tyson fury verses frank bruno?

First topic message reminder :

i think tyson fury would of knocked severn bells out of frank,an easy knockout for fury the fight would have lasted 3 rounds.

catchweight wrote:If anything I think Bruno is underrated. He was by no means the best in his own time but there were some top heavyweights around then compared to the crap around today. The way he crapped himself against Tyson second time around really damaged his reputation as a boxer but he gave some of the top heavyweights a good fight. Witherspoon, Lewis, he even had his moment against Tyson. He would wipe his ass with Tyson Fury.

I don't know. Toilet paper's better now than it was in the 90's. I can see Bruno using some of that aloe vera stuff if he was around now.

He would be wiping his ass twenty quid notes if he were around today. He could make a fortune.

The bits I've seen of Fury don't impress me in the slightest, I agree with most of the posters, he would be lucky to last three rounds against Bruno and less than that if he ever gets in the ring with either of the Klitschkos.

Everyone's agreed that Frank Bruno would put Tyson Furry to sleep.Similarly,let's put this somewhat acrid thread, to bed.

Who did Bruno beat to make people think he'd beat a Klitschko?

How exactly would he beat Vitali. I wouldn't even give him a punchers chance.

The fact that Bruno was champ at the end of the 90's is proof that it obviously wasn't such a great time.

Bruno had a big heart but was clearly a level below the top guys, and some not so top, of the last 30 years.

The difference between Bruno and the Klitschkos is that Bruno actually had some decent heavyweights around him in his era.

I think the version of bruno that gave Lewis a very hard first six rounds would probably beat Vlad and give Vitaly some problems. However, I would back Vitaly to overcome the early difficulties and then finish bruno off once he had him going (quite similar in fact to what happened in the Lewis - bruno fight)

If Bruno knew how to relax and pace himself..........He's a hard night for anyone in history.........apart from..

Foreman, Frazier, Shavers, Ali...........

Lewis couldn't cope with the jab until Frank got tired.

Love to see Bruno as champ now..

catchweight wrote:The difference between Bruno and the Klitschkos is that Bruno actually had some decent heavyweights around him in his era.

Yes and all those decent, and some not so decent, HW's would have beaten him (or did beat him) easily. The Klitschko's are better than decent HW's.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

catchweight wrote:The difference between Bruno and the Klitschkos is that Bruno actually had some decent heavyweights around him in his era.

The Klitschko's are better than decent HW's.

How do you know ??........Older brother lost to a 38 year old, bored......out of shape Lewis.......Beaten stiff galore....

Not saying they aren't above average.....BUT how do you know ??

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:If Bruno knew how to relax and pace himself..........He's a hard night for anyone in history.........apart from..

Foreman, Frazier, Shavers, Ali...........

Lewis couldn't cope with the jab until Frank got tired.

Love to see Bruno as champ now..

Lewis didn't want to KO Bruno early and upset the British fans, as soon as he stepped up the pressure Bruno folded.

You don't help yourself with comments like that.....Makes you look ignorant....

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

catchweight wrote:The difference between Bruno and the Klitschkos is that Bruno actually had some decent heavyweights around him in his era.

The Klitschko's are better than decent HW's.

How do you know ??........Older brother lost to a 38 year old, bored......out of shape Lewis.......Beaten stiff galore....

Not saying they aren't above average.....BUT how do you know ??

Because they've been HW champs for 10 years. You don't get to be long time HW champs if you're not very good.

Didn't a 'prime' Lewis get KO'd by a raving drug addict and another guy that Klitshko KO'd twice?...see it's easy.

Yeh, because when at risk of being knocked senseless by an 18st man a boxer's first thought is "Hmm, how can I play this out to not upset the locals...".

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

catchweight wrote:The difference between Bruno and the Klitschkos is that Bruno actually had some decent heavyweights around him in his era.

The Klitschko's are better than decent HW's.

How do you know ??........Older brother lost to a 38 year old, bored......out of shape Lewis.......Beaten stiff galore....

Not saying they aren't above average.....BUT how do you know ??

Because they've been HW champs for 10 years. You don't get to be long time HW champs if you're not very good..

Which heavyweight champs of the 80s would lose to the guys the Klits have beat...???

The 80's had an old Larry Holmes and a young Mike Tyson. It was hardly an amazing era.

No doubt you probably think Mike Spinks would beat the Klitschko's.

