Holyfield vs Valuev - The aftermath

[JohnThomas1]

Some pertinent questions need to be asked. I haven't seen the fight yet.

1. Who did you have winning?

2. Do you think it was a fix?

I see quite a bit of speculation.

3. Just how woeful is Valuev?

A dead duck version of Holyfield gives him no end of trouble with the complex old move a little left, move a little right i hear.

4. This fight makes a disgrace of the depth of talent in the heavyweight ranks present day?

Remember, if it was Wlad or Vitali dominating Valuev (as they surely would) they would have recieved big accolades from many.

5. Does this fight now reflect on Wlad and Vitali and the opponents they have beat?

6. In a nutshell, what do you think of the present division and the fighters in it?

[janitor]

[quote=JohnThomas1;3101101]Some pertinent questions need to be asked. I haven't seen the fight yet.

1. Who did you have winning?


I didnt watch it because I didnt care to see Holyfield get killed in the ring.


2. Do you think it was a fix?

I see quite a bit of speculation.


I dont see how it can be.


3. Just how woeful is Valuev?

A dead duck version of Holyfield gives him no end of trouble with the complex old move a little left, move a little right i hear.


Prety woefull.

He has been lucky to come along when he did.

He has let Holyfield down verry badly by reinforcing his delusions. All he had to do was beat up a 46 year of former champion and he couldnt even get that right.


4. This fight makes a disgrace of the depth of talent in the heavyweight ranks present day?

Remember, if it was Wlad or Vitali dominating Valuev (as they surely would) they would have recieved big accolades from many.

5. Does this fight now reflect on Wlad and Vitali and the opponents they have beat?


I never really thought that the Klitschko brothers were presiding over a strong era and you can only fight the oponents that are available.

If the Klitschko brothers continue winning as they have I will still be prepared to give them credit.


6. In a nutshell, what do you think of the present division and the fighters in it?


In general it is verry poor but there are still some interesting happenings.

I think that the Klitschko brothers stand out like a flower in the midle of an area of wasteland relative to the other recent beltholders. Peter, Valuev, and and their peers are a prety poor bunch but we have fighters like Povetkin and Haye moving through the rankings. Chagev might also be able to make things interesting.

Finaly I think that it is going to get better soon on the grounds that there is little room for it to get worse.

[WhataRock]

Holy...there were rounds that were hard to score because basically neither fighter did anything but I saw it for Holy.

Probably not, just a bad decision.

Very woeful...but he can operate at this level because he isnt a total retard for his size.

Yes..kinda...Holy wasnt a contender though..he got this fight on name alone, I dont think this fight reflects on the division to much because its not like Holy had beaten any contenders to get here...The division is pretty shit nonetheless.

I dont think so...I dont consider this belt a world title at the moment...it is a circus belt and Valeuv probably isnt even a top 10 heavy at the moment if you scored the fights he got gifted against him.

As stated before shit...It is poor and not really seeing much talent coming up to change this trend.

[JohnThomas1]

Cheers Jan.

[ChrisPontius]

Some pertinent questions need to be asked. I haven't seen the fight yet.

1. Who did you have winning?


Holyfield.



2. Do you think it was a fix?


One bad decision is lucky. Two is suspicious. Three is undeniably a fix. It has fuck all to do with "the judges sit at ring side", we're talking about fights that 5 year olds could score better.

The judges were bought, yes.


I see quite a bit of speculation.

3. Just how woeful is Valuev?


He is erratic. He did quite well in his recent rematch against Ruiz and dominated Liakhovic. But he performed mediocre vs Barret and Donald, and Holyfield now. He looked pretty mobile against Liakhovic and Ruiz II, but tonight he was nearly as stuck-in-the-mud as Butterbean was. He's a contender but no more than that.



4. This fight makes a disgrace of the depth of talent in the heavyweight ranks present day?

Remember, if it was Wlad or Vitali dominating Valuev (as they surely would) they would have recieved big accolades from many.


Just as much as Foreman-Moorer, Holmes-Mercer, Patterson-Bonavena, etc did.

Valuev is not the champion, and in fact he shouldn't even have been WBA champion since he clearly lost it to Chagaev, who was stripped because of an injury.



