Wards Legacy!

First topic message reminder :

http://www.boxingnews24.com/2016/11/andre-ward-can-surpass-mayweathers-pacquiaos-legacy/#more-221864

I normally go on boxing 24 for a laugh and thought no way can he surpass these guys. But the further I read into the article, the more I started to agree.

Light Heavyweight is becoming a very tough division. If Ward can somehow beat them all and cap it off with a win against GGG, he would be HUGE!

Now I am not saying Ward can do this. Perhaps Kovalev will knock his block off next. Who knows?

But if he finished his career in that style, he would be something else.

Ward is not a great puncher, so I can't imagine many ducking him. Lets just hope if his star grows, he doesn't do the high risk low reward road like Floyd and Manny. That is always a danger.

On the flipside, read the article and imagine Kovalev wins the rematch and takes out all comers. He won't have dominated 2 divisions, but he would be one of the most dominating light heavies ever. At least in the last 20-30 years.

There is no malice in this thread and I'm happy to discuss it with anyone. though a bit of banter is more than welcome. I won't wind anyone up.

Andre Ward won, get over it Dylan.

I don't think a real champion fights the likes of Bivol or Mekhonstev, boxing fans would expect a little bit more than that.

Haha, they will, if not already, be the mando's for his belts. I see it coming...he will vacate rather than step in with them.

Of course he will, a man who will fight Froch and Kovalev will be shaking in his boots at the prospect of those two.

Ward doesn't need to fight anyone decent...

The last P4P number 1 got there by beating Daniel Geale types..

Yeah, Ward should just fight another Brand

Can I ask why you ignore the top class opposition he's fought and focus solely on the poor ones?

Since Jan 2012, who has he fought?

Always stacks the odds in his favour too.

Venue
Judges
Ref

His best wins were based on fouling.
The footage does not lie, don't just take my word for it.

He's beaten Kovalev since then, sorry but nobody with his resume can be accused of ducking, you're talking garbage.

Media / PR has a lot to do with the reputation of some fighters.
Take Sky Sports for example. The hype they built around Khan, Quigg etc is absurd! Same with Froch to an extent. Froch is no A level fighter and he ran Ward close, 7-5 on two score cards. (excessive fouling again)

Beaten Kov?

Hooker really drew with Perez too right?

Gotta love Roc Nation

You're wrong on numerous levels.

1. Froch was an A level fighter, far better than those you're preemptively accusing Ward of ducking and as a huge Froch fan he lost fair and sqaure, you can't have watched the fight as it very little fouling in it. At this point I now realise you're opinion is not your own based but fabricated based on media perceptions, the very same thing you mentioned.

2. Ward beat Kovalev, crying about it being a robbery doesn't make it so nor does repeating it over and over again change the result. I've not watched the Perez fight so can't comment but there being a robbery in another doesn't make the headline fight one.

3. Hype is what sells and it's a promoters job to get as much money as possible for his/her boxers, there is absolutely nothing wrong with it.

Dylan1979 wrote:Beaten Kov?

Hooker really drew with Perez too right?

Gotta love Roc Nation

Come on knock it off..

Okay cool.

From now on I'll just sit back and applaud all his fouling, I'll ignore the ACTUAL rules of boxing.

It would help if you watched his fights before spouting a load of regurgitated garbage.

The trolls on here are shocking. Bit rich coming from me, but come on.

I've watched his fights, more than once.

Would help if some people knew the actual rules of boxing.

You're previous posts show you clearly haven't but it suits your argument so continue.

Grabbing and stuff has been going on since the beginning.

Jack Johnson was a genius at it. Ffs, Ward didn't cheat. He spoils a bit, but it is part of his style.

Hopkins did it recently. Lots of throwback fighters liked a grapple. What about Hatton?

Another good example is Holyfield when he fought Tyson. In fact many of Mikes opponents done the same.

Ward is not a cheat, but he knows dirty tricks and likes inside fighting.

Regardless what you think of the result, Ward showed how good he was last Saturday, like has over and over again.

He hasn't officially lost since he is 12 years old and he is on his way to being a great, if he isn't one already.

Enjoy him while he is here. Enjoy Kov too. These are two very good boxers.

