STRONG RUMOUR: Bellew-v-Adonis for WBC title

First topic message reminder :

This is expected to be Eddie Hearn's 'big announcement' at today's midday presser in London. Pretty much confirmed by Bellew himself on Twitter.

Presser isn't general admission so expect Twitter to be the main source of info for now.

Questions:

1) How do you expect Bellew to fare?

Adonis is an old one-trick pony for me, but that one trick is an epic punch. Bellew's chin isn't great and if he gets into a tear-up I can see an EKO loss. Doesn't mean he can't win a boxing battle though, but I think his Chilemba fights showed his level.

2) Regardless of result, given Clev has finally made a decent match-up, do you think this tees up a big British rematch bust-up between then two?

bhb001 wrote:

winchester wrote:

bhb001 wrote:

winchester wrote:

Rowley wrote:Perish the thought he may have improved. Dick Tiger lost four in a row at one point in his career, does that mean he was rubbish as well?

I dont know Dick Tiger. But I know Klitschko is only a champion because of his size. The Haye match is the perfect example. Haye is a better boxer than Klitschko but he lacked the size and style to beat him.

So he lost then. Beaten by the better man. Or when Man United are playing would you expect the other team to be given a different ball to give them a chance.

He was beaten by the bigger man, not the better man. Thats the point.

He was beaten, that is the point. No moral victories here

So do you think if Haye and Klitschko were the same size Klitschko would even have a chance? If Haye was was 6'7 and 250lbs? It would be a mismatch.

Impossible to say, if he was that size it would impact on his speed. Boxing is about making the best of your natural assets, Haye has speed but could not utilise it in a manner to secure victory. Wlad has size and power and did use it to his advantage. Can I ask why all fighters who are as big as Wlad are not as successful as he is?

winchester wrote:

bhb001 wrote:

winchester wrote:

bhb001 wrote:

winchester wrote:

Rowley wrote:Perish the thought he may have improved. Dick Tiger lost four in a row at one point in his career, does that mean he was rubbish as well?

I dont know Dick Tiger. But I know Klitschko is only a champion because of his size. The Haye match is the perfect example. Haye is a better boxer than Klitschko but he lacked the size and style to beat him.

So he lost then. Beaten by the better man. Or when Man United are playing would you expect the other team to be given a different ball to give them a chance.

He was beaten by the bigger man, not the better man. Thats the point.

He was beaten, that is the point. No moral victories here

So do you think if Haye and Klitschko were the same size Klitschko would even have a chance? If Haye was was 6'7 and 250lbs? It would be a mismatch.

I reckon If my Wife was my brother...we wouldn't have got married..

Haye knew the size of Wlad when he fought him. It wasn't a national secret. If Haye was that size and weight, he would not be anywhere near as nimble, so all his "advantages" are lost. So yes, Wlad would still have won.

Wumchester - urine off my thread you clueless little Tinkywinky.

Winchester JM asked you to list Furys achievements against Wlads, are you just going to ignore this? Oh by the way, if Wlad only wins because of his size is it the same for Fury?

hampo171 wrote:Winchester JM asked you to list Furys achievements against Wlads, are you just going to ignore this? Oh by the way, if Wlad only wins because of his size is it the same for Fury?

The question was utterly irrelevant to the point I was discussing. And yes if Furys size is a big advantage. Only a moron would disagree.

winchester wrote:

hampo171 wrote:Winchester JM asked you to list Furys achievements against Wlads, are you just going to ignore this? Oh by the way, if Wlad only wins because of his size is it the same for Fury?

The question was utterly irrelevant to the point I was discussing. And yes if Furys size is a big advantage. Only a moron would disagree.

Answer his question or F**K off..

This is hilarious.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

winchester wrote:

hampo171 wrote:Winchester JM asked you to list Furys achievements against Wlads, are you just going to ignore this? Oh by the way, if Wlad only wins because of his size is it the same for Fury?