5. Does this fight now reflect on Wlad and Vitali and the opponents they have beat?


Likewise, how does it reflect on the fact that an old Patterson arguably beat Bonavena, while he gave a peak Frazier hell as well as Ali? Mercer nearly beat Lewis, but lost a shutout decision to Holmes. Moorer beat Holyfield but lost to old Foreman. Old Norton went close with a peak Holmes while an aging Ali handled a younger version of him. Patterson at 37 gave Ali a lot of trouble until the cut.

These are just singular examples, which happen in every era. And before you say that Patterson was in his 30's while Holyfield is in his 40's, these are different eras. Fighters age slower today. Holyfield at 34 looked as good as he ever did against Tyson; fighters in their mid-30's were much slower and often shot before the 70's.


Let's not forget that Ibragimov, who Wlad DID dominate, beat Holyfield by 11 rounds to 1.


6. In a nutshell, what do you think of the present division and the fighters in it?

It's a good division, like i said before, these things happen in every era.

Plus, it's INCREDIBLY popular to hate on every current division. It has always happened in history. Marciano was a crude slugger, Bowe was ducking challenges, etc etc.


We have Wladimir Klitschko, Vitali Klitschko, Haye, Chagaev, Povetkin, Arreola, Gomez, Thompson, Ibragimov, Chambers and Dimitrenko. Pretty solid.

[JohnThomas1]

Cheers guys, keep em coming :happy

[Minotauro]

Some pertinent questions need to be asked. I haven't seen the fight yet.

1. Who did you have winning?

2. Do you think it was a fix?

I see quite a bit of speculation.

3. Just how woeful is Valuev?

A dead duck version of Holyfield gives him no end of trouble with the complex old move a little left, move a little right i hear.

4. This fight makes a disgrace of the depth of talent in the heavyweight ranks present day?

Remember, if it was Wlad or Vitali dominating Valuev (as they surely would) they would have recieved big accolades from many.

5. Does this fight now reflect on Wlad and Vitali and the opponents they have beat?

6. In a nutshell, what do you think of the present division and the fighters in it?

1. I had Holyfield winning, the fight is on youtube it was very boring with neither guy doing much.

2. A bad decision not a fix and who knows Evander might get a rematch.

3. I felt he should have lost Ruiz once anyway the guy is nothing special besides his size. I think he is even worse then Peter.

4. The division is defiantly poor and most of the guys lack the charisma or style to get causal fans interested. However I don't think it is as bad as it was a couple years ago as long as the right matches up are made the division popularity could rise there are a few young guys like Haye, Chagaev and Povetkin who look like they have bright futures. Ruslan is the real WBA champ anyway and with the Haye vs Vitali and Wlad vs Povetkin fights to come next year it’s starting to look better.

5. Depends if they were to start struggling with old guys who were shot then yes but if one of them would to beat Valuev easily then it wouldn't really matter as it would show the difference in class between them.

6. It certainly isn't the glamour division anymore but it is looking better then before and if the one of the champions really wants to be undisputed number 1 and is able to unify all the abc titles it would look a lot better. It is not the strongest division in boxing but not the worst either.

[mr. magoo]

1. I had Holyfield winning, the fight is on youtube it was very boring with neither guy doing much.

2. A bad decision not a fix and who knows Evander might get a rematch.

3. I felt he should have lost Ruiz once anyway the guy is nothing special besides his size. I think he is even worse then Peter.

4. The division is defiantly poor and most of the guys lack the charisma or style to get causal fans interested. However I don't think it is as bad as it was a couple years ago as long as the right matches up are made the division popularity could rise there are a few young guys like Haye, Chagaev and Povetkin who look like they have bright futures. Ruslan is the real WBA champ anyway and with the Haye vs Vitali and Wlad vs Povetkin fights to come next year it’s starting to look better.

5. Depends if they were to start struggling with old guys who were shot then yes but if one of them would to beat Valuev easily then it wouldn't really matter as it would show the difference in class between them.

6. It certainly isn't the glamour division anymore but it is looking better then before and if the one of the champions really wants to be undisputed number 1 and is able to unify all the abc titles it would look a lot better. It is not the strongest division in boxing but not the worst either.


Since I'm feeling lazy today, I'll just second this post and thank Minotauro for doing the work for me.

I felt that Holyfield won the fight though. Incidently, I think Vitali Klitschko would have Valuev for breakfast...

