchBritishchris wrote:Presumably, a large proportion of the population of the US is African-American or a member of a minority group. In California or Chicago they may not be chearing for a great white hope. In the US, since the 1960s almost all of the top boxers have been African-American, i'm not sure if a 'great white hope' exists anymore. Apparently, this guy was elected to a high office in the US and he doesn't have a 'traditional' American name.

There is always a bit of patriotism, but American sports fans aren't known for being the most biased. They may assess the Klitschko's or any fighter in the exact same way. I have a suspicion the fans would prefer excitement and edge of the seat contests. The Klistchko's are not known for their exciting fights or for being especially charismatic. I'm not convinced that the perspective on the Klitschko's would differ if they were American. Sports history in the US is littered with unpopular competitors.

White people cheering for a white boxer isn't racism.

Are the masses of Philipinos in the US racist for cheering on Manny P?.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

ArchBritishchris wrote:Presumably, a large proportion of the population of the US is African-American or a member of a minority group. In California or Chicago they may not be chearing for a great white hope. In the US, since the 1960s almost all of the top boxers have been African-American, i'm not sure if a 'great white hope' exists anymore. Apparently, this guy was elected to a high office in the US and he doesn't have a 'traditional' American name.

There is always a bit of patriotism, but American sports fans aren't known for being the most biased. They may assess the Klitschko's or any fighter in the exact same way. I have a suspicion the fans would prefer excitement and edge of the seat contests. The Klistchko's are not known for their exciting fights or for being especially charismatic. I'm not convinced that the perspective on the Klitschko's would differ if they were American. Sports history in the US is littered with unpopular competitors.

White people cheering for a white boxer isn't racism.

Are the masses of Philipinos in the US racist for cheering on Manny P?.

Nationalism / patriotism and racism aren't the same thing, though.

I don't suppose there is any moral issue in a Filipino supporting his fellow countryman against a non - Filipino, but I don't believe that to be the same thing as a situation where two Americans, one white and the other African American, compete against each other and the support for each is divided according to skin colour.

HumanWindmill wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

ArchBritishchris wrote:Presumably, a large proportion of the population of the US is African-American or a member of a minority group. In California or Chicago they may not be chearing for a great white hope. In the US, since the 1960s almost all of the top boxers have been African-American, i'm not sure if a 'great white hope' exists anymore. Apparently, this guy was elected to a high office in the US and he doesn't have a 'traditional' American name.

There is always a bit of patriotism, but American sports fans aren't known for being the most biased. They may assess the Klitschko's or any fighter in the exact same way. I have a suspicion the fans would prefer excitement and edge of the seat contests. The Klistchko's are not known for their exciting fights or for being especially charismatic. I'm not convinced that the perspective on the Klitschko's would differ if they were American. Sports history in the US is littered with unpopular competitors.

White people cheering for a white boxer isn't racism.

Are the masses of Philipinos in the US racist for cheering on Manny P?.

Nationalism / patriotism and racism aren't the same thing, though.

I don't suppose there is any moral issue in a Filipino supporting his fellow countryman against a non - Filipino, but I don't believe that to be the same thing as a situation where two Americans, one white and the other African American, compete against each other and the support for each is divided according to skin colour.

WHich is why I said US Philipinos.

Are Amir Khans UK asian fans racist?

I think the definition of racism is hating someone because of their skin colour.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

ArchBritishchris wrote:Presumably, a large proportion of the population of the US is African-American or a member of a minority group. In California or Chicago they may not be chearing for a great white hope. In the US, since the 1960s almost all of the top boxers have been African-American, i'm not sure if a 'great white hope' exists anymore. Apparently, this guy was elected to a high office in the US and he doesn't have a 'traditional' American name.

There is always a bit of patriotism, but American sports fans aren't known for being the most biased. They may assess the Klitschko's or any fighter in the exact same way. I have a suspicion the fans would prefer excitement and edge of the seat contests. The Klistchko's are not known for their exciting fights or for being especially charismatic. I'm not convinced that the perspective on the Klitschko's would differ if they were American. Sports history in the US is littered with unpopular competitors.

White people cheering for a white boxer isn't racism.

Are the masses of Philipinos in the US racist for cheering on Manny P?.

Nationalism / patriotism and racism aren't the same thing, though.

I don't suppose there is any moral issue in a Filipino supporting his fellow countryman against a non - Filipino, but I don't believe that to be the same thing as a situation where two Americans, one white and the other African American, compete against each other and the support for each is divided according to skin colour.

WHich is why I said US Philipinos.