Tony Tubbs vs Sam Peter sounds like one for the ages doesn't it?

Anyway, the version of Corrie Sanders that did for Wlad might give a few guys problems but I wouldn't bet my house on it (I wouldn't bet my socks on it to be honest). However the version who ambled into the ring to face Vitali does little or nothing.

TopHat24/7 wrote:Yeh, because when at risk of being knocked senseless by an 18st man a boxer's first thought is "Hmm, how can I play this out to not upset the locals...".

It's actually very easy. Just go ultra cautious behind the jab for the first 6 rounds.

I'm sure Lewis himself has admitted he carried Bruno.

Tubbs was a very polished fighter.........with a great jab and quick hands..

If you are suggesting they both are plodding slobs you've picked the wrong guy..

Even when overweight he was very fast and blessed with good footwork..

Like Page a waste of talent.

Nope, I'm suggesting that those two in the ring for the title doesn't get the juices flowing. In fact even talking about the like of Weaver Dokes, Thomas et al fighting today, I think that all you do is take the medicocrity of the 80's and bring it forward 30 years.

Like now, no-one really stood out from the crowd until dear old Mike came along. All these idiots thinking Wilder is some kind of shot in the arm for the sport are deluding themselves.

The guy who is going to transform the HW scene has probably only just laced them up as an amateur. People were talking about the young Tyson very very early into his career and there was a real buzz about him. There's absolutely no-one on the HW radar like that and won't be for a good few years.

Truth is though people are just desperate for American HW's. If the likes of Wilder and another few half decent US HW's come through and fight exciting fights against eachother suddenly it becomes another golden age @ HW. It's all relative. If the Klitschko's weren't so good everyone else wouldn't look so crap.

I disagree, people will appreciate a decent exciting fight irrespective of his nationality. For example, there's the big buzz about Golovkin and whilst he's yet to truly scale the heights there's definitely potential for him to be a star. Of course some will argue that he's a heavy handed plodder whilst some will argue that he actually deceptively good, applies intelligent pressure, closes down the space well and is spiteful and accurate with his body shots.

You don't have to be an American to set the world alight...Broner has shown that there's perhaps hope for American as a society when even they revel in Broner's a$$-whupping at the hands of Maidana.

Anyway, harking back to the K's, had they, and in particular Wlad, shown a little devil in their work, they would have crossed over in the USA. Sadly, Wlad had demonstrated a quite bewildering refusal to to take any sort of chance even when his oppnents are hopelessly outmatched. Can't recall the opponent (all blurs into one these days) but he had him trapped on the ropes and did nothing but jab, jab, straight right, long hard think and repeat. No uppercuts hooks and, crucially for me, no body shots against an opponent with his hands cupped around his ears. It's this level of fistic pacifism that has turned off audiences and yet all people can do to cite the fact that he's been around for ages and he's a nice bloke.

They said that about William Roach too.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

catchweight wrote:The difference between Bruno and the Klitschkos is that Bruno actually had some decent heavyweights around him in his era.

Yes and all those decent, and some not so decent, HW's would have beaten him (or did beat him) easily. The Klitschko's are better than decent HW's.

No they didnt. Tyson beat him pretty easily, big deal. He gave Lewis and Witherspoon very good fights. Put Klitschko in with Brunos competition and he doesnt do any better. Bruno wasnt losing to out of shape South African golfers or journeymen either.

Tyson, Holyfield, Holmes, Witherspoon, Dokes, Tubbs, Spinks, Thomas, Ruddock, Bruno off the top of my head were around in the 1980s. Klitschko would be doing well to win 2/3 of those fights. I would be flabbergasted if he won more than 4. They are all better than anyone he has beat. It was just a stronger talent pool all around than this crap one.

Its nothing to do with Klitschkos making the current heavyweights look bad. Its obvious they are bad. They are usually out of shape, they cant jab, they cant move. Half of them dont even supply effort. Chad Dawson, a light heavyweight who is now getting knocked out by supermiddleweights easily beat Adamek who has been rated one of the top heavyweights for years. An ancient, washed up Holyfield almost managed to pull off a win against a giant crap Valuev in a title fight. They are absolute Poopie.

The Klitschkos got to the top because they persevered, worked hard, stayed in shape and are professional and after about a decade of trying Wladimir Klitschko is able to perform the absolute basics of boxing to a reasonable standard. A jab, straight right and occasional left hook. Absolute basic stuff hardly any of the other heavyweights can manage.

