Fury Returns May 13th

First topic message reminder :

Opponent to be announced soon apparently and will be on Boxnation.

It's nice to see he's got over his issues.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Have no real urge to watch Wlad v Fury again...

But I didn't see a masterclass...Saw two fighters scared of committing.

One did slightly more....Very slightly.

Awful fight....Wouldn't have minded if some judge scored it 119 - 117.

Certainly amusing how a useless clown in many posters eyes on here has turned into Ray Robinson by beating a flat track bully you aren't supposed to hit back.

Absolutely spot on Truss.

Clearly Fury is better than a lot of people thought he was and no way is he rubbish. His jab is excellent at times, and he has good speed, reflexes and huge confidence. But he does only have one great victory, several easy victories and a couple of bad performances on his resume. I think he has a lot to prove before we label him the best. He may have had Wlads number but we havent seen him with anyone like Wilder or Joshua. Or a Povetkin type. Hennessey certainly took the easiest route to getting a title shot as possible. I hope he doesnt come back and take on several rubbish Germans with padded records before one decent opponent. I would like to see what hes made of

Yeah Fury is underrated. Nobodys calling him a great heavyweight or a Ray Robinson. The division is pretty pants and when hes in shape and on form hes probably the best boxer in it at the moment. Joshua could get there shortly, but he has to go and prove it. Wilder needs to up his opposition.

Given how highly regrded Klitschko was on here (I remember arguments that everybody from Jack Dempsey to Joe Louis to most of the 80s and 90 heavyweights would lose to him) its a rich when a guy like Fury who they claimed had no chance of winning goes and does it that its the rest of the word that needs a reality check.

Its also amazing given the reputation someone like Haye built up as a world class heavyweight on the back of a paper thin heavyweight record thats worse than Furys that its Fury who is supposed to the rubbish boxer. Fury is the better heavyweight.

catchweight wrote:

Given how highly regrded Klitschko was on here (I remember arguments that everybody from Jack Dempsey to Joe Louis to most of the 80s and 90 heavyweights would lose to him) its a rich when a guy like Fury who they claimed had no chance of winning goes and does it that its the rest of the word that needs a reality check.

Its also amazing given the reputation someone like Haye built up as a world class heavyweight on the back of a paper thin heavyweight record thats worse than Furys that its Fury who is supposed to the rubbish boxer. Fury is the better heavyweight.

I've never rated Wlad and I picked Tubbs, Page and Witherspoon etc to beat him.....Always have..

Fury is World class and Haye was World class..............Because World class is crap at the moment and has been for sometime...

It's a bit rich though also when nobody gave Bellew a chance and some posters on here have peed on his win.....Don't you think ??

Or is double standards reserved for fighters you like only..

A win against a one legged Haye in a fight he was losing until Haye was incapacitated.

Bellew did performed above (my) expectations for the first 5 rounds. But lets be real. Haye was a lame duck. I actually thought Bellew looked pretty unimpressive against a one legged Haye after the injury occured.

catchweight wrote:A win against a one legged Haye in a fight he was losing until Haye was incapacitated.

Bellew did performed above (my) expectations for the first 5 rounds. But lets be real. Haye was a lame duck. I actually thought Bellew looked pretty unimpressive against a one legged Haye after the injury occured.

Valid reply......

But then again Wlad was close to 40 when Fury beat him.....

If you like Fury it's a top win...........Personally I thought it was a competent performance against a flat track bully that saw someone bigger and crapped it....

Maybe you're right.............and I'm not..

Joshua will tell us more.....

I guess its all context. Ive never rated Klitschko as a great heavyweight and have always thought Fury was underrated. Fury winning was a surprise to me (especially in Germany) but I wasnt surprised that he would cause Klitschko a lot of problems.

There are plenty of people out there that rated Klitschko highly and wrote Fury off as no hoper (not you) that act like everyone else is off the wall for merely recognising the result showed that Fury is not actually remotely as bad as they claimed.

Joshua hopefully will get rid of Klitschko once and for all and go on to big things. Im still on the fence on that one. If he makes short work of Klitschko then he will be the man to beat.

catchweight wrote:Yeah Fury is underrated. Nobodys calling him a great heavyweight or a Ray Robinson. The division is pretty pants and when hes in shape and on form hes probably the best boxer in it at the moment. Joshua could get there shortly, but he has to go and prove it. Wilder needs to up his opposition.

Given how highly regrded Klitschko was on here (I remember arguments that everybody from Jack Dempsey to Joe Louis to most of the 80s and 90 heavyweights would lose to him) its a rich when a guy like Fury who they claimed had no chance of winning goes and does it that its the rest of the word that needs a reality check.

Its also amazing given the reputation someone like Haye built up as a world class heavyweight on the back of a paper thin heavyweight record thats worse than Furys that its Fury who is supposed to the rubbish boxer. Fury is the better heavyweight.

Haye's HW record is indeed paper thin, but so to is Fury's, and I'm not convinced that his is better. The win over Klit is good on paper, until you watch the fight and see that both protagonist were dreadful, and should Joshua win easy again Wlad, it will add the feeling that Wlad was already shot. So that leaves Chisora, against whom Haye was far more impressive, and a win over a shot Kevin Johnson. At least Haye looked like the real deal blowing away a past it Ruiz and never-had-it Harrison, and boxed well against Valuev. - Haye looked good in all his fights except Kiltchko, Fury only looked good against him, and dreadful the rest of the time-not really a surprise that Haye was seen as being better class.

No I dont buy that really. Haye went in against the heavyweight champion and was a non runner. Fury went in and got the job done. I didnt think Klitschko was much good against Haye either, Haye just offered so little that even Klitschko just manouvering him around the ring won it at a canter. Neither fight was anything close to pretty but Fury came out on top and Haye was never even in the fight. So lets not downplay that. Its the clear difference maker.

Haye more impressive against Chisora? Not for me neccessarily. The first Fury Chisora fight was two unconditioned guys. But second time around Fury totally dominated him as bad as anyone ever has. I dont think Haye was hugely impressive in any of his heavyweights fights, mainly because most of his opponents out side Klitschko were pushing 40 and pretty cack. Fury hasnt impressed in many of his either though, granted.

It wasnt surprising tht once upon a time Haye was seen as being better heavyweight with more potential. But whats surprising is how Haye has maintained that reputation. Hes a guy tht seems to get maximum credit for ordinary enough wins and all his looses or mediocre performnces excused away. Fury seems to attract the reverse effect. When he boxes well, his opponet was rubbish, shot, out of shape etc. When he doesnt box well its a surefire sign of how terrible he is. I think Fury would outbox Haye without too much difficulty in a pretty boring fight. Haye cant really box effectively on the front foot at heavyweight and Fury can move and jab well enough to nullify Haye.