The question was utterly irrelevant to the point I was discussing. And yes if Furys size is a big advantage. Only a moron would disagree.

Answer his question or F**K off..

No. Troll somewhere else. I hear there is someone with a different nationality on another thread. Go.....ask....them.....about......it......

winchester wrote:

hampo171 wrote:Winchester JM asked you to list Furys achievements against Wlads, are you just going to ignore this? Oh by the way, if Wlad only wins because of his size is it the same for Fury?

The question was utterly irrelevant to the point I was discussing. And yes if Furys size is a big advantage. Only a moron would disagree.

But you discredit everything Klitschko has done during what has been a fantastic career, yet feel Fury is the best heavyweight around at the moment? Surely if Fury is only winning because of his size, which lets face it, he has been and not against great opposition then he is no better than Klitschko?

By the way JMs question was perfectly valid, you keep stating Fury is the better fighter. Try telling people why you have this belief instead of trying to be the guy who shouts louder than everyone else.

Wumchester - get your dumb clueless ignorant backside off my thread you bake bean IQ'd little twerp.

This one is being played to perfection.

hampo171 wrote:

winchester wrote:

hampo171 wrote:Winchester JM asked you to list Furys achievements against Wlads, are you just going to ignore this? Oh by the way, if Wlad only wins because of his size is it the same for Fury?

The question was utterly irrelevant to the point I was discussing. And yes if Furys size is a big advantage. Only a moron would disagree.

But you discredit everything Klitschko has done during what has been a fantastic career, yet feel Fury is the best heavyweight around at the moment? Surely if Fury is only winning because of his size, which lets face it, he has been and not against great opposition then he is no better than Klitschko?

By the way JMs question was perfectly valid, you keep stating Fury is the better fighter. Try telling people why you have this belief instead of trying to be the guy who shouts louder than everyone else.

I think Fury would beat Klitschko beacause he has the style and size to do it. Its not rocket science. I have explained my reasons for it countless times in the past.

But Fury gets knocked down by feather fisted cruiserweights. What is going to happen when Wlad hits him?

NO YOU HAVEN'T!!!!!!!!!!

TopHat24/7 wrote:NO YOU HAVEN'T!!!!!!!!!!

I can envisage some guy with a striped shirt and braces laughing his head off at you guys..... 

Can we all calm down. Am fairly sure the foe button has not been disabled for any of you, if you find someones views so rage inducing try using this option as I have no desire to spend the day deleting comments and locking threads.

hampo171 wrote:But Fury gets knocked down by feather fisted cruiserweights. What is going to happen when Wlad hits him?

He could get knocked out, he could get knocked down and get back up, who knows, its heavyweight boxing. What happens from Fury hits Klitschko? I think you will find that its Klitschko is the guy who has been knocked out and knocked down multiple times in the past, not Fury.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:NO YOU HAVEN'T!!!!!!!!!!

I can envisage some guy with a striped shirt and braces laughing his head off at you guys..... 

I'M WEARING A STIPED SHIRT AND BRACES!!!!! ARGHHHHHH!!!

winchester wrote:

hampo171 wrote:But Fury gets knocked down by feather fisted cruiserweights. What is going to happen when Wlad hits him?

He could get knocked out, he could get knocked down and get back up, who knows, its heavyweight boxing. What happens from Fury hits Klitschko? I think you will find that its Klitschko is the guy who has been knocked out and knocked down multiple times in the past, not Fury.

By cruiserweights??..........Give us a kiss...but no tongues.. 

TopHat24/7 wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

TopHat24/7 wrote:NO YOU HAVEN'T!!!!!!!!!!

I can envisage some guy with a striped shirt and braces laughing his head off at you guys..... 

I'M WEARING A STIPED SHIRT AND BRACES!!!!! ARGHHHHHH!!!

There are a few here too.........Than again I used to wear waistcoats.........

Thought leather waistcoats were pretty much par for the course down at the Oyster Truss.

