How would Jerry Quarry...

[SteveO]

stack up in today's heavyweight scene?

And as a side note, does anyone have a professional and clean copy of his last fight with Ron Cranmer? I have a bootleg and its a little grainy and incomplete.

[Zakman]

A prime Quarry would do quite well against most of the HWs around today, with the exception of talented giants like the Klitschkos. In an era of divided titles such as this, he would undoubtedly have a belt, and be considered one of the best out there.

[brooklyn1550]

Among the very top guys...
Klitschko defeats Quarry
Quarry defeats Maskaev
Quarry defeats Chagaev
Quarry defeats Ibragimov
Quarry defeats Peter

He would be considered the 2nd best heavyweight in the world

[Irländsk]

Only Wlad Klitschko could defeat Quarry if he were active today. He would be second best out there and could probably take wlad 3 outta ten fight. He was a seriously tough cunt.

[cross_trainer]

Ibragimov might do well against him. He seems to have the style to make the fight difficult for Quarry. Chagaev would have a good shot as well. Jerry would probably beat Peter, Maskaev, and most of the rest, and I'd go about 50-50 on fights with Wlad and Vitali.

[Decker]

Ibragimov might do well against him. He seems to have the style to make the fight difficult for Quarry. Chagaev would have a good shot as well. Jerry would probably beat Peter, Maskaev, and most of the rest, and I'd go about 50-50 on fights with Wlad and Vitali. I've enjoyed reading many of your posts over the years, but can't agree here. Jerry was underrated... today he could be CW champ, and could beat low end to average HWs. But against the above guys he'd be an underdog. On JQ best nite he might win one of these.

50-50 vs K bros :admin Wlad & Vitali are about half a foot taller and 50 lbs heavier than Jerry and skilled. I see JQ busted up & stopped vs either brother.

[Scar]

Among the very top guys...
Klitschko defeats Quarry
Quarry defeats Maskaev
Quarry defeats Chagaev
Quarry defeats Ibragimov
Quarry defeats Peter

He would be considered the 2nd best heavyweight in the world

Totally agree even though I believe Peter might be able to beat him.

[robert ungurean]

He would hold one of the belts.

[Jack]

I think he beats them all besides Wladimir. If Vitali returns in good form, add his name too, but I don't know about that yet.

[cross_trainer]

I've enjoyed reading many of your posts over the years, but can't agree here. Jerry was underrated... today he could be CW champ, and could beat low end to average HWs. But against the above guys he'd be an underdog. On JQ best nite he might win one of these.

50-50 vs K bros :admin Wlad & Vitali are about half a foot taller and 50 lbs heavier than Jerry and skilled. I see JQ busted up & stopped vs either brother.
Yes, the Klitschkos are both much bigger, but in this case size isn't going to confer massive advantages on them.

Quarry took punches from Shavers, Foster, and Frazier--in other words, he's been through everything from massive concussive shots to attritional concussive shots. His chin will hold. Moreover, the Klitschkos' strength on the inside will be largely negated by his short, stubby arms and inside fighting ability. He was no weakling himself, either--he lifted Ali up during their fight, for example.

I see this coming down to a styles thing. Both Klitschkos have a tendency to hold their left out and throw single rather than combination punches. Both are headhunters, and Vitali isn't very mobile on offense or defense. Both, in my opinion, are vulnerable to a canny, mobile, and hard-hitting counterpuncher like Quarry whose great stamina and chin will allow him to "hang in there" as a live threat rather than a punching bag more than most Klitschko opponents in the past have done.




It comes down to styles, not quality. Quarry's stylistic tendencies will make him more dangerous to the Klitschkos even though Wlad is a better fighter overall.

[Sakura]

Jerry Quarry was 6'0 and 200lb or below, depends on when was his prime time....i cant see anyone, about that size be comparable against klitchkos. Even Chris Byrd is bigger

[cross_trainer]

Jerry Quarry was 6'0 and 200lb or below, depends on when was his prime time....i cant see anyone, about that size be comparable against klitchkos. Even Chris Byrd is bigger

Brewster would be about the same size as Quarry if he dropped a few pounds of fat, lifted a bit less, and ran a bit more. Slightly bigger, but not much.

Holyfield was between 190 and 210 pounds, and he would probably beat either Klitschko. Ironically, his style is also very similar to Quarry's.

[Decker]

Good counter cross trainer :D I think we may be close in age. Yes, I'm aware of Jerry's exploits and strengths. When Quarry was on he was a damn good fighter. I don't think Foster or Frazier hit as hard as the K bros nor as strong. And c'mon did Shavers land anything close to a clean shot vs Jerry in their dust up?! :cool:

I think Quarry-Lyle is what you - and others - hope will transpire vs the K bros. Me, I wouldn't bet that way.

[cross_trainer]

Good counter cross trainer :D I think we may be close in age. Yes, I'm aware of Jerry's exploits and strengths. When Quarry was on he was a damn good fighter. I don't think Foster or Frazier hit as hard as the K bros nor as strong. And c'mon did Shavers land anything close to a clean shot vs Jerry in their dust up?! :cool:

I think Quarry-Lyle is what you - and others - hope will transpire vs the K bros. Me, I wouldn't bet that way.

Good points. :good

Nah, Shavers never landed anything really massive, but he did land a few punches before he got obliterated. Foster did, and I think he was a comparable puncher to Wlad--prior to Quarry, he had annihilated everybody who faced him, and aside from his power he had few truly oustanding characteristics. Frazier wasn't a hitter in Wlad's league, but he could sustain a slow-paced, vicious beating on his opponents better than Vitali can. Bringing Frazier in was merely to demonstrate that Quarry had faced several types of punchers.

[Sakura]

Brewster would be about the same size as Quarry if he dropped a few pounds of fat, lifted a bit less, and ran a bit more. Slightly bigger, but not much.

Holyfield was between 190 and 210 pounds, and he would probably beat either Klitschko. Ironically, his style is also very similar to Quarry's.

Brewster is considerably bigger than Quarry, and if not, they must take Brewster in the camp(you know what i mean)..and remember, what beating Brewster get's before he surrender in second fight...how many hits he get inside?..not much..

[cross_trainer]

Brewster is considerably bigger than Quarry, and if not, they must take Brewster in the camp(you know what i mean)..and remember, what beating Brewster get's before he surrender in second fight...how many hits he get inside?..not much..

I don't know exactly what you mean when you say "they must take Brewster in the camp". :huh

[2smart4u]

:patsch he would be slaughtered by VLAD or VITALY from range ! He wouldnt beat guys like TUA either ! He would be cruiser champ and it would stop there ! :bbb

[Sakura]

He must be "extremely" hard diet, if he try to go about same weight than Quarry was.

[2smart4u]

Brewster would be about the same size as Quarry if he dropped a few pounds of fat, lifted a bit less, and ran a bit more. Slightly bigger, but not much.

Holyfield was between 190 and 210 pounds, and he would probably beat either Klitschko. Ironically, his style is also very similar to Quarry's.:patsch And what reason do you think HOLY beats either KLIT ! he had a hard enough time with reasonably large grandfathers and not much success against the other 2 big guys he fought ! and BOWE is neither as fast techniclly sound or powerful as either KLIT ! he is also smaller ! :deal

[Sakura]

:patsch And what reason do you think HOLY beats either KLIT ! he had a hard enough time with reasonably large grandfathers and not much success against the other 2 big guys he fought ! and BOWE is neither as fast techniclly sound or powerful as either KLIT ! he is also smaller ! :deal

Agree...and holy was more skilled fighter..

[ChrisPontius]

Yes, the Klitschkos are both much bigger, but in this case size isn't going to confer massive advantages on them.

Quarry took punches from Shavers, Foster, and Frazier--in other words, he's been through everything from massive concussive shots to attritional concussive shots. His chin will hold. Moreover, the Klitschkos' strength on the inside will be largely negated by his short, stubby arms and inside fighting ability. He was no weakling himself, either--he lifted Ali up during their fight, for example.

I see this coming down to a styles thing. Both Klitschkos have a tendency to hold their left out and throw single rather than combination punches. Both are headhunters, and Vitali isn't very mobile on offense or defense. Both, in my opinion, are vulnerable to a canny, mobile, and hard-hitting counterpuncher like Quarry whose great stamina and chin will allow him to "hang in there" as a live threat rather than a punching bag more than most Klitschko opponents in the past have done.