Never underestimate Frank. Theres no end to his talents


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4y66d8EDvU&feature=youtube_gdata_player

catchweight wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

catchweight wrote:The difference between Bruno and the Klitschkos is that Bruno actually had some decent heavyweights around him in his era.

Yes and all those decent, and some not so decent, HW's would have beaten him (or did beat him) easily. The Klitschko's are better than decent HW's.

No they didnt. Tyson beat him pretty easily, big deal. He gave Lewis and Witherspoon very good fights. Put Klitschko in with Brunos competition and he doesnt do any better. Bruno wasnt losing to out of shape South African golfers or journeymen either.  

Tyson, Holyfield, Holmes, Witherspoon, Dokes, Tubbs, Spinks, Thomas, Ruddock, Bruno off the top of my head were around in the 1980s. Klitschko would be doing well to win 2/3 of those fights. I would be flabbergasted if he won more than 4. They are all better than anyone he has beat. It was just a stronger talent pool all around than this crap one.  

Its nothing to do with Klitschkos making the current heavyweights look bad. Its obvious they are bad. They are usually out of shape, they cant jab, they cant move. Half of them dont even supply effort. Chad Dawson, a light heavyweight who is now getting knocked out by supermiddleweights easily beat Adamek who has been rated one of the top heavyweights for years. An ancient, washed up Holyfield almost managed to pull off a win against a giant crap Valuev in a title fight. They are absolute Poopie.

The Klitschkos got to the top because they persevered, worked hard, stayed in shape and are professional and after about a decade of trying Wladimir Klitschko is able to perform the absolute basics of boxing to a reasonable standard. A jab, straight right and occasional left hook. Absolute basic stuff hardly any of the other heavyweights can manage.

Obviously Sanders can't match the majesty of Buster Douglas, Michael Spinks and John Ruiz.

Who did Bruno beat that was better than Corrie Sanders anyway?

"Tyson, Holyfield, Holmes, Witherspoon, Dokes, Tubbs, Spinks, Thomas, Ruddock, Bruno"

Three good names, who never fought each other in their primes, and then average fighters.

Adamek has never been rated as anything other than a contender. I seem to remember a badly weight drained Adamek almost KO'ing Dawson. Perhaps if Adamek was around in a weaker time he could've done a Michael Spinks?

"A jab, straight right and occasional left hook. Absolute basic stuff hardly any of the other heavyweights can manage"

Do you believe what you are typing or is this a WUM? Tell me how a guy with such 'basic' skills is able to dominate the likes of David Haye? WK is an olympic gold medalist he's not a fat yank plodder from the 80's.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:Yeh, because when at risk of being knocked senseless by an 18st man a boxer's first thought is "Hmm, how can I play this out to not upset the locals...".

It's actually very easy. Just go ultra cautious behind the jab for the first 6 rounds.

I'm sure Lewis himself has admitted he carried Bruno.

Carried Bruno? Not a chance. Lewis was nothing but a powerful amateur at that point -- he was being outjabbed and outmuscled up until he landed that big hook.

WK is an olympic gold medalist he's not a fat yank plodder from the 80's
------------------------------------
Audley Harrison is an Olympic Gold Medalist...so what?....and let's face it, Wlad beat Haye by utilising the 'basic' jab and straight right hand. There was nothing spectacular about it. Haye stayed on the outside and Wlad kept the jab in his face. The fact he does it extremely well doesn't detract from the fact that it's still part of a boxer's basic skillset. He's also got a significant height and reach advantage which makes the "basics" a pretty formidable weapon against the majority of his opposition.

Audley Harrison was a very good boxer - not basic in any way. He just didn't have the heart and probably a bit too old to make it in the pros.

I'm gonna let you in on a little secret EVERY pro boxer knows the basics. The "absolute basics" don't get you to HW champ for 10 years though.

For WK to dominate Haye with the jab must mean his jab is a little better than "basic" don't you think?

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

catchweight wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

catchweight wrote:The difference between Bruno and the Klitschkos is that Bruno actually had some decent heavyweights around him in his era.

Yes and all those decent, and some not so decent, HW's would have beaten him (or did beat him) easily. The Klitschko's are better than decent HW's.

No they didnt. Tyson beat him pretty easily, big deal. He gave Lewis and Witherspoon very good fights. Put Klitschko in with Brunos competition and he doesnt do any better. Bruno wasnt losing to out of shape South African golfers or journeymen either.  