Received a message from a moderator there. Apparently saying Fury would beat Klitschko is an offence on here because there is no proof that he would.

winchester wrote:Received a message from a moderator there. Apparently saying Fury would beat Klitschko is an offence on here because there is no proof that he would.

I love the moderation on here !!! 

[quote="winchester"]

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

winchester wrote:

hampo171 wrote:Winchester JM asked you to list Furys achievements against Wlads, are you just going to ignore this? Oh by the way, if Wlad only wins because of his size is it the same for Fury?

The question was utterly irrelevant to the point I was discussing. And yes if Furys size is a big advantage. Only a moron would disagree.

Answer his question or F**K off..

No. Troll somewhere else. I hear there is someone with a different nationality on another thread. Go.....ask....them.....about......it......[/quote]

Credit where ir is due, that response was actually pretty funny for all the right reasons!! Still an idiot if he thinks a person losing to a bigger man is actually a win but I did laugh at this!

bhb001 wrote:

winchester wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

winchester wrote:

hampo171 wrote:Winchester JM asked you to list Furys achievements against Wlads, are you just going to ignore this? Oh by the way, if Wlad only wins because of his size is it the same for Fury?

The question was utterly irrelevant to the point I was discussing. And yes if Furys size is a big advantage. Only a moron would disagree.

Answer his question or F**K off..

No. Troll somewhere else. I hear there is someone with a different nationality on another thread. Go.....ask....them.....about......it......[/quote]

Credit where ir is due, that response was actually pretty funny for all the right reasons!! Still an idiot if he thinks a person losing to a bigger man is actually a win but I did laugh at this!

Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing... 

winchester wrote:Received a message from a moderator there. Apparently saying Fury would beat Klitschko is an offence on here because there is no proof that he would.

No, being a WUM is an offence.

Failing to justify your position, or answer questions directed at you, or acknowledge actual facts, but just repeat repeat repeat the same un-thought-out nonesense makes you a WUM.

Abusing other posters is an offence. Hence you are no longer a moderator.

Anyway winchester, have you an opinion on Bellew vs Adonis, which is the point of this particular posting.

Not sure anyone has any issue with the idea that you believe Fury would beat either brother. Fairly sure not many agree but such is life, as and when the fight happens you can look very smart if it happens. However think where people do take issue is with your oft repeated idea that the brothers are ducking Fury as there is absolutely nothing to support this. Fury has not done anywhere near enough to make him a “must fight” and was only a short while since he was fighting the likes of Maddalone and Rogan.

Also derailing every thread, no matter how tenuous a link it has to the subject with the same stuff gets more than a little wearisome.

Winchester you are a complete man sausage and know Poopie all about boxing.

winchester wrote:Abusing other posters is an offence. Hence you are no longer a moderator.

Yep, and I've made my comments about letting the nuts run the madhouse.

Nice to see you back Winchester.

You clearly know nothing about boxing in general so please just switch onto the bowls section of 606 if you would be so kind.

Furysuppercut wrote:Winchester you are a complete man sausage and know Poopie all about boxing.

In fairness that's not a crime..most of us are guilty of that........The d4 impression is more annoying..

Shall we do this then Winchester?

Olympic Gold Medals:

Tyson Fury 0

Wladimir Klitschko 1

Years as a world heavyweight champion:

Tyson Fury 0

Wladimir Klitschko 12 (collectively)

Belts won in career:

Tyson Fury - English Heavyweight Title, Commonwealth Heavyweight Title, British Heavyweight Title, Irish Heavyweight Title.

Wladimir Klitschko - WBC International Heavyweight Title (2), WBA Intercontinental Heavyweight Title, EBU Heavyweight Title, WBO Heavyweight Title (2), NABF Heavyweight Title, WBO NABO Heavyweight title, IBO Heavyweight Title, IBF Heavyweight Title, The Ring Heavyweight Title, WBA Regular Heavyweight Title, WBA "Super" Heavyweight Title

21 fights in, what had he won?