It comes down to styles, not quality. Quarry's stylistic tendencies will make him more dangerous to the Klitschkos even though Wlad is a better fighter overall.

Quarry didn't take many punches from Shavers. Frazier doesn't hit as hard as Wlad (it's more the pressure) and what's your evidence that Foster hits as hard as Wlad? He knocked out mediocre lightheavies but never did much against heavyweights, aside from cutting Ali.

I think Wlad would keep Quarry at the end of his jab for most of the time like he did Peter, and tie him up on the inside. Ali, while being past his best, didn't have much trouble with it. Ellis, who lacked the power to keep Quarry off beat him, too.

Brewster is much bigger than Quarry, at least 15 pounds heavier and a few inches taller. On top of that, Brewster is a murderous puncher whereas Quarry isn't.

[box03]

:patsch And what reason do you think HOLY beats either KLIT ! he had a hard enough time with reasonably large grandfathers and not much success against the other 2 big guys he fought ! and BOWE is neither as fast techniclly sound or powerful as either KLIT ! he is also smaller ! :deal Lewis hits as hard or harder than Wlad, and Holyfield didnt go down in 24 rounds against him. Holyfield also took a couple good shots from Foreman who no light puncher at any age. Holyfield probably would of tested Wlads chin early with some nice combinations, I cant see Wlad being able to eat too many of Holyfields left hooks. Wlads chin will always be his downfall which will be exposed every so often by good puncher, Wlad reminds me of Tommy Morrison alot bad chin and stamina but alot talent.

[2smart4u]

Lewis hits as hard or harder than Wlad, and Holyfield didnt go down in 24 rounds against him. Holyfield also took a couple good shots from Foreman who no light puncher at any age. Holyfield probably would of tested Wlads chin early with some nice combinations, I cant see Wlad being able to eat too many of Holyfields left hooks. Wlads chin will always be his downfall which will be exposed every so often by good puncher, Wlad reminds me of Tommy Morrison alot bad chin and stamina but alot talent.:lol: VLAD is nothing like TOMMY and for the record HOLY has had stamina problems himself in fights ! but i dont see it highlighted as a fault ! HOLY is a small heavyweight who never had much success with big fighters ! VLAD is larger then anyone he would have ever fought and for the most part has little trouble with small heavyweights with average power ! HOLY would get taken appart !:bbb

[box03]

:lol: VLAD is nothing like TOMMY and for the record HOLY has had stamina problems himself in fights ! but i dont see it highlighted as a fault ! HOLY is a small heavyweight who never had much success with big fighters ! VLAD is larger then anyone he would have ever fought and for the most part has little trouble with small heavyweights with average power ! HOLY would get taken appart !:bbbHes 2-3-1 against so called big good fighters, and was able to floor Bowe in there 3rd match and wlads chin is not nearly as good or his inside fighting. Wlad has never fought a fighter like Holyfield so you really have no basis for a perdiction, name one fighter other than light punching Bryd who possed the boxing skills Holyfield had?

[cross_trainer]

Quarry didn't take many punches from Shavers. Frazier doesn't hit as hard as Wlad (it's more the pressure) and what's your evidence that Foster hits as hard as Wlad? He knocked out mediocre lightheavies but never did much against heavyweights, aside from cutting Ali.

I think Wlad would keep Quarry at the end of his jab for most of the time like he did Peter, and tie him up on the inside. Ali, while being past his best, didn't have much trouble with it. Ellis, who lacked the power to keep Quarry off beat him, too.

Brewster is much bigger than Quarry, at least 15 pounds heavier and a few inches taller. On top of that, Brewster is a murderous puncher whereas Quarry isn't.

Mac Foster, not Bob.

[2smart4u]

Hes 2-3-1 against so called big good fighters, and was able to floor Bowe in there 3rd match and wlads chin is not nearly as good or his inside fighting. Wlad has never fought a fighter like Holyfield so you really have no basis for a perdiction, name one fighter other than light punching Bryd who possed the boxing skills Holyfield had?:patsch BOWE refused to get in the ring with any big punchers so why are you talking about his chin ! the only big fighters HOLY faced in their prime beat him 4 out of five fights and arguably 5 out of five ! And as far as inside fighting it wouldnt be nessesary as HOLY would be on the end of his jab and big right all night ! VLAD is also much better then BOWE outside and has much better power ! HOLY doest have the big equalizing power and certainly wouldnt win a boxing match against VLAD ! HOLY would get taken apart !:deal

[2smart4u]

Mac Foster, not Bob.:good How the hell did MAC end up anyway ? He was the next big thing in the late 60s if I remember correctly !

[cross_trainer]

:patsch he would be slaughtered by VLAD or VITALY from range ! He wouldnt beat guys like TUA either ! He would be cruiser champ and it would stop there ! :bbb
At this point I've got to wonder why you continue replying to these topics. All you post is "He's bigger, more skilled, and hits harder" over and over, and use each to justify the other. You don't intend to actually discuss these points--just to repeat them.

What's the purpose? Doesn't it get boring after a while? :huh

[cross_trainer]

:good How the hell did MAC end up anyway ? He was the next big thing in the late 60s if I remember correctly !

Destroyed by Ali and Quarry, then fizzled out.

[cross_trainer]

:patsch BOWE refused to get in the ring with any big punchers so why are you talking about his chin ! the only big fighters HOLY faced in their prime beat him 4 out of five fights and arguably 5 out of five ! And as far as inside fighting it wouldnt be nessesary as HOLY would be on the end of his jab and big right all night ! VLAD is also much better then BOWE outside and has much better power ! HOLY doest have the big equalizing power and certainly wouldnt win a boxing match against VLAD ! HOLY would get taken apart !:deal

:patsch

It's as if size and power are the only two variables you use...

[box03]

:patsch BOWE refused to get in the ring with any big punchers so why are you talking about his chin ! the only big fighters he faced in their prime beat him 4 out of five fights and arguably 5 out of five ! And as far as inside fighting it wouldnt be nessesary as HOLY would be on the end of his jab and big right all night ! VLAD is also much better then BOWE outside and has much better power ! HOLY doest have the big equalizing power and certainly wouldnt win a boxing match against VLAD ! HOLY would get taken apart !:deal In his prime Holyfield 90-93 was a great inside fighter who on the inside would tear Wlad apart anybody will tell you that, that was part of the reason Bowe had such good success with Holyfield because he himself was a good inside technician. As I said before and you refuse to answer when has Wlad ever had to deal with a good fighter such as Holyfield? I just cant see Wlad being able to take Holyfields left hook in this fight and a prime Holyfield would be able to get in on Wlad and do some dammage.

[Decker]

With some it always turns into an anti K bros thread.

Lewis hits as hard or harder than Wlad, Very close - plus or minus a bit either way. Same w/their chins.

and Holyfield didnt go down in 24 rounds against him. If LL knew he was going to be robbed in their 1st fight he'd have been less cautious when he got Holy in deep shit a few times. Holy was in some serious defensive shells at least twice in Lewis-Holy I. LL was never in trouble.

Holyfield also took a couple good shots from Foreman who no light puncher at any age. Holyfield probably would of tested Wlads chin early with some nice combinations, I cant see Wlad being able to eat too many of Holyfields left hooks. Wlad took many shots - clean and otherwise - from Peter, who hits harder than roided up CW Holy, and won a comfy UD. Next...

Wlads chin will always be his downfall which will be exposed every so often by good puncher, Wlad reminds me of Tommy Morrison alot bad chin and stamina but alot talent. Tommy could bang and had a dangerous left hook, but Wlad is on a higher level. Most fighters are exposed sooner or later. J Louis (chin) was exposed vs Schmeling in their 1st fight, Ali was exposed by Frazier in 1971, Frazier by Foreman,... is this some major point you're making?

[2smart4u]

At this point I've got to wonder why you continue replying to these topics. All you post is "He's bigger, more skilled, and hits harder" over and over, and use each to justify the other. You don't intend to actually discuss these points--just to repeat them.

What's the purpose? Doesn't it get boring after a while?:patsch they are the only reasons that should haved to be posted CROSS ! I could over annilize the situation and simply muddy what is or should be very clear ! Like you do ! That must get boring after awhile doesnt it ? :deal

[cross_trainer]

In his prime Holyfield 90-93 was a great inside fighter who on the inside would tear Wlad apart anybody will tell you that, that was part of the reason Bowe had such good success with Holyfield because he himself was a good inside technician. As I said before and you refuse to answer when has Wlad ever had to deal with a good fighter such as Holyfield? I just cant see Wlad being able to take Holyfields left hook in this fight and a prime Holyfield would be able to get in on Wlad and do some dammage.