[Bummy Davis]

Holyfield did little but more than Valuev who deserved to lose his title for lack of fighting, How you can say Valuev won is beyond me but when King is involved...strange things can happen...Valuev should now be used as cannon fodder vs Vlad or Vitali, although he does not deserve a shot...Evander would be swallowed up by a decent heavy...match him with Povetkin in 4 months as a barometer. The division is solid, I cant think of any that did not have its bad fights from the 70's, 80's 90's and Vlauev has squeaked by in a few fights...Primo Carnera was a much better fighter and I think its apartent all Nicolay has is Size 7" and 330 lbs...it would be a horible sight to see him fall but its HIS time to get KO'D and Evander now needs to also go out the way Louis, Ali, Holmes, Tyson went out, on his ass

[Seamus]

Some pertinent questions need to be asked. I haven't seen the fight yet.

1. Who did you have winning?
I had to stop watching after 8. Had Holy by a couple rounds at that point.

2. Do you think it was a fix?

I see quite a bit of speculation. It would not surprise me. But if the powers that be are betting on the freak show factor to sell more tickets, this latest display will likely deflate such lofty delusions.

3. Just how woeful is Valuev? To his defense, we have seen him much better but any sort of movement causes him trouble. On a particularly bad day, he looks absolutely amateurish. Against the right style opponent, he has looked formidable but they must be hand-picked by STYLE (not even overall ability). Lastly, I fear the big guy is on a rapid physical decline.


4. This fight makes a disgrace of the depth of talent in the heavyweight ranks present day?

I think there is still decent depth to the division and it is under-rated. However, Valuev must be rid of the division. He has always been a King shamjob. Make the exciting matchups with the K bros., Haye, Chag, give each of the old blood no more than one chance (No more Maskaev, No Golota, etc..) and mix in the new blood liberally. We never no how good or bad the new crop is UNTIL they fight. Make these matchups often and the division bounces right back.

5. Does this fight now reflect on Wlad and Vitali and the opponents they have beat?

I don't see the reflection. Either one would retire Holy in a fashion that would lose fans with its savagery.

[mr. magoo]

It really is a shame that Evander didn't get the decision. Would a victory over Valuev have boosted his all time ratings? Probably not by much. But considering the circumstances, it would have been a great way to end a career.

[Russell]

It really is a shame that Evander didn't get the decision. Would a victory over Valuev have boosted his all time ratings? Probably not by much. But considering the circumstances, it would have been a great way to end a career.

Considering his age, it most definitely would have bumped him up there.

Look at what a similar win did for Foreman.

[Seamus]

Considering his age, it most definitely would have bumped him up there.

Look at what a similar win did for Foreman.


It was nothing like the Foreman victory. Foreman executed a plan and ensnared Moorer, finishing him power. Foreman had offense and output. And for that matter, Moorer defended his title with a bit of passion.

Holyfield merely pulled out some moves from Dancing with the Stars and Valuev showed no pulse whatsoever. There were few if any meaningful connects in the entire fight. It was listless and uninspired.

[Russell]

Er, you're aware that one of the reasons Valuev looked so piss poor is because Holyfield implemented a simple, subtle yet effective strategy against a fighter who's no genius to begin with, yes?

Foreman's "claim" of having a plan has been dismissed as bullshit by more then one poster.

[mr. magoo]

Considering his age, it most definitely would have bumped him up there.

Look at what a similar win did for Foreman.

Precisely why I added the words " considering the circumstances."
As for the comparison to big George, Foreman won the LINEAL heavyweight title by knocking out a legitimately good fighter who by all standards, deserved to be rated at the top of his division. Additionally, Foreman was not trying to repair a horribly damaged record, as his stats were still in respectable shape. As much as I think a win over valuev would have helped Evander's standings, the impact would have likely been minimal. In fact, most people ( including myself ), feel that he won that fight as it is, but I'm not about to bump him up 3 or 4 places because of it.

[Russell]

I didn't say it damages Holyfield in the least, now did I?

If he offically won it it would have done him a lot of good. As it is now, outside of the fans who actually care it's a loss. People definitely don't give Jimmy Young the benefit of the doubt 30 years on.

[mr. magoo]

It was nothing like the Foreman victory. Foreman executed a plan and ensnared Moorer, finishing him power. Foreman had offense and output. And for that matter, Moorer defended his title with a bit of passion.