Dylan1979 wrote:oh btw...as per Queensbury Rules ( The Official Rules Of Boxing )

Clinching
Wrestling
Headbutts
Elbows

...are not boxing, they are all fouls. Ward spends most of his time in the ring fouling instead of legit / legal boxing....ask Kessler!

But I guess rules don't matter anymore right?

You missed Low Blows

AdamT wrote:Grabbing and stuff has been going on since the beginning.

Jack Johnson was a genius at it. Ffs, Ward didn't cheat. He spoils a bit, but it is part of his style.

Hopkins did it recently. Lots of throwback fighters liked a grapple. What about Hatton?

Another good example is Holyfield when he fought Tyson. In fact many of Mikes opponents done the same.

Ward is not a cheat, but he knows dirty tricks and likes inside fighting.

Regardless what you think of the result, Ward showed how good he was last Saturday, like has over and over again.

He hasn't officially lost since he is 12 years old and he is on his way to being a great, if he isn't one already.

Enjoy him while he is here. Enjoy Kov too. These are two very good boxers.

I'm sorry Adam but hitting and holding and headbutting are absolutely illegal they are not "part of the game"

The happen in every single fight but only get highlighted when the fans favourite lose, they have been part of the game as Adam puts it since the beginning.

Who cares if it happens since boxing began really. Spoiling is not "masterful boxing" anymore than diving to win a penalty kick is masterful football. Call it for what it is.

catchweight wrote:Who cares if it happens since boxing began really. Spoiling is not "masterful boxing" anymore than diving to win a penalty kick is masterful football. Call it for what it is.

You're talking to a Hopkins fan! Spoiling and providing sh it fights is celebrated on here!

You're not quite right in the head are you Haz, try to diversify your repertoire somewhat.

Spoiling is part of the game which everyone gets. But dressing it up as great technical boxing is rubbish. Spoiling is a skill, but its actually anti boxing. Im no fan of it, especially when its central to deciding a fight. Hopkins was a good technical boxer, but not as good as hes made out. Against other good technical boxers he often struggled and went in with the intention of spoiling the fight rather than engaging in a technical boxing contest.

Then again you rated Sammy Angott highly because Doug Fischer said so, so why now such negativity towards spoilers Haz?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Then again you rated Sammy Angott highly because Doug Fischer said so, so why now such negativity towards spoilers Haz?

Dont recall that - don't often agree with Dougie. I recall praising Angott's opposition - that's about it. He was horrible to watch.

catchweight wrote:Spoiling is part of the game which everyone gets. But dressing it up as great technical boxing is rubbish. Spoiling is a skill, but its actually anti boxing. Im no fan of it, especially when its central to deciding a fight. Hopkins was a good technical boxer, but not as good as hes made out. Against other good technical boxers he often struggled and went in with the intention of spoiling the fight rather than engaging in a technical boxing contest.

Excellent points (lost on Sad Sack, no doubt). He IS anti-boxing. If he fell into a barrel full of ti ts he'd come out complaining the barrel had rough edges.

hazharrison wrote:

catchweight wrote:Spoiling is part of the game which everyone gets. But dressing it up as great technical boxing is rubbish. Spoiling is a skill, but its actually anti boxing. Im no fan of it, especially when its central to deciding a fight. Hopkins was a good technical boxer, but not as good as hes made out. Against other good technical boxers he often struggled and went in with the intention of spoiling the fight rather than engaging in a technical boxing contest.

Excellent points (lost on Sad Sack, no doubt). He IS anti-boxing. If he fell into a barrel full of ti ts he'd come out complaining the barrel had rough edges.

Why be personal all the time ??

Don't take this the wrong way but you have the symptoms of someone autistic..

I really don't think you can help yourself mate.....

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

catchweight wrote:Spoiling is part of the game which everyone gets. But dressing it up as great technical boxing is rubbish. Spoiling is a skill, but its actually anti boxing. Im no fan of it, especially when its central to deciding a fight. Hopkins was a good technical boxer, but not as good as hes made out. Against other good technical boxers he often struggled and went in with the intention of spoiling the fight rather than engaging in a technical boxing contest.