Wlad is bigger than Holyfield, so Holyfield's punches can't hurt him. They'll just bounce off.

[2smart4u]

In his prime Holyfield 90-93 was a great inside fighter who on the inside would tear Wlad apart anybody will tell you that, that was part of the reason Bowe had such good success with Holyfield because he himself was a good inside technician. As I said before and you refuse to answer when has Wlad ever had to deal with a good fighter such as Holyfield? I just cant see Wlad being able to take Holyfields left hook in this fight and a prime Holyfield would be able to get in on Wlad and do some dammage.:lol: BOWE had success on the inside because he was the bigger stronger man and also didnt have a very good outside game and so had no choice ! HOLY get get the hell beat out of him trying to get inside against VLAD ! :hi: And for the record VLAD has never fought anyone exactly like HOLY but has had little trouble with similar fighters ! HOLY however fought someone who fought much like VLAD and he got beat and beat quite easily ! :deal VLAD would take him apart !:bbb

[cross_trainer]

:patsch they are the only reasons that should haved to be posted CROSS ! I could over annilize the situation and simply muddy what is or should be very clear ! Like you do ! That must get boring after awhile doesnt it ? :deal
I'm OVER-analyzing? :lol:

Perhaps I should simplify. Ahem...

" :patsch VLAD is bigger. He beat bigger fighters, so he's more skilled. HOLY did not beat bigger fighters. :yep He beat smaller fighters, so he's less skilled. VLAD has more power than HOLY because he's bigger. HOLY lost to fighters who are big and powerful. :nut WLAD is big and powerful. WLAD will beat HOLY because he's more skilled, big, and powerful. Big powerful small big powerful small big powerful small big powerful small bigpowerfulsmallbigpowerfulsmallbigpowerfulsmall...."

[2smart4u]

Wlad is bigger than Holyfield, so Holyfield's punches can't hurt him. They'll just bounce off.:patsch this is simply an asshole statment CROSS ! SIZE and SKILL are a very big advantage ! HOLY never did well against the combiation his whole carreer ( but of cource he would suddenly against VLAD :lol: )! And according to you the much larger harder punching mans shots would just bounce off HOLY ! Dispite evidence to the contrary ! :hi:

[box03]

With some it always turns into an anti K bros thread.

Very close - plus or minus a bit either way. Same w/their chins.

If LL knew he was going to be robbed in their 1st fight he'd have been less cautious when he got Holy in deep shit a few times. Holy was in some serious defensive shells at least twice in Lewis-Holy I. LL was never in trouble.

Wlad took many shots - clean and otherwise - from Peter, who hits harder than roided up CW Holy, and won a comfy UD. Next...

Tommy could bang and had a dangerous left hook, but Wlad is on a higher level. Most fighters are exposed sooner or later. J Louis (chin) was exposed vs Schmeling in their 1st fight, Ali was exposed by Frazier in 1971, Frazier by Foreman,... is this some major point you're making? I agree with some of your points but Lewis had alot better chin, Lewis only been down what 2 or 3 times, Wlads been down a total of 11 or 12 no comparison there. Peter did hit Wlad with some solid shots in which Wlad went down 3 times in that fight, Peter if you watch in that fight smothered alot of his punches when he had Wlad hurt which is a sign of inexperience on Peters part. I still think Holyfields sharp punches would be to much for Wlad to handle.

[cross_trainer]

:lol: BOWE had success on the inside because he was the bigger stronger man and also didnt have a very good outside game and so had no choice ! HOLY get get the hell beat out of him trying to get inside against VLAD ! :hi: And for the record VLAD has never fought anyone exactly like HOLY but has had little trouble with similar fighters ! HOLY however fought someone who fought much like VLAD and he got beat and beat quite easily ! :deal VLAD would take him apart !:bbb

Name one fighter Wlad fought who's similar in style to Holyfield.

And it better not be "Chris Byrd, because he's the same size as Holyfield".

[cross_trainer]

:patsch this is simply an asshole statment CROSS ! SIZE and SKILL are a very big advantage ! HOLY never did well against the combiation his whole carreer ( but of cource he would suddenly against VLAD :lol: )! And according to you the much larger harder punching mans shots would just bounce off HOLY ! Dispite evidence to the contrary ! :hi:
:patsch

Again, three variables--power, "skill", and size. And you didn't show how Wlad is skilled anyway. Is it because he's bigger and his opponents are bigger?

Also, what "evidence to the contrary"? Holyfield wasn't floored by Lewis in TWO encounters, and Lewis hits at least as hard as Klitschko. Your obsession with Wlad's size and power is blinding you to very obvious points.

[2smart4u]

I'm OVER-analyzing? :lol:

Perhaps I should simplify. Ahem...

" :patsch VLAD is bigger. He beat bigger fighters, so he's more skilled. HOLY did not beat bigger fighters. :yep He beat smaller fighters, so he's less skilled. VLAD has more power than HOLY because he's bigger. HOLY lost to fighters who are big and powerful. :nut WLAD is big and powerful. WLAD will beat HOLY because he's more skilled and bigger. Big powerful small big powerful small big powerful small big powerful small bigpowerfulsmallbigpowerfulsmallbigpowerfulsmall....":yep If you know so little about the fighters you shouldnt even be in the debate ! :hey If you need to explain things like your dealing with a first grader whats the point ! VLAD being a fighter who is harder to hit and harder to outbox is pretty easy to understand ! Oh hell I forgot your game of intelectual one upmanship thats is kind of funny to anyone with half a brain !:yep

[2smart4u]

:patsch

Again, three variables--power, "skill", and size. And you didn't show how Wlad is skilled anyway. Is it because he's bigger and his opponents are bigger?

Also, what "evidence to the contrary"? Holyfield wasn't floored by Lewis in TWO encounters, and Lewis hits at least as hard as Klitschko. Your obsession with Wlad's size and power is blinding you to very obvious points.:patsch please man give it break ! What evidence do you think you provided to claim HOLY would beat said fighters ! When in fact he had no success whatsoever when faced with similar fighters ! :deal I just dying to ear this convoluted crap !:lol: And for the record HOLY was koed by a lighter hitter then VLAD and saved by the bell when in with cruisers ! Your obsession with glorifying older fighters apparently has blinded you to these facts !

[cross_trainer]

:yep If you know so little about the fighters you shouldnt even be in the debate ! :hey If you need to explain things like your dealing with a first grader whats the point ! VLAD being a fighter who is harder to hit and harder to outbox is pretty easy to understand ! Oh hell I forgot your game of intelectual one upmanship thats is kind of funny to anyone with half a brain !:yep

:rofl

By any measurement, Holyfield is more skilled that Wlad. Better headmovement, foot movement, counterpunching ability. Crisper left hook. A willingness to trade on the inside when necessary, keeping the arms close to his body rather than flailing like Wlad does in close. He had a wider variety of punches--including an uppercut. Kept continuously on the move and was able to position himself far better than Wlad does. Did not move straight back when attacked.

But then, you haven't have noticed any of these things, because you never go beyond the basic "skill"/size/power equation.

[cross_trainer]

:patsch please man give it break ! What evidence do you think you provided to claim HOLY would beat said fighters ! When in fact he had no success whatsoever when faced with similar fighters ! :deal I just dying to ear this convoluted crap !:lol:

What similar fighters? :lol:

Lewis is the only one who's remotely close.

[2smart4u]

:rofl

By any measurement, Holyfield is more skilled that Wlad. Better headmovement, foot movement, counterpunching ability. Crisper left hook. A willingness to trade on the inside when necessary, keeping the arms close to his body rather than flailing like Wlad does in close. He had a wider variety of punches--including an uppercut. Kept continuously on the move and was able to position himself far better than Wlad does. Did not move straight back when attacked.