Holyfield merely pulled out some moves from Dancing with the Stars and Valuev showed no pulse whatsoever. There were few if any meaningful connects in the entire fight. It was listless and uninspired.

I won't say that Foreman's plan was any better than Holyfield's, afterall he was losing in one sided fashion for almost a full 9 rounds before dropping Moorer in the tenth. I agree with you however, that Foreman's win over Moorer was by far a greater victory, because as you say, he was fighting a much livlier opponent who was seriously trying to kick his ass, and who had genuine accomplishements and abilities as a fighter.

[mr. magoo]

I didn't say it damages Holyfield in the least, now did I?

If he offically won it it would have done him a lot of good. As it is now, outside of the fans who actually care it's a loss. People definitely don't give Jimmy Young the benefit of the doubt 30 years on.


Yes, it was a loss, regardless of how I scored the fight. Nothing changes that....

Had he gotten the decision, it would have been a great way to leave boxing and might even have helped his all time status, but probably a very little margin.

[Unforgiven]

I'll keep my message simple :

THE CURRENT HEAVYWEIGHTS ARE SHIT.

I've been saying it for ages, and I have no time for the imbeciles who believe there are heavyweights around today who are on a par with the top big men of good heavyweight eras.

People say the division needs a new burst of energy in the shape of something like a prime Tyson, or an Ali, or a prime Holyfield.
Hell, I'd settle for the second-coming of Carl "The Truth" Williams ! :lol:

That's how bad things have got.

To make matters worse, the only two guys out there who are well-conditioned and capable of fighting a smart fight and aren't totally shot are the two guys who wont ever fight each other !
And the Klitschkos - who I find boring to watch most of the time - are probably being totally flattered by the absolutely dire level of competition put in front of them.

Most of the heavyweight contenders around today wouldn't even be considered good journeymen back in the day.

[mr. magoo]

I'll keep my message simple :

THE CURRENT HEAVYWEIGHTS ARE SHIT.

I've been saying it for ages, and I have no time for the imbeciles who believe there are heavyweights around today who are on a par with the top big men of good heavyweight eras.

People say the division needs a new burst of energy in the shape of something like a prime Tyson, or an Ali, or a prime Holyfield.
Hell, I'd settle for the second-coming of Carl "The Truth" Williams ! :lol:

That's how bad things have got.

To make matters worse, the only two guys out there who are well-conditioned and capable of fighting a smart fight and aren't totally shot are the two guys who wont ever fight each other !
And the Klitschkos - who I find boring to watch most of the time - are probably being totally flattered by the absolutely dire level of competition put in front of them.

Most of the heavyweight contenders around today wouldn't even be considered good journeymen back in the day.


As harsh as you made it out to be, I have to second this.

If we look at the heavyweight picture of the early 90's, we see

Tyson
Holyfield
Bowe
Lewis
Ruddock
Foreman
Witherspoon
Mercer
Moorer
Douglas

Frankly, I see very little room for even some of the best of today's heavy's except for the Klitschko bros who might fall in somewhere around mid-list. Fighters like Valuev, Peter, Maskaev, Chagaev, etc are not even top 15 heavys in that era.

[Unforgiven]

As harsh as you made it out to be, I have to second this.

If we look at the heavyweight picture of the early 90's, we see

Tyson
Holyfield
Bowe
Lewis
Ruddock
Foreman
Witherspoon
Mercer
Moorer
Douglas

Frankly, I see very little room for even some of the best of today's heavy's except for the Klitschko bros who might fall in somewhere around mid-list. Fighters like Valuev, Peter, Maskaev, Chagaev, etc are not even top 15 heavys in that era.

I look at Sam Peter and consider him something like a less polished and slower version of a Gary Mason.
And Mason was no one in his day.

[ChrisPontius]

Most of the heavyweight contenders around today wouldn't even be considered good journeymen back in the day.

I agree, Chuck Wepner would've reigned surpreme today, undisputed.

In fact, WHERE IS CHUCK?? Maybe he can launch a comeback...

[ChrisPontius]

It really is a shame that Evander didn't get the decision. Would a victory over Valuev have boosted his all time ratings? Probably not by much. But considering the circumstances, it would have been a great way to end a career.

I think he enhanced his legacy a bit. In my opinion it was a win. While Valuev looked worse than he ever did, Holyfield did what he could and should've gotten the win.