Are Amir Khans UK asian fans racist?

I think the definition of racism is hating someone because of their skin colour.

So do I, Juke, and I believe we are saying the same thing. I was just a bit confused, for a moment, by your comment regarding ' white people cheering for a white boxer.'

HumanWindmill wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

ArchBritishchris wrote:Presumably, a large proportion of the population of the US is African-American or a member of a minority group. In California or Chicago they may not be chearing for a great white hope. In the US, since the 1960s almost all of the top boxers have been African-American, i'm not sure if a 'great white hope' exists anymore. Apparently, this guy was elected to a high office in the US and he doesn't have a 'traditional' American name.

There is always a bit of patriotism, but American sports fans aren't known for being the most biased. They may assess the Klitschko's or any fighter in the exact same way. I have a suspicion the fans would prefer excitement and edge of the seat contests. The Klistchko's are not known for their exciting fights or for being especially charismatic. I'm not convinced that the perspective on the Klitschko's would differ if they were American. Sports history in the US is littered with unpopular competitors.

White people cheering for a white boxer isn't racism.

Are the masses of Philipinos in the US racist for cheering on Manny P?.

Nationalism / patriotism and racism aren't the same thing, though.

I don't suppose there is any moral issue in a Filipino supporting his fellow countryman against a non - Filipino, but I don't believe that to be the same thing as a situation where two Americans, one white and the other African American, compete against each other and the support for each is divided according to skin colour.

WHich is why I said US Philipinos.

Are Amir Khans UK asian fans racist?

I think the definition of racism is hating someone because of their skin colour.

So do I, Juke, and I believe we are saying the same thing. I was just a bit confused, for a moment, by your comment regarding ' white people cheering for a white boxer.'

Sorry Windmill, I was replying to the other guy who said that the great white hope no longer exists because there's much less racism.

They would get more TV time in America and have more fans if they were from the States but don't think they would be lauded as ATGs. They just aren't exciting enough. Very robotic and not good at selling fights.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

HumanWindmill wrote:

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

ArchBritishchris wrote:Presumably, a large proportion of the population of the US is African-American or a member of a minority group. In California or Chicago they may not be chearing for a great white hope. In the US, since the 1960s almost all of the top boxers have been African-American, i'm not sure if a 'great white hope' exists anymore. Apparently, this guy was elected to a high office in the US and he doesn't have a 'traditional' American name.

There is always a bit of patriotism, but American sports fans aren't known for being the most biased. They may assess the Klitschko's or any fighter in the exact same way. I have a suspicion the fans would prefer excitement and edge of the seat contests. The Klistchko's are not known for their exciting fights or for being especially charismatic. I'm not convinced that the perspective on the Klitschko's would differ if they were American. Sports history in the US is littered with unpopular competitors.

White people cheering for a white boxer isn't racism.

Are the masses of Philipinos in the US racist for cheering on Manny P?.

Nationalism / patriotism and racism aren't the same thing, though.

I don't suppose there is any moral issue in a Filipino supporting his fellow countryman against a non - Filipino, but I don't believe that to be the same thing as a situation where two Americans, one white and the other African American, compete against each other and the support for each is divided according to skin colour.

WHich is why I said US Philipinos.

Are Amir Khans UK asian fans racist?

I think the definition of racism is hating someone because of their skin colour.

So do I, Juke, and I believe we are saying the same thing. I was just a bit confused, for a moment, by your comment regarding ' white people cheering for a white boxer.'

Sorry Windmill, I was replying to the other guy who said that the great white hope no longer exists because there's much less racism.

Got it, Juke. My mistake.

I thought a great white hope didn't exist right now because two of the top three heavyweights are big white guys. Can't miss 'em-they're massive. And, if I'm gonna be 'controversial', David Haye is 'half white'. Black heavyweights haven't had a look in for ages.

BALTIMORA wrote:I thought a great white hope didn't exist right now because two of the top three heavyweights are big white guys. Can't miss 'em-they're massive. And, if I'm gonna be 'controversial', David Haye is 'half white'. Black heavyweights haven't had a look in for ages.

Now you're acting silly just to be arguementative.

Jukebox Timebomb wrote:

BALTIMORA wrote:I thought a great white hope didn't exist right now because two of the top three heavyweights are big white guys. Can't miss 'em-they're massive. And, if I'm gonna be 'controversial', David Haye is 'half white'. Black heavyweights haven't had a look in for ages.

Now you're acting silly just to be arguementative.

Not entirely but yeah, a bit. Really though I don't think there's much-if any-call for a great white hype in this day and age.