But then, you haven't have noticed any of these things, because you never go beyond the basic "skill"/size/power equation.:lol: VLADS hook is much harder and fired off the jab so why would you claim that ! VLAD is also harder to hit cleanly and is the harder puncher who is the much more effective boxer according to all stats ! So whats your point again ! Oh yes now I remember ! Your guru status !:lol:

[2smart4u]

What similar fighters? :lol:

Lewis is the only one who's remotely close.:lol: He didnt beat BOWE andit was widely accepted that it was because of BOWES size ( who is smaller then either KLIT ) And he no success with LL ! Your point is again ?:patsch

[Decker]

At this point I've got to wonder why you continue replying to these topics. All you post is "He's bigger, more skilled, and hits harder" over and over, and use each to justify the other. You don't intend to actually discuss these points--just to repeat them.

What's the purpose? Doesn't it get boring after a while? :huh

Cross, got to defend 2smart4u. At least he has plain logic & science on his side - not warm & fuzzy memories or outright predudice.

I'll tell you what's boring and beyond lame. It's the constant "HW bad today, Wlads chin, HW bad today, Wlads a robot" mantra from these clowns. And I'm not referring to you as one of the clowns either. You can disagree w/someone without acting like a 3 year old that hasn't had their nap. It's these trolls and blind posters that kept me from joining ESB for over 3 years. I had better material in grade school than most of these "adults". I'd bet at least half of them have never been in a real fist fight... but they're experts in pro boxers courage and chins :roll: :-(

Cross, you probably know this story. The term robot is usually a slur used against white boxers - although plenty of non white boxers are robotic. Didn't Jack Johnson & others use that term to describe Joe Louis? :lol: :rofl
I'm not going to research the word, but I don't think it was much used until the 20th century.

[cross_trainer]

:lol: VLADS hook is much harder and fired off the jab so why would you claim that ! VLAD is also harder to hit cleanly and is the harder puncher who is the much more effective boxer according to all stats ! So whats your point again ! Oh yes now I remember ! Your guru status !:lol:
:rofl

Power? Check.

"Skill"? Check.

Now all you're missing is "He's bigger!" to complete the set.

[box03]

:rofl

By any measurement, Holyfield is more skilled that Wlad. Better headmovement, foot movement, counterpunching ability. Crisper left hook. A willingness to trade on the inside when necessary, keeping the arms close to his body rather than flailing like Wlad does in close. He had a wider variety of punches--including an uppercut. Kept continuously on the move and was able to position himself far better than Wlad does. Did not move straight back when attacked.

But then, you haven't have noticed any of these things, because you never go beyond the basic "skill"/size/power equation. well put:good But then again the size,power,and skill over power a little man like Holyfield. We should also factor heart into the fight, not even diehard Wlad fans can give him that notch.

[2smart4u]

:rofl

Power? Check.

"Skill"? Check.

Now all you're missing is "He's bigger!" to complete the set.:lol: I see your simply repetitive without retort ! Typical !:deal

[cross_trainer]

Cross, got to defend 2smart4u. At least he has plain logic & science on his side - not warm & fuzzy memories or outright predudice.

I'll tell you what's boring and beyond lame. It's the constant "HW bad today, Wlads chin, HW bad today, Wlads a robot" mantra from these clowns. And I'm not referring to you as one of the clowns either. You can disagree w/someone without acting like a 3 year old that hasn't had their nap. It's these trolls and blind posters that kept me from joining ESB for over 3 years. I had better material in grade school than most of these "adults". I'd bet at least half of them have never been in a real fist fight... but they're experts in pro boxers courage and chins :roll: :-(

Cross, you probably know this story. The term robot is usually a slur used against white boxers - although plenty of non white boxers are robotic. Didn't Jack Johnson & others use that term to describe Joe Louis? :lol: :rofl
I'm not going to research the word, but I don't think it was much used until the 20th century.

2smart4u and the "Klitschko haters" are often two unfortunate sides of the same coin. They focus on one or two variables and completely ignore the rest because that's what they want to believe.

And I'd actually agree with Johnson's evaluation. Louis was robotic...but like Wlad (who is somewhat similar in this regard), he was an EXTREMELY good robot. It's not a slur, really--if you're a robotic fighter, you're also usually very precise.

[cross_trainer]

:lol: I see your simply repetitive without retort ! Typical !:deal


You didn't have a point. How can I have a retort to a point that doesn't exist? :huh

You mentioned ONE technical aspect--hooking off the jab. Well, Holy did that too on occasion. All the rest was repetition of "He has skill! He has size! He has power!"

[2smart4u]

2smart4u and the "Klitschko haters" are often two unfortunate sides of the same coin. They focus on one or two variables and completely ignore the rest because that's what they want to believe.

And I'd actually agree with Johnson's evaluation. Louis was robotic...but like Wlad (who is somewhat similar in this regard), he was an EXTREMELY good robot. It's not a slur, really--if you're a robotic fighter, you're also usually very precise.:patsch Total bullshit ! I dont simply rely on a couple of variables at all ! you my friend ignore the obvious and its a tad bizzar ! And you drift on the side of the ROSE COLORED GLASS wearing groud more times then not ! You know when you see a cow you can simply assume its a cow ! I think you would want a long drawn out DNA test to convince you ! :yep Not nesessary for most !:hi:

[Decker]

well put:good But then again the size,power,and skill over power a little man like Holyfield. We should also factor heart into the fight, not even diehard Wlad fans can give him that notch.
Not a bad point. I'd give Holy the "heart" edge over Wlad.

But I'd also give Joe Frazier the heart edge over Foreman ! Didn't seem to help much there ! :!: :yep

[cross_trainer]

You know wnhen you see a cow you can simply asume its a cow ! I think you would want a long drwan out DNA test to convince you ! :yep

If I identified animals like you analyze boxers, I would believe there were only three animals on earth. ;)

[2smart4u]

You didn't have a point. How can I have a retort to a point that doesn't exist? :huh

You mentioned ONE technical aspect--hooking off the jab. Well, Holy did that too on occasion. All the rest was repetition of "He has skill! He has size! He has power!":patsch VLAD gets hit less ? VLAD koes more opponents ? VLAD loses less rounds ! And since you claim its not his size that is the cause of these stats maybe you would like to explain ! And dont use the HOLYS competion is better argument becasue that will be ripped apart also !:yep are these points easy enough for you !:bbb

[cross_trainer]

Not a bad point. I'd give Holy the "heart" edge over Wlad.

But I'd also give Joe Frazier the heart edge over Foreman ! Didn't seem to help much there ! :!: :yep

True.

But, in his defense, Wlad does keep getting up whenever he's knocked down. He has a great deal of heart--it's just that his chin and confidence sometimes let him down, like Patterson.

[2smart4u]

If I identified animals like you analyze boxers, I would believe there were only three animals on earth. ;):lol: Actually you could make an accurate accessment of most classified species of animals because of the knowlege base readily available ! the way you anialize things you wont even get past mammals !:yep :hi:

[2smart4u]

True.

But, in his defense, Wlad does keep getting up whenever he's knocked down. He has a great deal of heart--it's just that his chin and confidence sometimes let him down, like Patterson.:lol: can we say balance issue ?:hi:

[cross_trainer]

:patsch VLAD gets hit less ?

Foreman didn't get hit much in his prime either. Was he more skilled than Holyfield too?


VLAD koes more opponents ?

Shavers must be the most skilled fighter EVER!

VLAD looses less rounds !

...And also hasn't beaten a great fighter like Tyson.


And since you claim its not his size that is the cause of these stats maybe you would like to explain !

Wlad often faced opponents who lacked the firepower to exploit his technical weaknesses. His one-dimensional standing at range and firing jab/hook/rights at Byrd worked because Byrd lacked the inside fighting ability, the front-foot aggressive ability to get inside in the first place, and the power to make his shots count when he DID manage to penetrate. His standing-at-range style meshed perfectly with Wlad's tendencies. Purritty and Sanders, on the other hand, were able to exploit these problems.


And dont use the HOLYS competion is better argument becasue that will be ripped apart also !:yep

The fact remains--Holyfield beat both Bowe and Tyson, who are considered two of the best in their era. Both are better than Byrd, who is Wlad's best win.


are these points easy enough for you !:bbb

Too easy.

[cross_trainer]

:lol: Actually you could make an accurate accessment of most classified species of animals because of the knowlege base readily available ! the way you anialize things you wont even get past mammals !:yep :hi:

Except that you're NOT using the knowledge base readily available. You're using the equivalent of an "Zoo Animal ABC" book with three letters.

[cross_trainer]

:lol: He didnt beat BOWE andit was widely accepted that it was because of BOWES size ( who is smaller then either KLIT ) And he no success with LL ! Your point is again ?:patsch
So their ONLY similarity is that they're big?