[mr. magoo]

I agree, Chuck Wepner would've reigned surpreme today, undisputed.

In fact, WHERE IS CHUCK?? Maybe he can launch a comeback...

All sarcasm asside,

as untalented as Chuck Wepner was, at least the man fought with heart. That's one thing that no one can take away from him. These guys have it all. Big bodies, quality trainers, well managed Amateur and professional careers, and cutting edge training facilities. Yet, look at the level of effort they put forth. Remember Evander Holyfield's trilogy with Riddick Bowe? Christ, when was the last time anyone saw a series of fights like that? Sorry, but Valuev vs Ruiz 1 & 2, don't quite cut it for me, and neither does most of what the Klitschko's have done lately.

[Seamus]

I'll keep my message simple :

THE CURRENT HEAVYWEIGHTS ARE SHIT.

I've been saying it for ages, and I have no time for the imbeciles who believe there are heavyweights around today who are on a par with the top big men of good heavyweight eras.

People say the division needs a new burst of energy in the shape of something like a prime Tyson, or an Ali, or a prime Holyfield.
Hell, I'd settle for the second-coming of Carl "The Truth" Williams ! :lol:

That's how bad things have got.

To make matters worse, the only two guys out there who are well-conditioned and capable of fighting a smart fight and aren't totally shot are the two guys who wont ever fight each other !
And the Klitschkos - who I find boring to watch most of the time - are probably being totally flattered by the absolutely dire level of competition put in front of them.

Most of the heavyweight contenders around today wouldn't even be considered good journeymen back in the day.


I don't buy that the talent is not here, only that you can't appraise talent until it has been displayed against nearly equal talent. The fact is that King, Arum and the old school of management and promotion has destroyed the division. There needs to be new blood at the top. The talent is there and more talent would be attracted were the sport more believable, less corrupt and safety-first. Perhaps, also, fans should not consider a HW shot or a bust after one or more losses. Then perhaps the up-and-comers and the champs would not be so protected.

Almost every decade has its detractors (I personally think the 70's are way, way overrated). Right now I see good talent at the top (I do not consider Valuev at the top) and potential on the way up. But there needs to be MORE FIGHTS MORE OFTEN among the elite, Povetkin, Chagaev, the Bros. K, Haye, Peter, any of the youngsters from the US or UK. Instead, we too often get retreads with connections getting shots and in the latest case a circus freak with very limited ability.

[Bummy Davis]

All sarcasm asside,

as untalented as Chuck Wepner was, at least the man fought with heart. That's one thing that no one can take away from him. These guys have it all. Big bodies, quality trainers, well managed Amateur and professional careers, and cutting edge training facilities. Yet, look at the level of effort they put forth. Remember Evander Holyfield's trilogy with Riddick Bowe? Christ, when was the last time anyone saw a series of fights like that? Sorry, but Valuev vs Ruiz 1 & 2, don't quite cut it for me, and neither does most of what the Klitschko's have done lately.

WEPNER WAS A NICE GUY AND TRIED TO WIN VS ALI BUT HE WAS A HORIBLE FIGHTER,i had to endure a few of his fights, he was slow,could not punch but was a tough hang in there guy...im afraid if he fought the klitscko's he would not only bleed but hit the deck and i can hardly see Evangelista or any of the contenders minus Foreman,Frazier,and Ali holding a title down today....Quarry would be somewhat compettive but not against the Klitscho's

[mr. magoo]

WEPNER WAS A NICE GUY AND TRIED TO WIN VS ALI BUT HE WAS A HORIBLE FIGHTER,i had to endure a few of his fights, he was slow,could not punch but was a tough hang in there guy...im afraid if he fought the klitscko's he would not only bleed but hit the deck and i can hardly see Evangelista or any of the contenders minus Foreman,Frazier,and Ali holding a title down today....Quarry would be somewhat compettive but not against the Klitscho's


I agree with what you say, but I also think you're missing the point.

For all of their athletic ability, most of today's top raters just don't cut it in the heart department. Sure, I'd pick the Klits to beat Quarry, Wepner, Shavers and perhaps even Lyle and Norton. But, who would you rather pay to see fight, the Klits or those other guys? Heavyweight boxing sucks right now. Roughly 9 out of every 10 fights are borderline unwatchable. Evander Holyfield out foxing Valuev the other night, was a faint cry from the past, and a reminder of the days when boxing was boxing.