Tyson, Holyfield, Holmes, Witherspoon, Dokes, Tubbs, Spinks, Thomas, Ruddock, Bruno off the top of my head were around in the 1980s. Klitschko would be doing well to win 2/3 of those fights. I would be flabbergasted if he won more than 4. They are all better than anyone he has beat. It was just a stronger talent pool all around than this crap one.  

Its nothing to do with Klitschkos making the current heavyweights look bad. Its obvious they are bad. They are usually out of shape, they cant jab, they cant move. Half of them dont even supply effort. Chad Dawson, a light heavyweight who is now getting knocked out by supermiddleweights easily beat Adamek who has been rated one of the top heavyweights for years. An ancient, washed up Holyfield almost managed to pull off a win against a giant crap Valuev in a title fight. They are absolute Poopie.

The Klitschkos got to the top because they persevered, worked hard, stayed in shape and are professional and after about a decade of trying Wladimir Klitschko is able to perform the absolute basics of boxing to a reasonable standard. A jab, straight right and occasional left hook. Absolute basic stuff hardly any of the other heavyweights can manage.

Obviously Sanders can't match the majesty of Buster Douglas, Michael Spinks and John Ruiz.

Who did Bruno beat that was better than Corrie Sanders anyway?

"Tyson, Holyfield, Holmes, Witherspoon, Dokes, Tubbs, Spinks, Thomas, Ruddock, Bruno"

Three good names, who never fought each other in their primes, and then average fighters.

Adamek has never been rated as anything other than a contender. I seem to remember a badly weight drained Adamek almost KO'ing Dawson. Perhaps if Adamek was around in a weaker time he could've done a Michael Spinks?

"A jab, straight right and occasional left hook. Absolute basic stuff hardly any of the other heavyweights can manage"

Do you believe what you are typing or is this a WUM? Tell me how a guy with such 'basic' skills is able to dominate the likes of David Haye? WK is an olympic gold medalist he's not a fat yank plodder from the 80's.

Lets see, the Klitschkos are the best thing ever, Sugar Ray Robinson couldnt beat any top twenty middleweight today, past fighters were drunks, the more world titles in boxing the better..... Some of your pearls of wisdom.

Safe to say I think its you who is having a larf, but fairplay you got some mileage out of it.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:Audley Harrison was a very good boxer - not basic in any way. He just didn't have the heart and probably a bit too old to make it in the pros.

I'm gonna let you in on a little secret EVERY pro boxer knows the basics. The "absolute basics" don't get you to HW champ for 10 years though.

For WK to dominate Haye with the jab must mean his jab is a little better than "basic" don't you think?

No, you misunderstand fella...the jab IS a basic move..the fact it's a basic move doesn't mean it's not a good one though. Wlad does the basics very well and the sheer size of him coupled with the poor quality of opposition (and let's mot forget his unwillingness to engage) means that he's never had to do much more than the bare minimum in his fights. When was the last time he was involved ina war or a tear-up? It simply doesn't happen as he does let it happen and his opponents are good enough to negate the essentials and draw him into a fight where he may not be as effective (mind you, all he'd do is hold and lean on as he can't fight on the inside)

No, i think you'll find the guy said that the Klitschkos are only able to perform the absolute basics and only to a "reasonable" degree, and that all other HW's can't manage the basics. Which of course is complete rubbish.

When was the last time Mayweather 'engaged' when was he last involved in a war or tear up? Boxers only get involved in "tear-ups" if they're not good enough to avoid them.

Ali and Liston would be cruiser weights today - another gem

The saddest thing about the current scene is that I'd be fairly confident in naming ten guys that Lewis beat that are better than anything on either Bros record.

Ruddock
Tucker
Morrison
Golota
Tua
Holyfield
Bruno
Briggs
Mason
Vitali
Shot Tyson

catchweight wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

catchweight wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

catchweight wrote:The difference between Bruno and the Klitschkos is that Bruno actually had some decent heavyweights around him in his era.

Yes and all those decent, and some not so decent, HW's would have beaten him (or did beat him) easily. The Klitschko's are better than decent HW's.

No they didnt. Tyson beat him pretty easily, big deal. He gave Lewis and Witherspoon very good fights. Put Klitschko in with Brunos competition and he doesnt do any better. Bruno wasnt losing to out of shape South African golfers or journeymen either.  