Excellent points (lost on Sad Sack, no doubt). He IS anti-boxing. If he fell into a barrel full of ti ts he'd come out complaining the barrel had rough edges.

Why be personal all the time ??

Don't take this the wrong way but you have the symptoms of someone autistic..

I really don't think you can help yourself mate.....

Don't take this the wrong way, but you have all the traits of someone American.

I'm going to foe you Haz not because I dislike you..But because I'd feel bad if I was short with you again..

I apologise for anything out of order I've written...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:I'm going to foe you Haz not because I dislike you..But because I'd feel bad if I was short with you again..

I apologise for anything out of order I've written...

Very noble of you. If that means I can't see your posts, we're both winners (can you do it on the Adam Truss account, also?).

Good lad.

extremely immature. Truss knows a lot more about boxing than me and I'm prettier!

When someone like Duran uses foul tactics it seems to be applauded..

Strange that.

Ali used them too, especially later on. Punches to back of the head and holding boxers heads down.

It is combat and boundaries will pushed when so much is on the line.

Hammer isn't the only Hopkins fan. I admire his ability and cerebral attitude to the sport. Very shrewd fighter and a great. Ward is the same.

Never was much of a hopkins fan. Too many boring, foul filled contests.

Hopkins wasn't quite as boring at middleweight - he was more of a grinder at 160. Still wasn't very exciting to watch.

He started boxing late. He was never a Ray Leonard.

Fair play to the guy for having the career he had. He is one of the best 160-175 fighters in the modern era.

At 160 he ranks up there. At 175, not a hope.

I've been a fan of him since about 2000. My friends two favourite boxers were Hopkins and Barrera.

My two were Jones and Barrera back then.

Were you demanding he leave the middlewight division back then instead of fighting allen and echols for the fortieth time?

If I remember correctly he fought a few names then. Definitely better than Brook and Geale. De la Hoya and Trinidad were small, but much better Tha Kell. Did he also not challenge Jones Jr.

Also he made a jump up. Has GGG? Or is he waiting to drag Lomachenko up next.

I don't need another GGG discussion. I am trying not to mention him, but you guys can't let it go.

He looks an excellent fighter, but his resume is lacking. Is that fair enough??

I just find it weird that you were a hopkins fan in 2000 when he was in the midst of one of the dullest series of fights imaginable. As for ggg, i wouldnt have inferred to him were you not perpetually slating his opposition.

I was 16.

Ok. But maybe now you can appreciate the irony of slamming golovkin at every opportunity and declaring being a hopkins fan. Hopkins farted about at middleweight for an absolute age in the most forgettable contests you could imagine trying to land a decent fight. He is the absolute testament to hanging around long enough to secure a fight. He didnt leave middleweight in a noble act of sacrifice. He left because he lost and had no other options there.

I'm not being dragged into a discussion of someone that has fought nobody's. I was a kid then and liked the executioner mask.

I don't care for GGG. I have tried not to blast him recently. But If he I thrown my way, what will happen?

Will we agree to leave it there. I won't change my opinion on him and I don't want to beat that same drum.

I'll leave that for Haz and Floyd.

Can't remember seeing you attacking him? Or is it ok to blast certain fighters?

You can blast whoever you like. Im just pointing out the ridiculousness of it. Hopkins wore a mask though, i guess that clinches it.

To be honest, i dont even know what your position on fighters is, because it changes every couple of months. I think what really goes on here most of the time is poster a and poster b get in an argument and the fighters are simply pawns to attack each other. Which is why most of the threads on here gravitate towards the same arguments ad nauseum.

I have merely tried to use an actual boxing example in hopkins (who you claim to be a fan of) to highlight a comparison. If you had indicated from the beginning that you wear a fan of hopkins from 2000 on because he wore a mask back then i would have left it three posts ago.

It doesn't matter. I won't be blasting GGG from now on. If people think he is the Sh1t, happy days.

AdamT wrote:It doesn't matter. I won't be blasting GGG from now on. If people think he is the Sh1t, happy days.

Not many people do, because they have eyes, when they try and explain why GGG isn't good they literally make up nonsense that makes no sense and cannot be proven with any real facts

You blast GGG, but everyone is ducking him, I still don't get it

You can criticise his resume, but you can't criticise him for his resume