Andre Ward announces his retirement

First topic message reminder :

So, Andre Ward claims he's retiring from boxing. Class me as sceptical on this one, but he says his days as a prize fighter are over.

If he keeps his word, what are everyone's overall feelings about Ward's career? Has he done enough to be considered a great? Or do his (relatively) small number of fights against elite opposition and less than easy-on-the-eye style disqualify him?

If indeed this is the end, then it's been a damn fine career, whatever the exact details.

That isn't how an official works is it, his promoter Eddie Hearn would contact Ward's promoter and it would go from there, that didn't happen.

LionsV2 wrote:That isn't how an official works is it, his promoter Eddie Hearn would contact Ward's promoter and it would go from there, that didn't happen.

We're going off track here a little don't you think, I've never said Froch is a) an atg and b) better than Ward

I'm just highlighting the foolishness of your constant ducking accusations.

lol

Ward can't himself expect to be called an atg getting out of 75 while it's looking so interesting can he? surely

LionsV2 wrote:The overall number of fights doesn't really matter, the overall quality on his record is quite outstanding, if we look at just the names.

Miranda- Still useful at the time
Kessler- Top 10 at 168lbs overall
Green- Decent title defence
Bika- Ugly fight but again a decent defence
Abraham- Good win
Froch- Top 10 at 168lbs overall
Dawson- Weight drained but conclusively won
Rodriguez- top ten at the time
Barrera- The ease of that win looks more impressive as time goes by
Kovalev- Two controversial wins but deservedly so in my opinion

It's not the greatest resume of all time but that's ten opponents who were all within the top ten of their divisions at the time.

How many top ten fighters has someone like Gonzalez beaten? Top fighters used to fight top ten fighters as a matter of course. The true ATGs fought more ATGs than Ward's fought top ten fighters!

AdamT wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

AdamT wrote:A successful boxer, that isn't always easy on the eye, gets blasted on here. What else is new?

No Ward wasn't always for, 'Big drama show'. He could fight though.

Same people that blast Ward, likely jizz over Jack Johnson. With the articles I have read and any footage shown, he wasn't exactly mr exciting either.

Thankfully, three of them have retired this year! Truly, a great year for the sport!

Good troll attempt.

Your boy GGG didn't turn out to be great either. Only knocks out cans.

How is it trolling to be pleased about seeing the back of three very successful yet extremely dull fighters? Boxing needs excitement in order to become a mainstream sport again.

Golovkin may not be an ATG (like Ward isn't) but he'll be remembered long after he's gone. Value for money.

I actually don't get over excited with GGG. He stalks forward with a decent jab and eats leather to land his own.

I like watching flashy, skilled boxers with great speed.

AdamT wrote:I actually don't get over excited with GGG. He stalks forward with a decent jab and eats leather to land his own.

I like watching flashy, skilled boxers with great speed.

Wlad and Ward are hardly Roy Jones. Both were hard to beat, awkward and masters at clinching. Absolutely boring to watch. Floyd used to be good to watch (as a super feather) but rarely post-De la Hoya.

I take it your favourite fighters to watch now are Lomachenko and Crawford?

Will Golovkin really be remembered that positively, I don't see it myself nor do I see it as a good thing that three of the sports biggest names retire in the same year.

LionsV2 wrote:Will Golovkin really be remembered that positively, I don't see it myself nor do I see it as a good thing that three of the sports biggest names retire in the same year.

Oh I imagine so. Most knockout artists with iron chins and a willingness to take one to land one are usually remembered fondly.

Will they be missed? Joshua will prove a better heavyweight and a far more exciting one. The welters won't miss Floyd (Spence vs Crawford could be a classic).

Remembered by the very fans who remember all the boring boxers anyway.

to be fair GGG still has the chance to build a lasting legacy so he will be remembered if he bows out soon on what he's got then he'll be a footnote I think.

I have to admit i only found Mayweather great when i learnt more about the defensive side of the game (might be why i over compensate for it now ;-) but Ward just doesn't do it for me. Think he's an excellent boxer with a decent record but if he stays retired now don't think we'll see people mentioning him in a few years time.

GGG is one defence away from tying B-Hop for the record (yeah yeah, opposition), which generally helps fighters be remembered. Fan friendly style, plus genuinely noteworthy achievements generally turn into a fighter who is long remembered. Another way of noting it is to see how often their name gets called when discussing a boxer who's name isnt GGG

kingraf wrote:GGG is one defence away from tying B-Hop for the record (yeah yeah, opposition), which generally helps fighters be remembered. Fan friendly style, plus genuinely noteworthy achievements generally turn into a fighter who is long remembered. Another way of noting it is to see how often their name gets called when discussing a boxer who's name isnt  GGG

I love it that Hopkins' bogus record will be broken by an even more bogus one (due to part of it being the WBA's second ranked belt).

I predicted that would happen at some point. Just wait until GGG's record is eclipsed by someone holding the IBO version in a few years (who knows, could be Eubank).

I think Lomachenko and Crawford are awesome to watch.

I do like watching GGG. But he isn't some middleweight Morales or Manny Pacquiao.