[ChrisPontius]

Evander Holyfield out foxing Valuev the other night, was a faint cry from the past, and a reminder of the days when boxing was boxing.

There is some irony in that, considering Holyfield did exactly the opposite of the slugfests he used to represent, to beat Valuev for a "reminder of when boxing was boxing".

[mr. magoo]

There is some irony in that, considering Holyfield did exactly the opposite of the slugfests he used to represent, to beat Valuev for a "reminder of when boxing was boxing".

I don't care if he used a Russian AK-47 to obliterate Valuev. The fact is, he fought a better fight despite being 46 years of age and not having fought in over a year. Additionally, he showed more heart and effort which incidently is the hallmark of Holyfield.

[Seamus]

I think we really ought to look at Valuev as a fighter in steep decline from a low precipice. He does not look right physically when comparing him to previous fights.

And Magoo, I disagree in one part in regards to Moorer-Foreman. Look back to the 7th on and you see George shaking Moorer with thudding jabs. It was hardly a one-punch KO. He waited on Moorer to get tired and sloppy and needled his way in. Power took care of the rest as Moorer was beaten up at the end.

[OLD FOGEY]

Some pertinent questions need to be asked. I haven't seen the fight yet.

1. Who did you have winning?

2. Do you think it was a fix?

I see quite a bit of speculation.

3. Just how woeful is Valuev?

A dead duck version of Holyfield gives him no end of trouble with the complex old move a little left, move a little right i hear.

4. This fight makes a disgrace of the depth of talent in the heavyweight ranks present day?

Remember, if it was Wlad or Vitali dominating Valuev (as they surely would) they would have recieved big accolades from many.

5. Does this fight now reflect on Wlad and Vitali and the opponents they have beat?

6. In a nutshell, what do you think of the present division and the fighters in it?


1. Who won--Valuev. I watched the fight a second time just to see if my initial impression was crazy as almost everyone else sees Holyfield being robbed and winning easily. I gave Valuev every round from round six on as Holyfield effectively stopped fighting offensively. You don't win rounds throwing five or fewer punches per round. Some may reply but "what did Valuev do?" and I have to say he did enough. He started getting his jab working and he started scoring with his right. He put together little three or four punch combinations. Now, his punches couldn't break a rotten eggshell, he looked slow and mechanical, and for a supposed champion, he sucked, but he did enough to beat a 46 year old man who seemed to be basically just fighting to survive over the second half of the fight.

2. I would have voted with the judges, myself, with Valuev two points up.

3. How woeful is Valuev--pretty woeful, but just as he is overrated by some because of his size, he is also underrated when he just manages to get by as he did against Holyfield. But reasonably, Valuev should have beaten the ancient Holyfield decisively, not like this.

4. The heavyweight division lacks both a charismatic star and depth of talent. Thompson, Peter, and Valuev all look mediocre to me.

5. This fight did not reflect on the Klitschkos, but the total lack of talent and committment by Thompson, Peter, and Rahman did.

6. The only interesting fight would be Vitali against Wlad and that will never come off, or either Klitschko against David Haye.

[ChrisPontius]

I don't care if he used a Russian AK-47 to obliterate Valuev. The fact is, he fought a better fight despite being 46 years of age and not having fought in over a year. Additionally, he showed more heart and effort which incidently is the hallmark of Holyfield.

Holyfield showed more heart and effort? He was on the backfoot all night long and barely got hit by big shots. Now i'm not saying those are negatives, but to say he showed more "heart and effort" fighting that way isn't on the mark if you ask me..

[mr. magoo]

Holyfield showed more heart and effort? He was on the backfoot all night long and barely got hit by big shots. Now i'm not saying those are negatives, but to say he showed more "heart and effort" fighting that way isn't on the mark if you ask me..



I think he showed heart from the stand point that he was not even supposed to survive the introduction, yet instead of lying down and collecting a paycheck he fought for 12 rounds, and arguably won it... No, this was not the Holyfield of old, but as I said earlier, he gave us a faint cry of what used to be, and certainly showed more effort than Valuev.

[Bummy Davis]

Holyfeild used his smarts and showed that Valuev does not know how to handle movement but Holy should have pressed a bit more to insure a win, it was close and we know how that can go and so does E H

[AnthonyJ74]

Holyfield should now be the oldest fighter to win a portion of the heavyweight championship.