Tyson Fury: 21 fights - 15 KO's = 71% by KO

Wladimir Klitschko: 21 Fights - 17 KO's = 81% by KO (was also the WBC International Champion at this point)

How long did it take them to get to 21 - 0?

Fury: 5 years

Wladimir: 2 years

Who has fought the biggest man?

Tyson Fury: 6ft 3 inches (most of his opponents)

Wladimir Klitschko: 6ft 7 and a half inches (Mariusz Wach), 6ft 6 and a half (Ray Austin)

But surely its only Wlads size that means he's the best? (He's 6ft 6 inches and Tyson fury is 6ft 9 inches)

Want me to go on Wumchester?

Rowley wrote:Not sure anyone has any issue with the idea that you believe Fury would beat either brother. Fairly sure not many agree but such is life, as and when the fight happens you can look very smart if it happens. However think where people do take issue is with your oft repeated idea that the brothers are ducking Fury as there is absolutely nothing to support this. Fury has not done anywhere near enough to make him a “must fight” and was only a short while since he was fighting the likes of Maddalone and Rogan.

Also derailing every thread, no matter how tenuous a link it has to the subject with the same stuff gets more than a little wearisome.

It is my opinion that the Klitschkos do not want to face Fury. My reasons are that I think they see Fury as too big a risk. He is bigger and stronger than them. He is younger. And he has a style that is aggressive and can bully them which means they cant fight their style of jabbing safetly at a distance. Fury is too big and aggressive for that. He would force them to to fight. The Klitschkos are old and they are hanging at the top now. Fury is upcoming. I dont buy that they have no reason to offer him a match because they offered worse opponents than Fury matches in the past and even offered sparring partners or opponents that Fury has beaten a match. So they cant say Fury doesnt deserve one without highlighting how they offer other boxers matches that deseve it even less. I watched Klitschkos last match and the guy was one of the most hopeless boxers I have ever seen in a title match. He didnt even try. He was a sparring partner who just stood there. You are kidding yourself if you think that is the best opponent out there that Klitschko could offer a match to. Fury would have miles better. That is my argument which I have repeated before yet still get asked every time as if I havent.

Nice breakdown Jabmachine! Hopefully this WUM Frak off now back to another forum. Everytime someone asks him a genuine question regarding his opinion or to prove his point, he completely ignores it. I cant wait to see his response to this.

Furys The warning about insulting people applied to you as well. Two words for you all Foe Option.

mobilemaster8 wrote: I cant wait to see his response to this.

I can.. 

Haha yeh i can as well Truss but i want this guy to get off the boards and eat some humble pie. Unfortunately his views are that ridiculous and stupid i want him to stay so he can annoy 95% of us lot. Also a funny read.

If Fury is too big for Wlad, then why has Fury never fought anyone of Wlads size, yet Wlad has beaten people bigger than himself?

What evidence do you base this on?

mobilemaster8 wrote:Haha yeh i can as well Truss but i want this guy to get off the boards and eat some humble pie. Unfortunately his views are that ridiculous and stupid i want him to stay so he can annoy 95% of us lot. Also a funny read.

If I thought for one minute he believed anything he wrote..I'd agree with you kid..

JabMachineMK2 wrote:Shall we do this then Winchester?

Olympic Gold Medals:

Tyson Fury 0

Wladimir Klitschko 1

Years as a world heavyweight champion:

Tyson Fury 0

Wladimir Klitschko 12 (collectively)

Belts won in career:

Tyson Fury - English Heavyweight Title, Commonwealth Heavyweight Title, British Heavyweight Title, Irish Heavyweight Title.

Wladimir Klitschko - WBC International Heavyweight Title (2), WBA Intercontinental Heavyweight Title, EBU Heavyweight Title, WBO Heavyweight Title (2), NABF Heavyweight Title, WBO NABO Heavyweight title, IBO Heavyweight Title, IBF Heavyweight Title, The Ring Heavyweight Title, WBA Regular Heavyweight Title, WBA "Super" Heavyweight Title

21 fights in, what had he won?