Tyson, Holyfield, Holmes, Witherspoon, Dokes, Tubbs, Spinks, Thomas, Ruddock, Bruno off the top of my head were around in the 1980s. Klitschko would be doing well to win 2/3 of those fights. I would be flabbergasted if he won more than 4. They are all better than anyone he has beat. It was just a stronger talent pool all around than this crap one.  

Its nothing to do with Klitschkos making the current heavyweights look bad. Its obvious they are bad. They are usually out of shape, they cant jab, they cant move. Half of them dont even supply effort. Chad Dawson, a light heavyweight who is now getting knocked out by supermiddleweights easily beat Adamek who has been rated one of the top heavyweights for years. An ancient, washed up Holyfield almost managed to pull off a win against a giant crap Valuev in a title fight. They are absolute Poopie.

The Klitschkos got to the top because they persevered, worked hard, stayed in shape and are professional and after about a decade of trying Wladimir Klitschko is able to perform the absolute basics of boxing to a reasonable standard. A jab, straight right and occasional left hook. Absolute basic stuff hardly any of the other heavyweights can manage.

Obviously Sanders can't match the majesty of Buster Douglas, Michael Spinks and John Ruiz.

Who did Bruno beat that was better than Corrie Sanders anyway?

"Tyson, Holyfield, Holmes, Witherspoon, Dokes, Tubbs, Spinks, Thomas, Ruddock, Bruno"

Three good names, who never fought each other in their primes, and then average fighters.

Adamek has never been rated as anything other than a contender. I seem to remember a badly weight drained Adamek almost KO'ing Dawson. Perhaps if Adamek was around in a weaker time he could've done a Michael Spinks?

"A jab, straight right and occasional left hook. Absolute basic stuff hardly any of the other heavyweights can manage"

Do you believe what you are typing or is this a WUM? Tell me how a guy with such 'basic' skills is able to dominate the likes of David Haye? WK is an olympic gold medalist he's not a fat yank plodder from the 80's.

Lets see, the Klitschkos are the best thing ever, Sugar Ray Robinson couldnt beat any top twenty middleweight today, past fighters were drunks, the more world titles in boxing the better..... Some of your pearls of wisdom.

Safe to say I think its you who is having a larf, but fairplay you got some mileage out of it.

I see what you've done.

You're right Michael Dokes and Tony Tubbs are world beaters. I mean how would the K's deal with such boxing elite.

Let's get real. Ray Robinson fought in an era when training consisted of not getting too drunk the night before a fight. Any middleweight in the current top 20 would muller him.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The saddest thing about the current scene is that I'd be fairly confident in naming ten guys that Lewis beat that are better than anything on either Bros record.

Ruddock
Tucker
Morrison
Golota
Tua
Holyfield
Bruno
Briggs
Mason
Vitali
Shot Tyson

God, take Holyfield and VK out of that and it's one truly awful list. Tua?? Morrison?? Briggs?? Mason?????????????

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:No, i think you'll find the guy said that the Klitschkos are only able to perform the absolute basics and only to a "reasonable" degree, and that all other HW's can't manage the basics. Which of course is complete rubbish.

When was the last time Mayweather 'engaged' when was he last involved in a war or tear up? Boxers only get involved in "tear-ups" if they're not good enough to avoid them.

I'm referring to my comments about the basic jab...let someone else defend their comments. Hopefully you're not comparing Wlad to Floyd as they are night and day. Floyd rarely has such a significant size advantage over his opponents (except Marquez) that Wlad regularly enjoys. Floyd also utilises a much wider range of skills than Wlad to ensure he doesn't have to engage (although if memory serves he did get dragged into a bit of a brawl with Cotto).

Wlad doesn't engage because he can't, he's never shown an ability let alone willingness to work the body. He simply can't fight effectively on the inside hence his near constant grabbing, holding and pushing as demonstrated against Povetkin nor can he fight effectively on the back foot. Don't get me wrong, if he gets away with it then good luck to him but let's not kid ourselves that he's the complete all-rounder because he's not.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The saddest thing about the current scene is that I'd be fairly confident in naming ten guys that Lewis beat that are better than anything on either Bros record.

Ruddock
Tucker
Morrison
Golota
Tua
Holyfield
Bruno
Briggs
Mason
Vitali
Shot Tyson

God, take Holyfield and VK out of that and it's one truly awful list. Tua?? Morrison?? Briggs?? Mason?????????????