What a surprise.

[2smart4u]

Foreman didn't get hit much in his prime either. Was he more skilled than Holyfield too?



Shavers must be the most skilled fighter EVER!



...And also hasn't beaten a great fighter like Tyson.



Wlad often faced opponents who lacked the firepower to exploit his technical weaknesses. His one-dimensional standing at range and firing jab/hook/rights at Byrd worked because Byrd lacked the inside fighting ability, the front-foot aggressive ability to get inside in the first place, and the power to make his shots count when he DID manage to penetrate. His standing-at-range style meshed perfectly with Wlad's tendencies. Purritty and Sanders, on the other hand, were able to exploit these problems.



The fact remains--Holyfield beat both Bowe and Tyson, who are considered two of the best in their era. Both are better than Byrd, who is Wlad's best win.




Too easy.:lol: GEORGE got hit plenty when faced with good boxers ALi YOUNG LYLE ! VLAD doesnt ! VLAD doesnt get outboxed and EARNIE did and so did GEORGE ! PURRITY was when he was an overtrained kid and SANDERS was a 64 powerpunching southpaw ! No comparison there ! BOWE didnt prove any greatness and HOLY lost 2 out of three and arguably 3 out of three ! TYSON was fresh out of jail and was actually smaller then HOLY ! Your points are rediculous and simple double talk ! :deal :yep

[2smart4u]

Except that you're NOT using the knowledge base readily available. You're using the equivalent of an "Zoo Animal ABC" book with three letters. Im stating the obvious and your desperatly trying to be the guru ! :lol:

[box03]

Not a bad point. I'd give Holy the "heart" edge over Wlad.

But I'd also give Joe Frazier the heart edge over Foreman ! Didn't seem to help much there ! :!: :yep I guess I have hard time with some people on here putting Wlad on this pedestal and having him knocking out ATGs, but he himself has never even fought a b+ oppenent in his career. You could tell me how good he is and how he can beat everyone, but theres really no proof of him beating anyone even worth a shit.

[2smart4u]

So their ONLY similarity is that they're big?

What a surprise.:lol: And thats the reason given for BOWES success ! VLAD is bigger faster and more powerful then BOWE ! Its looking even worst for HOLY now ! :hi:

[Marnoff]

He'd be recognized as one of the best. Him and the Klitschkos.

[cross_trainer]

:lol: GEORGE got hit plenty when faced with good boxers ALi YOUNG LYLE ! VLAD doesnt !

No, he gets hit by mediocre boxers like Purritty, Sanders, and Brewster. Then people make excuses for him.

VLAD doesnt get outboxed

You're right. He gets FLATTENED.


PURRITY was when he was an overtrained kid and SANDERS was a 64 powerpunching southpaw ! No comparison there !

Except that they both beat him by exploiting his weaknesses, which are only now starting to be ironed out.

BOWE didnt prove any greatness and HOLY lost 2 out of three and arguably 3 out of three !

Bowe proved a good deal greater than Byrd.


TYSON was fresh out of jail and was actually smaller then HOLY !

:rofl

Need I say more?

[cross_trainer]

:lol: And thats the reason given for BOWES success ! VLAD is bigger faster and more powerful then BOWE ! Its looking even worst for HOLY now ! :hi:

Wrong.

That's ONE of the reasons for Bowe's success. Much more important were his numerous abilities on the inside--which Wlad completely lacks.

[cross_trainer]

Im stating the obvious

The VERY obvious.

Who knew that power and size were the only two variables?

[Decker]

True.

But, in his defense, Wlad does keep getting up whenever he's knocked down. He has a great deal of heart--it's just that his chin and confidence sometimes let him down, like Patterson. We generally agree here.

I guess I have hard time with some people on here putting Wlad on this pedestal and having him knocking out ATGs, but he himself has never even fought a b+ oppenent in his career. You could tell me how good he is and how he can beat everyone, but theres really no proof of him beating anyone even worth a shit. You made 1 decent point, then go back to the "this era no good" mantra. :verysad Brew, Peter - even Brock to a lesser extent - were considered HW saviors by many on ESB... until Wlad beat them. Then they got bad overnite. :huh Damn, even the haters give Wlad too much credit :rofl

Funny, this thread almost died but it got rolling :yep If it wasn't for LL or K bros, we'd be arguing over Bowe vs Holy to Dempsey vs Firpo in HW threads :lol:

[box03]

You made 1 decent point, then go back to the "this era no good" mantra. :verysad Brew, Peter - even Brock to a lesser extent - were considered HW saviors by many on ESB... until Wlad beat them. Then they got bad overnite. :huh Damn, even the haters give Wlad too much credit :rofl

Funny, this thread almost died but it got rolling :yep If it wasn't for LL or K bros, we'd be arguing over Bowe vs Holy to Dempsey vs Firpo in HW threads :lol:[/quote] Im not saying Wlad is a bad fighter by any means, but your stacking him up to be some unbeatable fighter which hes not. I honestly believe a boxer with a good chin and power, and aint afraid of going toe to toe with Wlad will beat him. I have 2 guys I feel that can our chageav and Peter, both can take a punch and throw one. After seeing Chageav beat Valuev in a very tactical way without getting hit with that solid of blow has a chance. Peter knows what to expect he was there 2 years ago and now is a better boxer who chooses his punches more wisely unlike before, he will beat Wlad in a unification match.

[Decker]

Well now you're starting to sound sensible, box03. I don't think Wlad is unbeatable. Why do you draw that conclusion?
Just because I think he could beat most of the CW to small HW champs of days gone by? Because I don't think this era is weak?

Agree that Chagaev or Peter has a fighting chance vs Wlad.

[box03]

Well now you're starting to sound sensible, box03. I don't think Wlad is unbeatable. Why do you draw that conclusion?
Just because I think he could beat most of the CW to small HW champs of days gone by? Because I don't think this era is weak?

Agree that Chagaev or Peter has a fighting chance vs Wlad. Well at least we agree that Peter and Chagaev have a chance against Wlad. I know Im going to hear it from everyone on this perdiction, but I feel Mccall has a shot at beating Wlad. Mccall's chin is one of the best in the division right now and I believe his power is little bit above average, while his skills can be questioned I do think he has alot of desire which will to keep him in the fight longer than most think.

[SteveO]

When I started this thread, it was about Jerry Quarry. And now I see both Klitschko's, Holyfield, and Bowe mentioned...and Quarry hasn't been mentioned for a few pages. And what's this about zoo animals?

[semichin]

Among the very top guys...
Klitschko defeats Quarry
Quarry defeats Maskaev
Quarry defeats Chagaev
Quarry defeats Ibragimov
Quarry defeats Peter

He would be considered the 2nd best heavyweight in the world
That could be, but if Lewis were still here, and vitali at a bit younger as well, I think he'd be #4,...He was at one time # 3

[cross_trainer]

When I started this thread, it was about Jerry Quarry. And now I see both Klitschko's, Holyfield, and Bowe mentioned...and Quarry hasn't been mentioned for a few pages. And what's this about zoo animals?

We're not quite sure.

[red cobra]

Totally agree even though I believe Peter might be able to beat him.
Quarry usually feasted on big, lumbering heavyweights, and thats what Sam Peter is. Only the Klitschkos would be able to beat Jerry.

[Decker]

When I started this thread, it was about Jerry Quarry. And now I see both Klitschko's, Holyfield, and Bowe mentioned...and Quarry hasn't been mentioned for a few pages. And what's this about zoo animals? Don't forget Lennox :yep

We were talking about Jerry. Then the I love to hate the K bros, LL, weak era ESBers showed up :D

[2smart4u]

Wrong.

That's ONE of the reasons for Bowe's success. Much more important were his numerous abilities on the inside--which Wlad completely lacks.:lol: BULLSHIT ! he won by bulling HOLY ! Nuff said ! And VLAD wouldnt haved to because he has the skilll to do HOLY in from the outside ! :deal

[2smart4u]

:lol: No, he gets hit by mediocre boxers like Purritty, Sanders, and Brewster. Then people make excuses for him.



You're right. He gets FLATTENED.



Except that they both beat him by exploiting his weaknesses, which are only now starting to be ironed out.



Bowe proved a good deal greater than Byrd.