I do agree that Ward and especially Wlad are quite dull. Floyd is not as dull as many casuals think. I love watching his pull counters, sharp fast lead rights and that left hook.

He doesn't let his hands go, because of issues. Why would he risk breaking his hands mid fight and lose? That would make him stupid.

Floyd technically Is the most skilled boxer in the last twenty plus years(Jones was a better athlete).

I don't have to convince you all about Floyd. Deep down you all know how good he was. Sorry how great.

I honestly think he will be remembered as a top ten fighter in years to come. At least top 20.

Can't bum up Floyd, without mentioning Manny. Another guy that is arguably a top 20-30 fighter and one of the greatest southpaw fighters ever.

kingraf wrote:GGG is one defence away from tying B-Hop for the record (yeah yeah, opposition), which generally helps fighters be remembered. Fan friendly style, plus genuinely noteworthy achievements generally turn into a fighter who is long remembered. Another way of noting it is to see how often their name gets called when discussing a boxer who's name isnt  GGG

Achievements like that are only ever remembered if the boxer themselves is a bit special, the majority of reign holders are barely remembered.

Comparing ward and Floyd is chalk and cheese

Nothing alike at all

AdamT wrote:I think Lomachenko and Crawford are awesome to watch.

I do like watching GGG. But he isn't some middleweight Morales or Manny Pacquiao.

I do agree that Ward and especially Wlad are quite dull. Floyd is not as dull as many casuals think. I love watching his pull counters, sharp fast lead rights and that left hook.

He doesn't let his hands go, because of issues. Why would he risk breaking his hands mid fight and lose? That would make him stupid.

Floyd technically Is the most skilled boxer in the last twenty plus years(Jones was a better athlete).

I don't have to convince you all about Floyd. Deep down you all know how good he was. Sorry how great.

I honestly think he will be remembered as a top ten fighter in years to come. At least top 20.

Can't bum up Floyd, without mentioning Manny. Another guy that is arguably a top 20-30 fighter and one of the greatest southpaw fighters ever.

He definitely won't be top ten. Top 40 is more realistic. There's a good case for Pacquiao to rank higher. He got more work done against other great fighters.

There's no case for Pacquiao as you know and he's top ten, made even sweeter by how much you hate it

hazharrison wrote:

AdamT wrote:I think Lomachenko and Crawford are awesome to watch.

I do like watching GGG. But he isn't some middleweight Morales or Manny Pacquiao.

I do agree that Ward and especially Wlad are quite dull. Floyd is not as dull as many casuals think. I love watching his pull counters, sharp fast lead rights and that left hook.

He doesn't let his hands go, because of issues. Why would he risk breaking his hands mid fight and lose? That would make him stupid.

Floyd technically Is the most skilled boxer in the last twenty plus years(Jones was a better athlete).

I don't have to convince you all about Floyd. Deep down you all know how good he was. Sorry how great.

I honestly think he will be remembered as a top ten fighter in years to come. At least top 20.

Can't bum up Floyd, without mentioning Manny. Another guy that is arguably a top 20-30 fighter and one of the greatest southpaw fighters ever.

He definitely won't be top ten. Top 40 is more realistic. There's a good case for Pacquiao to rank higher. He got more work done against other great fighters.

FFS! I nearly spat out my coffee! Top 40?? Are you Bert Sugar's Ghost???

AdamT wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

AdamT wrote:I think Lomachenko and Crawford are awesome to watch.

I do like watching GGG. But he isn't some middleweight Morales or Manny Pacquiao.

I do agree that Ward and especially Wlad are quite dull. Floyd is not as dull as many casuals think. I love watching his pull counters, sharp fast lead rights and that left hook.

He doesn't let his hands go, because of issues. Why would he risk breaking his hands mid fight and lose? That would make him stupid.

Floyd technically Is the most skilled boxer in the last twenty plus years(Jones was a better athlete).

I don't have to convince you all about Floyd. Deep down you all know how good he was. Sorry how great.

I honestly think he will be remembered as a top ten fighter in years to come. At least top 20.

Can't bum up Floyd, without mentioning Manny. Another guy that is arguably a top 20-30 fighter and one of the greatest southpaw fighters ever.

He definitely won't be top ten. Top 40 is more realistic. There's a good case for Pacquiao to rank higher. He got more work done against other great fighters.

FFS! I nearly spat out my coffee! Top 40?? Are you Bert Sugar's Ghost???

Reality is a shocker huh? The only modern fighter (post Ali) nailed on for a top ten spot is Duran. Even Ray Leonard is struggling. Floyd isn't anywhere close to that standing. Greb, Robinson, Langford and Armstrong already have four spots sewn up. Then there's Ali, Pep, Moore, Benny Leonard, Gans etc. Like it or lump it, Floyd isn't close. His record doesn't compare to someone like Ez Charles - look at the wins on his record. He beat Moore and Burley a combined five times! That eclipses Floyd's entire career!

Does Charles losses not also count? Burley was a great fighter, but fact remains, he was never champion? Or are you conceding that even the great fighters of yesteryear dodged fights too?

If you had of even stated top 25, then fair enough.

So you rate Pac higher for his better wins?