Tua was world class with devastating power and a cast iron chin, if he, Ruddock, mason and Bruno are awful then god forbid how you'd describe Chagaev and Ibragimov let alone Mormeck or Peter.

DAVE667 wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:No, i think you'll find the guy said that the Klitschkos are only able to perform the absolute basics and only to a "reasonable" degree, and that all other HW's can't manage the basics. Which of course is complete rubbish.

When was the last time Mayweather 'engaged' when was he last involved in a war or tear up? Boxers only get involved in "tear-ups" if they're not good enough to avoid them.

I'm referring to my comments about the basic jab...let someone else defend their comments. Hopefully you're not comparing Wlad to Floyd as they are night and day. Floyd rarely has such a significant size advantage over his opponents (except Marquez) that Wlad regularly enjoys. Floyd also utilises a much wider range of skills than Wlad to ensure he doesn't have to engage (although if memory serves he did get dragged into a bit of a brawl with Cotto).

Wlad doesn't engage because he can't, he's never shown an ability let alone willingness to work the body. He simply can't fight effectively on the inside hence his near constant grabbing, holding and pushing as demonstrated against Povetkin nor can he fight effectively on the back foot. Don't get me wrong, if he gets away with it then good luck to him but let's not kid ourselves that he's the complete all-rounder because he's not.

I think this is a bit of a falsity. Mayweather does the same thing all the time. He's just excellent at doing it much like klitschko. Neither really fight on the inside, neither trade full-stop.

I think you'd probably have to go back to his fight with Corley to see Floyd take any risks, and Klitschko back to his fight with Peter - both probably 10 years back now.

I want some of what Mayweather's Cellmate is smoking..........

A few puffs before Klitschko sumo wrestles his next fatso would certainly help me appreciate the best heavyweight of all time putting on another boxing masterclass against one of the greatest challengers in heavyweight history

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:No, i think you'll find the guy said that the Klitschkos are only able to perform the absolute basics and only to a "reasonable" degree, and that all other HW's can't manage the basics. Which of course is complete rubbish.

When was the last time Mayweather 'engaged' when was he last involved in a war or tear up? Boxers only get involved in "tear-ups" if they're not good enough to avoid them.

I'm referring to my comments about the basic jab...let someone else defend their comments. Hopefully you're not comparing Wlad to Floyd as they are night and day. Floyd rarely has such a significant size advantage over his opponents (except Marquez) that Wlad regularly enjoys. Floyd also utilises a much wider range of skills than Wlad to ensure he doesn't have to engage (although if memory serves he did get dragged into a bit of a brawl with Cotto).

Wlad doesn't engage because he can't, he's never shown an ability let alone willingness to work the body. He simply can't fight effectively on the inside hence his near constant grabbing, holding and pushing as demonstrated against Povetkin nor can he fight effectively on the back foot. Don't get me wrong, if he gets away with it then good luck to him but let's not kid ourselves that he's the complete all-rounder because he's not.

I think this is a bit of a falsity. Mayweather does the same thing all the time. He's just excellent at doing it much like klitschko. Neither really fight on the inside, neither trade full-stop.

I think you'd probably have to go back to his fight with Corley to see Floyd take any risks, and Klitschko back to his fight with Peter - both probably 10 years back now.

Holy crap, did you just say Mayweather doesn't fight on the inside??

The man could win a fight in a phonebox!!

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:No, i think you'll find the guy said that the Klitschkos are only able to perform the absolute basics and only to a "reasonable" degree, and that all other HW's can't manage the basics. Which of course is complete rubbish.

When was the last time Mayweather 'engaged' when was he last involved in a war or tear up? Boxers only get involved in "tear-ups" if they're not good enough to avoid them.

I'm referring to my comments about the basic jab...let someone else defend their comments. Hopefully you're not comparing Wlad to Floyd as they are night and day. Floyd rarely has such a significant size advantage over his opponents (except Marquez) that Wlad regularly enjoys. Floyd also utilises a much wider range of skills than Wlad to ensure he doesn't have to engage (although if memory serves he did get dragged into a bit of a brawl with Cotto).

Wlad doesn't engage because he can't, he's never shown an ability let alone willingness to work the body. He simply can't fight effectively on the inside hence his near constant grabbing, holding and pushing as demonstrated against Povetkin nor can he fight effectively on the back foot. Don't get me wrong, if he gets away with it then good luck to him but let's not kid ourselves that he's the complete all-rounder because he's not.