:rofl

Need I say more?:lol: SANDERS is far from mediocur ! the PURITY fight was against a sick and very young VLAD and the BREWSTER fight stank ! but this has already been discussed and you are simply using it to boost a losing argument ! And for the record HOLY isnt as durable as PURITY and VLAD we are talking about is the prime version no ? HOLY also doesnt have the power of BREW or the size or stance or power of SANDERS ! HOLY doesnt match up well here and his own history backs that statement up ! no matter how you spin it ! :deal :hi:

[ChrisPontius]

Mac Foster, not Bob.

My bad.
I think Wlad would bust him up from the outside while using a lot of movement, throwing a left hook on the inside then hold and go back to the outside to neutralise Quarry's game.





Am i do only one who imagine's 2smart4u's desktop to have a post-it hanging on his monitor that says "Bigger. Stronger. Hits harder" as well as an extra keyboard of which every key is a shortcut to either :yep, :lol: , :deal, :patsch and :hi:?

[cross_trainer]

My bad.
I think Wlad would bust him up from the outside while using a lot of movement, throwing a left hook on the inside then hold and go back to the outside to neutralise Quarry's game.

Wlad doesn't have Ali's mobility, however. Interestingly, he hasn't faced many extremely mobile fighters recently--his successes have been primarily against stationary targets.


Am i do only one who imagine's 2smart4u's desktop to have a post-it hanging on his monitor that says "Bigger. Stronger. Hits harder" as well as an extra keyboard of which every key is a shortcut to either :yep, :lol: , :deal, :patsch and :hi:?

:lol:

[cross_trainer]

:lol: :lol: SANDERS is far from mediocur !

Certainly not a fighter like Ali or Young. After Wlad, his best win is against Michael Sprott.

That's mediocre however you spin it. Lower top 10 quality or fringe contender.


the PURITY fight was against a sick and very young VLAD and the BREWSTER fight stank ! but this has already been discussed and you are simply using it to boost a losing argument !

Losing argument? Have you even read the thread?


And for the record HOLY isnt as durable as PURITY

Unbelievable statement. I really don't know what to say here. You believe that Purritty is in any way comparable to Holyfield? :rofl


and VLAD we are talking about is the prime version no ? HOLY also doesnt have the power of BREW or the size or stance or power of SANDERS ![/quote

Wow, you're right! Holyfield is smaller than Sanders, so Sanders must be better! :nut

[quote=2smart4u]
HOLY doesnt match up well here and his own history backs that statement up ! no matter how you spin it ! :deal :hi:

"History"? What history? You've just restated what you've been saying all along--Wlad is bigger and hits harder, his opponents are bigger and hit harder, and Wlad never really lost because he has twenty gazillion excuses.

[2smart4u]

Certainly not a fighter like Ali or Young. After Wlad, his best win is against Michael Sprott.

That's mediocre however you spin it. Lower top 10 quality or fringe contender.



Losing argument? Have you even read the thread?




Unbelievable statement. I really don't know what to say here. You believe that Purritty is in any way comparable to Holyfield? :rofl

[quote=2smart4u]
and VLAD we are talking about is the prime version no ? HOLY also doesnt have the power of BREW or the size or stance or power of SANDERS ![/quote

Wow, you're right! Holyfield is smaller than Sanders, so Sanders must be better! :nut



"History"? What history? You've just restated what you've been saying all along--Wlad is bigger and hits harder, his opponents are bigger and hit harder, and Wlad never really lost because he has twenty gazillion excuses.:lol: Yes CROSS HOLY does have a history of loseing to the real good big men he faced ! SANDERS is a south paw who is larger and harder punching then HOLY ! I claimed HOLY isnt as DURABLE as PURRITY and he isnt ! I claimed nothing else but of cource your resorting to making false claims on my behalf ( that almost as bad as claiming LOUIS used to cut water weight ) :yep So dispite your spinning YOUR LOSING HE ARGUMENT and I read fine thanks ! And last but not least the size factor is signifacant when comparing fighters head to head whether you like it or not ! So CHEERS and have a great day !:lol: PS thanks for shortening this reponce a little !:thumbsup

[2smart4u]

My bad.
I think Wlad would bust him up from the outside while using a lot of movement, throwing a left hook on the inside then hold and go back to the outside to neutralise Quarry's game.





Am i do only one who imagine's 2smart4u's desktop to have a post-it hanging on his monitor that says "Bigger. Stronger. Hits harder" as well as an extra keyboard of which every key is a shortcut to either :yep, :lol: , :deal, :patsch and :hi:?:huh VLADS size strenth and punching power are his main advantages so why in hell wouldnt they be mentioned alot when comparing him to a SMALLER WEAKER PUNCHER ! Espesily when they are either ignored or there signifacance not understood !:patsch

[cross_trainer]

:lol: Yes CROSS HOLY does have a history of loseing to the real good big men he faced ! SANDERS is a south paw who is larger and harder punching then HOLY !

Do you believe Sanders would beat Holyfield, yes or no? Do you believe he was a better fighter than Holyfield, yes or no?

I claimed HOLY isnt as DURABLE as PURRITY and he isnt !

You clearly implied that Purritty was a tougher opponent than Holyfield would have been because of his chin. Comparing two fighters on such a different level is beyond stupid.



I claimed nothing else but of cource your resorting to making false claims on my behalf ( that almost as bad as claiming LOUIS used to cut water weight ) :yep

Yeah, I wouldn't expect you to know about Louis's water weight cutting. That requires knowledge of the era and doesn't involve size or power.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


Now I expect you to deny reality and insist that Louis didn't cut weight. Please do so, because I find it rather amusing.


So dispite your spinning YOUR LOSING HE ARGUMENT and I read fine thanks !

If you believe you're winning this argument, you do not have a clue what's going on.



And last but not least the size factor is signifacant when comparing fighters head to head whether you like it or not !

Nobody said size was irrelevant. It's only when people who don't understand the finer points of boxing use it as a crutch ("He's bigger, so he wins") that it becomes a problem.

So CHEERS and have a great day !

You're one of the most passive-aggressive posters I've ever seen. Posting :patsch smilies one minute and being cheerful the next. :think

[cross_trainer]

:huh VLADS size strenth and punching power are his main advantages so why in hell wouldnt they be mentioned alot when comparing him to a SMALLER WEAKER PUNCHER ! Espesily when they are either ignored or there signifacance not understood !:patsch

Because they're the only ones you're capable of looking at. You ignore all of Jerry's advantages because you don't understand analyzing fighters' styles. You just look for the bigger, harder-punching guy and predict he'll win. :good

[Decker]

... and Wlad never really lost because he has twenty gazillion excuses. CT, seriously, I'm sure you've seen thouands of fights over the years. Don't you agree that Wlad-Brew I was one weird fight? :think
It's top 1% in the bizarre outcome category.

And vs Ross, Wlad was being over worked. He was dehydrated and (obviously) faded in the late rounds. Wlad literally left it in the gym that nite. Yeah, Sanders clocked him. If Wlad took CS lightly, it's team Wlad's fault... just like LL in his first fight with Rahman.

[2smart4u]

Do you believe Sanders would beat Holyfield, yes or no? Do you believe he was a better fighter than Holyfield, yes or no?



You clearly implied that Purritty was a tougher opponent than Holyfield would have been because of his chin. Comparing two fighters on such a different level is beyond stupid.




Yeah, I wouldn't expect you to know about Louis's water weight cutting. That requires knowledge of the era and doesn't involve size or power.

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]

[Only registered and activated users can see links]


Now I expect you to deny reality and insist that Louis didn't cut weight. Please do so, because I find it rather amusing.



If you believe you're winning this argument, you do not have a clue what's going on.




Nobody said size was irrelevant. It's only when people who don't understand the finer points of boxing use it as a crutch ("He's bigger, so he wins") that it becomes a problem.



You're one of the most passive-aggressive posters I've ever seen. Posting :patsch smilies one minute and being cheerful the next. :think:lol: So claiming a fighter has a beter chin then another fighter is stupid dispite it beingb true ? So you think Ll had a better chin then CHUVALO and its stupid to claim GEORGE is more durable ! So you really beleive JOE dehydrated thus weakening himself before a fight ?:patsch And i wouldnt waste my time reading an article that would claim this foolishness ! And trust me I understand the finer points of boxing just fine but when a comparison simply doent ******t going that in depth I dont bother ! JOE lost to GEORGE fore a simple reason of being overpowerd and only a retard needs this to be explained any furthor ! And for the record since Im on a message board I find it ammusing always and get a kick on how irritating those little faces apparently are ! Cheers ! :yep

[2smart4u]

CT, seriously, I'm sure you've seen thouands of fights over the years. Don't you agree that Wlad-Brew I was one weird fight? :think
It's top 1% in the bizarre outcome category.