[Bad_Intentions]

1. I had Holyfield winning, the fight is on youtube it was very boring with neither guy doing much.

2. A bad decision not a fix and who knows Evander might get a rematch.

3. I felt he should have lost Ruiz once anyway the guy is nothing special besides his size. I think he is even worse then Peter.

4. The division is defiantly poor and most of the guys lack the charisma or style to get causal fans interested. However I don't think it is as bad as it was a couple years ago as long as the right matches up are made the division popularity could rise there are a few young guys like Haye, Chagaev and Povetkin who look like they have bright futures. Ruslan is the real WBA champ anyway and with the Haye vs Vitali and Wlad vs Povetkin fights to come next year it’s starting to look better.

5. Depends if they were to start struggling with old guys who were shot then yes but if one of them would to beat Valuev easily then it wouldn't really matter as it would show the difference in class between them.

6. It certainly isn't the glamour division anymore but it is looking better then before and if the one of the champions really wants to be undisputed number 1 and is able to unify all the abc titles it would look a lot better. It is not the strongest division in boxing but not the worst either.
:good:good

[DamonD]

1. Who did you have winning?
Holyfield 116-112. Really bad fight though, so little action. And no doubt Valuev did rally, of sorts, over the second half of the fight.

2. Do you think it was a fix?
I prefer not to. I think Holyfield would be too proud, and Valuev seems a pretty stand-up guy too. Possibly between Sauderland and the judges? Not sure.

3. Just how woeful is Valuev?
It was a terrible performance, worst I've seen from him. Some are trying to paint it as Holyfield's movement giving him problems, but he's not the first guy to try stick 'n' move with Valuev and he was still able to perform better and throw more against those guys. He really let himself down...he fought like he was scared of Holyfield's power, which really shouldn't have been the case.

4. This fight makes a disgrace of the depth of talent in the heavyweight ranks present day?
Valuev's stock drops a lot, but I don't think it really affects the division in general.
Anyone thinking this result means Holyfield could take on the Klitschkos with the same needs their head examined even more than Evander.

5. Does this fight now reflect on Wlad and Vitali and the opponents they have beat?
Again, pretty much confirms it...maybe not so much Vitali who's only had the one fight since coming back, but Wladimir has been beating the best comp in recent years.

6. In a nutshell, what do you think of the present division and the fighters in it?
The Klitschkos are of course stand-outs and I have hopes for Haye. If he can do something about the fat and lack of defence Arreola possibly. Povetkin has potential. Maybe Gomez. Still think Chambers can make an impact. Apart from that it's pretty damn thin.


As for the comparison to the 90s heavyweights...well, personally that's my second-favourite decade in heavyweight boxing next to the 70s. But I don't think it's about the skill so much. I think there are skillful fighters in the division today.

The main difference, the main problem, is that there are very few marketable fighters.
People like personalities, and the often wild and crazy 90s scene had them in spades.

Thuggish Tyson, holyman Holyfield, dreadlocked Lewis, big-eating Uncle George Foreman, funny guy Bowe, moody Moorer, erratic McCall, 'loveable loser' Bruno, heavy-handed Ruddock, redneck brawler Morrison, big-talking Hide, big-punching New Zealander Tua...and so on. Lots of interesting characters. Then you throw in the press conference brawls, arrests, drug busts, upsets and network battles...

[MRBILL]

Lon Chaney showed more speed and power in the 1945 flick: "The Mummy's Curse." Nick Valuev was horrid in his attack...... Holy can still move and punch a bit; Holy won..... The decision stunk.....

MR.BILL

[mr. magoo]

Lon Chaney showed more speed and power in the 1945 flick: "The Mummy's Curse." MR.BILL


Wasn't Lon Chaney the wolfman, or did he do multiple creep roles?

[OLD FOGEY]

Wasn't Lon Chaney the wolfman, or did he do multiple creep roles?

He did multiple creep roles. He was the Wolfman several times, the Mummy 3 times, and Dracula and the Frankenstein monster once each, plus assorted lesser monsters such as the Electric Man and the Indestructible Man. The Mummy had a great left, though, and finished most of his opponents quickly. He was good at cutting off the ring. He would be banned today for using illegal performance enhancing drugs. Without the Tana Fluid, he was just another stiff.