Tyson Fury: 21 fights - 15 KO's = 71% by KO

Wladimir Klitschko: 21 Fights - 17 KO's = 81% by KO (was also the WBC International Champion at this point)

How long did it take them to get to 21 - 0?

Fury: 5 years

Wladimir: 2 years

Who has fought the biggest man?

Tyson Fury: 6ft 3 inches (most of his opponents)

Wladimir Klitschko: 6ft 7 and a half inches (Mariusz Wach), 6ft 6 and a half (Ray Austin)

But surely its only Wlads size that means he's the best? (He's 6ft 6 inches and Tyson fury is 6ft 9 inches)

Want me to go on Wumchester?

 

 
It doesnt prove anything. Klitschko is at the end of his career and Fury is at the start. When Mike Tyson was upcoming and knocking out everyone he had no gold medals or titles. He would have still knocked Klitschko into the middle of next week. Thats if Klitschko could make room to offer him a match of course in between fighting sparring partners and guys nobody has heard of.
 
I have watched Klitchko and Fury both fight and I think Fury would win. Klitschko would be the biggest challenge Fury has faced but Fury is better than the guys that have knocked Klitschko out.

winchester wrote: I watched Klitschkos last match and the guy was one of the most hopeless boxers I have ever seen in a title match. He didnt even try. He was a sparring partner who just stood there. You are kidding yourself if you think that is the best opponent out there that Klitschko could offer a match to.

My own view on the current best available opponent is Povetkin.

There are other statistics I could quote, such as the records of boxers both have faced in their careers, the amount of money earned, the amount of countries they've boxed in, the number of mandatory challengers they've faced etc. All of them tip in Wlads favour.

But yeah, Wlad is SO ducking Fury. He's quaking in his boots. So, my point: Wlad is a better heavyweight than Tyson Fury.

JM2, Only one correction. Fury has fought someone who was 6'5"; Hans-Joer Balsko. Apart from that minor correction, spot on. But you are missing the big picture; He hasn't made an offer to Fury or Wilder and therefore he must be scared of them. It is only logical, innit!!  

Ok, that response cries WUM. Can you please post exactly what video of Tyson Fury you're basing your evidence upon Wumchester?

You said he was "boring" yet has a higher KO percentage. Had one at the SAME point Fury is at.

You said he is only good because of his size, yet he beat 2 people bigger than him.

You say he fights sparring partners and people nobody has heard of - if you've never heard of David Haye I think you live in a cave, and if you've never heard of Povetkin, you know nothing about boxing. How about Samuel Peters? Eddie Chambers? Chris Byrd? Ruslan Chagaev? Yeah they were sparring partners....sure.

You then go on to say Fury has the style to beat Wlad, well I apologise for being frank, but if big strong inside fighters do well against Wlad - why did the big, strong 6ft 5inch Tony Thompson get beaten twice?

I just can't see where you're coming from.

If you say "I think Fury would beat Wlad, I have no evidence to support this, its just what I think" then thats one thing, but rubbishing Wlad is terrible.

bhb001 wrote:JM2, Only one correction. Fury has fought someone who was 6'5"; Hans-Joer Balsko. Apart from that minor correction, spot on. But you are missing the big picture; He hasn't made an offer to Fury or Wilder and therefore he must be scared of them. It is only logical, innit!!  

 

Rowley wrote:

winchester wrote: I watched Klitschkos last match and the guy was one of the most hopeless boxers I have ever seen in a title match. He didnt even try. He was a sparring partner who just stood there. You are kidding yourself if you think that is the best opponent out there that Klitschko could offer a match to.  

My own view on the current best available opponent is Povetkin.

 
That is a really interesting observation, Rowley. Can you remind me who Wlad is fighting next? Because we know Wlad avoids anyone that is good, because we have been told this enough times. So, logically, he cannot be fighting Povetkin next can he.