And vs Ross, Wlad was being over worked. He was dehydrated and (obviously) faded in the late rounds. Wlad literally left it in the gym that nite. Yeah, Sanders clocked him. If Wlad took CS lightly, it's team Wlad's fault... just like LL in his first fight with Rahman.:lol: These 2 reasons apparently are a million in some peoples eyes !:yep

[cross_trainer]

CT, seriously, I'm sure you've seen thouands of fights over the years. Don't you agree that Wlad-Brew I was one weird fight? :think
It's top 1% in the bizarre outcome category.

It was a weird fight, I'll give you that. But I do not believe it was fixed. I suspect it was a combination of poor preparation, bad pacing and possibly bad food or another ailment. A little bit like a magnified Lewis-Rahman.


And vs Ross, Wlad was being over worked. He was dehydrated and (obviously) faded in the late rounds. Wlad literally left it in the gym that nite. Yeah, Sanders clocked him. If Wlad took CS lightly, it's team Wlad's fault... just like LL in his first fight with Rahman.

Yes, in each fight there are reasons for his failures. But then again, sometimes his opponents had to face similar obstacles. Brewster II, for instance, involved Lamon with a nasty eye injury that he was worried about.

These things happen in boxing. Wlad should get a partial pass for circumstances, but giving him a complete pass in each fight is unrealistic--and also is a double standard, since Louis is not being given similar passes for his fights in this thread.

[cross_trainer]

:lol: So claiming a fighter has a beter chin then another fighter is stupid dispite it beingb true ? So you think Ll had a better chin then CHUVALO and its stupid to claim GEORGE is more durable !
If you think Puritty and Holyfield are on remotely the same level, you're delusional. Puritty's chin being better is irrelevant, because Holyfield was much better than he was. Puritty was a journeyman, and Wlad lost to him.

It's also debatable, since Holy faced bigger punchers.


So you really beleive JOE dehydrated thus weakening himself before a fight ?:patsch And i wouldnt waste my time reading an article that would claim this foolishness
I see. So you want to wallow in your ignorance?

You doubted a fact, I posted corroborating evidence, and now you're pretending it doesn't exist to win the argument. That's rather childish, wouldn't you say?



! And trust me I understand the finer points of boxing just fine
You've never demonstrated it. Seriously. In my entire tenure on this forum, I have never seen you throw up one single shred of decent stylistic analysis. I don't believe you understand boxing beyond size and power.

JOE lost to GEORGE fore a simple reason of being overpowerd and only a retard needs this to be explained any furthor !
We're not talking about Foreman/Frazier. And your statement is inaccurate anyway. :good


And for the record since Im on a message board I find it ammusing always and get a kick on how irritating those little faces apparently are ! Cheers ! :yep
:lol:

[2smart4u]

Because they're the only ones you're capable of looking at. You ignore all of Jerry's advantages because you don't understand analyzing fighters' styles. You just look for the bigger, harder-punching guy and predict he'll win. :good:smoke Because if you understand the fight game you realize dispite some technicle advantages a fighter might have the size factor can render then irrelevent when the skill to use it is there! Dispite you claiming its a one demensinal arguments its a fact ! :bbb

[cross_trainer]

:smoke Because if you understand the fight game you realize dispite some technicle advantages a fighter might have the size factor can render then irrelevent when the skill to use it is there! Dispite you claiming its a one demensinal arguments its a fact ! :bbb
Except that you never demonstrated that you know the fight game, because you've never posted anything approaching good analysis of technical advantages. Just "he hits harder and he's bigger". :nut

[2smart4u]

If you think Puritty and Holyfield are on remotely the same level, you're delusional. Puritty's chin being better is irrelevant, because Holyfield was much better than he was. Puritty was a journeyman, and Wlad lost to him.

It's also debatable, since Holy faced bigger punchers.


I see. So you want to wallow in your ignorance?

You doubted a fact, I posted corroborating evidence, and now you're pretending it doesn't exist to win the argument. That's rather childish, wouldn't you say?



You've never demonstrated it. Seriously. In my entire tenure on this forum, I have never seen you throw up one single shred of decent stylistic analysis. I don't believe you understand boxing beyond size and power.


We're not talking about Foreman/Frazier. And your statement is inaccurate anyway. :good


:lol::lol: So where di I claim PURITY is as skilled as HOLY ? I claimed he is more durable and he is ? ( gee your getting repetitive ) If you ever bothered to read my post I make lots lots of reference to style when its ******ted ! here it is not ! The size and strenth argument is the most relevent factor ! And trust me Im not wallowing at anything ! Are you so ignorent as to not understand that the internet is not always an arcurate place to get your info from ? And the FRAZIER GEORGE thing was an analaogy and it wasnt wrong in any way ! GEORGES biggest advantage had to due with his size advantage which when combined with his punching style ( should be obvious ) made JOE easy cannon foder for him ! :deal Cheers !

[2smart4u]

Except that you never demonstrated that you know the fight game, because you've never posted anything approaching good analysis of technical advantages. Just "he hits harder and he's bigger". :nut:lol: maybe you should pay closer attention to some of my other posts instead of desperatly trying to win an argument where your assessment is so flawed ! :yep

[cross_trainer]

:lol: So where di I claim PURITY is as skilled as HOLY ? I claimed he is more durable and he is ? ( gee your getting repetitive ) If you ever bothered to read my post I make lots lots of reference to style when its ******ted ! here it is not ! The size and strenth argument is the most relevent factor ! And trust me Im not wallowing at anything ! Are you so ignorent as to not understand that the internet is not always an arcurate place to get your info from ?

So I should believe you instead? :lol:

Tell you what. Check out a Joe Louis biography sometime. It will say EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

But by all means, feel free to stick your head in the sand and pretend otherwise. :good

[cross_trainer]

:lol: maybe you should pay closer attention to some of my other posts instead of desperatly trying to win an argument where your assessment is so flawed ! :yep

I have. Like I said, you've never posted a shred of decent style analysis. The best I've seen from you is the observation that Wlad hooks off the jab--which you could have acquired from any HBO broadcast.

[Decker]

It was a weird fight, I'll give you that. But I do not believe it was fixed. I suspect it was a combination of poor preparation, bad pacing and possibly bad food or another ailment. A little bit like a magnified Lewis-Rahman. Fair enough. All I know is Wlad was winning Brew I very similar to Brew II, then all of a sudden had nothing left. Of course Lamon tagged him.

Yes, in each fight there are reasons for his failures. But then again, sometimes his opponents had to face similar obstacles. Brewster II, for instance, involved Lamon with a nasty eye injury that he was worried about.Few Wlad fans use (unknown) injuires to make excuses for him. Yes, Brew was the worse for wear after his fight with "white wolf", and Wlad didn't lose his energy pounding on Lamon that nite. That's boxing. Or as you say...

These things happen in boxing...

[2smart4u]

So I should believe you instead? :lol:

Tell you what. Check out a Joe Louis biography sometime. It will say EXACTLY THE SAME THING.

But by all means, feel free to stick your head in the sand and pretend otherwise. :good:lol: Your a classic BOOK WORM ! Its a rediculous statement and would be a very stupid thing to do ! And yes here you should beleive me ! :yep

[cross_trainer]

Fair enough. All I know is Wlad was winning Brew I very similar to Brew II, then all of a sudden had nothing left. Of course Lamon tagged him.

Few Wlad fans use (unknown) injuires to make excuses for him. Yes, Brew was the worse for wear after his fight with "white wolf", and Wlad didn't lose his energy pounding on Lamon that nite. That's boxing. Or as you say...

I agree. But Lamon did get eye surgery after his fight with Lyakhovich, so it's as much a "known" injury as Vitali's injuries against Rahman (for which he also got surgery).

If Vitali loses his next fight, injuries will definitely be high on the suspects list--for me as well as everyone else. It's only fair to extend Brewster the same credence.