[mr. magoo]

He did multiple creep roles. He was the Wolfman several times, the Mummy 3 times, and Dracula and the Frankenstein monster once each, plus assorted lesser monsters such as the Electric Man and the Indestructable Man. The Mummy had a great left, though, and finished most of his opponents quickly. He was good at cutting off the ring. He would be banned today for using illegal performance enhancing drugs. Without the Tana Fluid, he was just another stiff.


Sounds like Chaney always had a card lined up. I bet Frankenstein was like the Valuev of his day.

[OLD FOGEY]

Sounds like Chaney always had a card lined up. I bet Frankenstein was like the Valuev of his day.

Now that you mention it.

[Unforgiven]

I agree, Chuck Wepner would've reigned surpreme today, undisputed.

In fact, WHERE IS CHUCK?? Maybe he can launch a comeback...

I wasn't refering to Chuck Wepner as a good journeyman. That's your call.
The guy was a mediocre journeyman, but he was white and from the East Coast of the USA so somehow he got in the rankings. Even his manager jokes about how Wepner got a winning run at one point and got a ranking.
Wepner was stopped in 3 rounds by a 3-0 George Foreman, and we know how protected Foreman was early on.
He was also matched with a fledgling Buster Mathis and an up-and-coming Duane Bobick, who were fed tomato cans early too.
Wepner got ranked, I assume, with a horrendous 12-round robbery decision over an over-the-hill ex-contender Ernie Terrell.
Or a trilogy with another white-skinned New Jersey ham-and-egger Randy Neumann

[Unforgiven]

I don't buy that the talent is not here, only that you can't appraise talent until it has been displayed against nearly equal talent. The fact is that King, Arum and the old school of management and promotion has destroyed the division. There needs to be new blood at the top. The talent is there and more talent would be attracted were the sport more believable, less corrupt and safety-first. Perhaps, also, fans should not consider a HW shot or a bust after one or more losses. Then perhaps the up-and-comers and the champs would not be so protected.

Almost every decade has its detractors (I personally think the 70's are way, way overrated). Right now I see good talent at the top (I do not consider Valuev at the top) and potential on the way up. But there needs to be MORE FIGHTS MORE OFTEN among the elite, Povetkin, Chagaev, the Bros. K, Haye, Peter, any of the youngsters from the US or UK. Instead, we too often get retreads with connections getting shots and in the latest case a circus freak with very limited ability.

In truth, Chagaev didn't look THAT superior in his fight against Valuev, nor did he look special against Matt Skelton.
There's no reason for me to believe he's not just another mediocre fighter of moderate ability "with connections".

That's the problem with today's era and people apologizing for it. Valuev is obviously beyond the pale now, but people will then answer that with "Oh, he was never legit anyway, I'm taking about the TOP GUYS like X, Y, and Z" ........ But then 6 months from now X's name with be mud, and Y will be the laughingstock disappointment of the division, and people say "Ah, but A, B and C are coming through".

I dont care whether there's "talent" or not. Maybe there are fighters with lots of it. But no one's performing, apart from perhaps the Klitschko brothers (some or most of the time). And it boils down to committment, conditioning and professionalism more than talent. Those brothers are focussed, stay in shape, and (at least wlad) have planned career-schedule.

klitschko v Klitschko is the only fight out there that we know is between two proven performers who are unlikely to turn up fat or shit. But that fight wont happen. David Haye MIGHT be for real, but he talks a lot to get headlines instead of fighting and showing us his ability.
Other guys are sick or injured or whatever. and when they get round to fighting dont expect much.
Wladimir versus Ibragimov was two top 5 guys, IMO. And it was REALLY AWFUL, as bad a non-fight as Valuev v. Holyfield.

I think the division has been getting worse and worse for about 10 years now. Really. People tell me Chris Byrd was a top 30 all-time heavyweight ! WTF ? He typifies much of what you say, a sideshow with connections, benefitting from questionable decisions against fringe contenders and holding a meaningless title.

sure enough, other eras get "over-rated", but there's NOTHING to get interested in this one that can even be used to "over-rate" it in years to come. Wlad and Vitali might get remembered, but LOSING to an old Lennox Lewis might be the most remrakable thing to be said between them !

[MRBILL]

Wasn't Lon Chaney the wolfman, or did he do multiple creep roles?

He also did a few Mummy sequels in the 1940's.....:yep

MR.BILL