I think this is a bit of a falsity. Mayweather does the same thing all the time. He's just excellent at doing it much like klitschko. Neither really fight on the inside, neither trade full-stop.

I think you'd probably have to go back to his fight with Corley to see Floyd take any risks, and Klitschko back to his fight with Peter - both probably 10 years back now.

Holy crap, did you just say Mayweather doesn't fight on the inside??

The man could win a fight in a phonebox!!

Doing the shoulder roll is not fighting on the inside.

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

DAVE667 wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:No, i think you'll find the guy said that the Klitschkos are only able to perform the absolute basics and only to a "reasonable" degree, and that all other HW's can't manage the basics. Which of course is complete rubbish.

When was the last time Mayweather 'engaged' when was he last involved in a war or tear up? Boxers only get involved in "tear-ups" if they're not good enough to avoid them.

I'm referring to my comments about the basic jab...let someone else defend their comments. Hopefully you're not comparing Wlad to Floyd as they are night and day. Floyd rarely has such a significant size advantage over his opponents (except Marquez) that Wlad regularly enjoys. Floyd also utilises a much wider range of skills than Wlad to ensure he doesn't have to engage (although if memory serves he did get dragged into a bit of a brawl with Cotto).

Wlad doesn't engage because he can't, he's never shown an ability let alone willingness to work the body. He simply can't fight effectively on the inside hence his near constant grabbing, holding and pushing as demonstrated against Povetkin nor can he fight effectively on the back foot. Don't get me wrong, if he gets away with it then good luck to him but let's not kid ourselves that he's the complete all-rounder because he's not.

I think this is a bit of a falsity. Mayweather does the same thing all the time. He's just excellent at doing it much like klitschko. Neither really fight on the inside, neither trade full-stop.

I think you'd probably have to go back to his fight with Corley to see Floyd take any risks, and Klitschko back to his fight with Peter - both probably 10 years back now.

Holy crap, did you just say Mayweather doesn't fight on the inside??

The man could win a fight in a phonebox!!

Doing the shoulder roll is not fighting on the inside.

Your username suggests you don't take him seriously but even without that I'm prepapred to vote for you as having made one of the more stupid comments on these pages

Mayweather is an ATG. Much like WK he doesn't trade punches though - on the inside or outside.

That HW fight last weekend - that was fighting on the inside. Mayweather with his cross arm shoulder roll defence looking to counter guys coming in and out is not inside fighting. Mayweather is as pure a boxer as you can get, he's not a brawler.

When does inside fighting have to mean trading blows??!

I don't think Mayweather is that good inside....(His girlfriend thinks different)......But like with most great fighters you end up fighting THEIR fight !!

Hatton in fairness tried to make it an inside fight........BUT as with guys like Whittaker, Nelson and Ali etc.........They'll counter your charges and hurt you on the way in...so you end up not coming in as much and then you end up committing suicide by fighting at long range...

Ali was cack on the inside..........Didn't matter !!

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The saddest thing about the current scene is that I'd be fairly confident in naming ten guys that Lewis beat that are better than anything on either Bros record.

Ruddock
Tucker
Morrison
Golota
Tua
Holyfield
Bruno
Briggs
Mason
Vitali
Shot Tyson

Can't agree with some of those names. Some of them like Tua even have losses to Klitschko victims. A shot Tyson who would go on to lose 2 of his next 3 fights to journeymen shouldnt be elevated to something he wasnt just because he fought Lewis.

TopHat24/7 wrote:When does inside fighting have to mean trading blows??!

When someone is throwing punches at you on the inside and you are not throwing anything back then you are not fighting on the inside. Mayweather doing his shoulder roll/back turn is not fighting on the inside.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Mayweathers cellmate wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:The saddest thing about the current scene is that I'd be fairly confident in naming ten guys that Lewis beat that are better than anything on either Bros record.

Ruddock
Tucker
Morrison
Golota
Tua
Holyfield
Bruno
Briggs
Mason
Vitali
Shot Tyson

God, take Holyfield and VK out of that and it's one truly awful list. Tua?? Morrison?? Briggs?? Mason?????????????

Tua was world class with devastating power and a cast iron chin, if he, Ruddock, mason and Bruno are awful then god forbid how you'd describe Chagaev and Ibragimov let alone Mormeck or Peter.

I'd describe them both as every bit as good as Andrew Golota.