[2smart4u]

I have. Like I said, you've never posted a shred of decent style analysis. The best I've seen from you is the observation that Wlad hooks off the jab--which you could have acquired from any HBO broadcast.:lol: So you think I need that info from the broadcast team ? Now your resorting to desperate insurlts to try and discredit me ? And sorry your wrong ! Ive posted plenty of style analisis but against you this one has been the most relevent ! Your getting pathetic now bud !:hi: love these faces !:yep

[cross_trainer]

:lol: Your a classic BOOK WORM ! Its a rediculous statement and would be a very stupid thing to do ! And yes here you should beleive me ! :yep

That is one of the stupidest statements I've ever heard from you, and I've heard some whoppers. You want to know if Louis is dehydrated, but you don't want to search the internet OR look at books because it would make you a "book worm"?!

How do you get your information? Psychic visions? :lol:

[cross_trainer]

:lol: So you think I need that info from the broadcast team ? Now your resorting to desperate insurlts to try and discredit me ? And sorry your wrong ! Ive posted plenty of style analisis but against you this one has been the most relevent ! Your getting pathetic now bud !:hi: love these faces !:yep

It's not an insult, it's fact. You haven't posted any stylistic analysis at all on Wlad vs. Quarry. Just size and KO%, which anybody could get from boxrec. :good

[2smart4u]

That is one of the stupidest statements I've ever heard from you, and I've heard some whoppers. You want to know if Louis is dehydrated, but you don't want to search the internet OR look at books because it would make you a "book worm"?!

How do you get your information? Psychic visions? :lol::lol: Nothing stupid in what I claimed ! Regurgetating info without an actuall understanding of it is classic bookworm stuff ! and like a stated why read info that is obviouly flawed ! You seem to have a problem with people who just might understand a topic better then you ! Hence your desperation to win this argument with your flawed analisis !:deal :bbb

[2smart4u]

It's not an insult, it's fact. You haven't posted any stylistic analysis at all on Wlad vs. Quarry. Just size and KO%, which anybody could get from boxrec. :good:lol: And Ive claerly stated that VLADS physical advantges were the most relevent advantages ! There is no need to go any furthur ! I thing NARD beats PFP also because he is larger ! No need to go any more in depth is there ?:nut Anyway have a good one CROSS ! I have to go get some work done ! Cheres !

[cross_trainer]

:lol: Nothing stupid in what I claimed ! Regurgetating info without an actuall understanding of it is classic bookworm stuff ! and like a stated why read info that is obviouly flawed ! You seem to have a problem with people who just might understand a topic better then you ! Hence your desperation to win this argument with your flawed analisis !:deal :bbb
On the contrary, there are many people who know the topic better than I do. You're just not one of them.

Face it--you were wrong about Louis's weight cutting. All of the sources on the fight back me up. Just admit it and move on rather than making yourself look like an idiot by denying the obvious.

[2smart4u]

On the contrary, there are many people who know the topic better than I do. You're just not one of them.

Face it--you were wrong about Louis's weight cutting. All of the sources on the fight back me up. Just admit it and move on rather than making yourself look like an idiot by denying the obvious.:lol: Rather passive agggressive guy arent you ? No one was cutting water weight back then CROSS ! you have a nice day !:yep

[cross_trainer]

:lol: Rather passive agggressive guy arent you ?

No. You're saying that because that's what I said to you. Just as you said I was repetitive after I said you were. You need to be more original in your criticisms.

No one was cutting water weight back then CROSS !

Then I guess all of the sources are lying. But I'm sure I should believe a poster on the internet (who claimed Wlad has a better chin than Holyfield) rather than several biographers and boxing historians.

[2smart4u]

No. You're saying that because that's what I said to you. Just as you said I was repetitive after I said you were. You need to be more original in your criticisms.



Then I guess all of the sources are lying. But I'm sure I should believe a poster on the internet (who claimed Wlad has a better chin than Holyfield) rather than several biographers and boxing historians.:lol: Gee your smart ! You caught my obvious ribbing and you can agree with the status quo ! Ive never taken you for a conformist ?:bart

[cross_trainer]

:lol: Gee your smart ! You caught my obvious ribbing and you can agree with the status quo ! Ive never taken you for a conformist ?:bart

There was clear defensiveness in that ribbing. ;)

What does being a conformist have to do with anything? Facts are facts. Louis was dehydrated, and "status quo" has nothing to do with it.

[2smart4u]

There was clear defensiveness in that ribbing. ;)

What does being a conformist have to do with anything? Facts are facts. Louis was dehydrated, and "status quo" has nothing to do with it.:lol: No it was clear evidence of your hypocrissy which I found ammusing ! And LOUIS and no one else purposly dehydrates before an athletic event ! And its total stupidity to think they did ! :rofl :lol:

[cross_trainer]

And LOUIS and no one else purposly dehydrates before an athletic event ! And its total stupidity to think they did ! :rofl :lol:
[Only registered and activated users can see links]

Yeah, he was. The sources back me up.

Do you actually believe that denying it will change anything?

[Irish Steel]

I see him like a chageav. Good, but nothing outstanding. But he is better than chagaev I think. Peter might beat hem 3-4 times outta 10. And he cant beat wlad. But other than that, I would say he would be number 2-3.

[ChrisPontius]

Wlad doesn't have Ali's mobility, however. Interestingly, he hasn't faced many extremely mobile fighters recently--his successes have been primarily against stationary targets.



I would hardly call Byrd "stationary". He is one of the hardest fighters to hit yet Wlad won every one of the 19 rounds they fought.

I think the reason that there have not been many "mobile" fighters is because it's a stupid strategy against him: he's guaranteed to be taller and reachier than you and has great handspeed and a dito jab.

By the way, i don't think his mobility is far below Ali's, in 1971, which was when he twice beat Quarry (ok, the other time in 1972). On top of that, he has great power to keep Quarry at distance, cut him, etc.

[cross_trainer]

I would hardly call Byrd "stationary". He is one of the hardest fighters to hit yet Wlad won every one of the 19 rounds they fought.

I think the reason that there have not been many "mobile" fighters is because it's a stupid strategy against him: he's guaranteed to be taller and reachier than you and has great handspeed and a dito jab.

By the way, i don't think his mobility is far below Ali's, in 1971, which was when he twice beat Quarry (ok, the other time in 1972). On top of that, he has great power to keep Quarry at distance, cut him, etc.

Byrd's upper body movement is often excellent, but he isn't as fast on his feet as some--including Quarry. Klitschko seems far more accurate and comfortable when he's "set", and while he's definitely mobile, he isn't that good laterally. He prefers a rather linear range-setting type of footwork.

Quarry, on the other hand, was pretty good with a lateral dance/slip/counterpunch, transitioning from movement to solid positioning rather quickly as he went in and out. This strikes me as a rather awkward counterpoint to Klitschko's style.

[Fighting Weight]

That is one of the stupidest statements I've ever heard from you, and I've heard some whoppers. You want to know if Louis is dehydrated, but you don't want to search the internet OR look at books because it would make you a "book worm"?!

How do you get your information? Psychic visions? :lol:

Psycho visions more like :nut

Or maybe he does have psychic powers....some people read tea-leaves, he reads jizz stains on his WALDO posters?

[Fighting Weight]

It's not an insult, it's fact. You haven't posted any stylistic analysis at all on Wlad vs. Quarry. Just size and KO%, which anybody could get from boxrec. :good

I haven't read all the thread, but I knew this would be true of it for sure, that's all 2dumb ever posts, apart from stupid smilies.

[Mendoza]

Quarry didn't take many punches from Shavers. Frazier doesn't hit as hard as Wlad (it's more the pressure) and what's your evidence that Foster hits as hard as Wlad? He knocked out mediocre lightheavies but never did much against heavyweights, aside from cutting Ali.

I think Wlad would keep Quarry at the end of his jab for most of the time like he did Peter, and tie him up on the inside. Ali, while being past his best, didn't have much trouble with it. Ellis, who lacked the power to keep Quarry off beat him, too.

Brewster is much bigger than Quarry, at least 15 pounds heavier and a few inches taller. On top of that, Brewster is a murderous puncher whereas Quarry isn't.

All true. I think Quarry would be in the mix today ( a top ten fighter ), but I would not pick him to defeat Wlad, or Peter. I need to see more of Chagaev, Ibragimov, and Povetkin. Each has a chance to be better than Quarry.

Quarry was an odd fighter. You never knew which Quarry would show up. Sometimes he fought foolishly and beat himself. Other times he looked great.