Do you rate Jermain Taylor much higher than GGG too? He beat Hopkins twice.

Floyd

Hernandez (only ever lost to Oscar)

Corrales (33-0 p4p boxer higher rated than Floyd at the time)

Castillo x2(legit champion at 135, Floyd arguably lost one, but he got the decision and won the rematch)

Baldomir (buck average but champ at the time and Floyd easily beat the previous champ, Judah)

Oscar (154lb 6 division champ and the biggest name in the sport. Also considerably bigger than Floyd)

Ricky Hatton (undefeated 140 champ and roughly Floyd's size)

JMM (ok there is an issue with the weight, but he is a great fighter, that had Mannys number)

Shane Mosley (Past his prime, but many at the time were accusing Floyd of ducking him. You probably did too. Look at what he did to Margarito)

Miguel Cotto 154 (A fighter that went on to win the 160 title and lost to plaster guy and Manny Pacquiao)

Canelo Alveraz 152 (perhaps a little drained, but was considerably larger than Floyd. Floyd beat him much easier than GGG managed)

Manny Pacquiao (the fight was a bit late and both guys pas their absolute best, but nobody would argue, they were the one and two guys at 147)

Other champs and fringe contenders like, Ortiz, Gatti, Ndou, Mitchell, Judah, Guerrero and Berto.

Not a bad record imo.

Mayweather is a good way above Moore and Gans, easily top ten and arguments against it tend to be thin.

I also left out Maidana x2. Pretty solid wins for a 37 year old.

The thing is people will dismiss the win over Marquez whilst waxing lyrical over Charles' wins over Burley despite outweighing him significantly, it's the lack of consistency.

If you're fighting the level of competition Charles did, you're not going to win them all.

Floyd's record is good and he's easily the most successful boxer of all time, however, his record is lacking great wins against his top rivals when at their best. His opponents were well chosen.

Would Robinson have done the same (fight less often against opponents of his choosing for more pay)? Almost certainly. But he didn't - he had no option. He fought LaMotta 6 times! You look through the records of the other ATGs and most of them racked up double figures against other ATGs.

I know most posters on here are Floyd fans and a lot of you don't like it, but he's not close to an ATG top ten based on his record.

If Floyd fought Baldomir 6 times he would be criticised heavily. But that's how he'd make LaMotta look.

I love how Haz thinks it's a fact that he's not top ten; Robinson fought LaMotta six times because the last three fights were easy money and the mob dictated who fought who.

It's similar to how people gloat about Chavez 89-0 or whatever he went. How much dross is among that 89-0?

Chavez is a great fighter with some class wins, but a lot of no names are on that list too.

LionsV2 wrote:I love how Haz thinks it's a fact that he's not top ten; Robinson fought LaMotta six times because the last three fights were easy money and the mob dictated who fought who.

What does it matter why they fought? The fact remains they fought six times in an epic series (when both were largely avoided in their own divisions). That's the type of work you're comparing Floyd's record to.

hazharrison wrote:What does it matter why they fought?

I can become a legend by fighting my brother 6 times? Is that a serious question?

Scottrf wrote:

hazharrison wrote:What does it matter why they fought?

I can become a legend by fighting my brother 6 times? Is that a serious question?

I've no idea what that means? Who's your brother?

I think you'll find it was LaMotta doing the avoiding not the other way round nor could you say that Robinson was avoided so a fairly hollow excuse for them fighting needlessly so many times. Two or three times yes but six times is adding nothing, LaMotta was a tough tough sod but lets not make out he was a truly world class middleweight because he simply wasn't.

LionsV2 wrote:I think you'll find it was LaMotta doing the avoiding not the other way round nor could you say that Robinson was avoided so a fairly hollow excuse for them fighting needlessly so many times. Two or three times yes but six times is adding nothing, LaMotta was a tough tough sod but lets not make out he was a truly world class middleweight because he simply wasn't.

LaMotta avoided fighters and wasn't a world class middleweight? That's preposterous (especially considering he owns one of the finest wins in divisional history - over Robinson).

He holds a trio of wins over Fritzie Zivic and Tommy Bell. He beat Cerdan, Satterfield, Holman Williams - the amazing win over Dauthuille. He's a top 100 all-timer and would make a middleweight top ten (no mean feat considering the division's history).

hazharrison wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

hazharrison wrote:What does it matter why they fought?

I can become a legend by fighting my brother 6 times? Is that a serious question?

I've no idea what that means? Who's your brother?

Misread as who!

Scottrf wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

Scottrf wrote:

hazharrison wrote:What does it matter why they fought?

I can become a legend by fighting my brother 6 times? Is that a serious question?

I've no idea what that means? Who's your brother?

Misread as who!

Ah, got ya!

Nice use of Boxrec but it's not adding a great deal; Zivic, Bell and Williams were all Welterweights as was Robinson when they fought. Satterfield is really scraping the barrel and there is no chance he's top 10 at Middleweight.

I'm sure that Burley, Wade and Chase all avoided him, he was a mob ruled boxer who benefited from there influence getting many decisions he didn't deserve.

Difficult to place him, a great fighter who on the plus side managed to survive in the trenches against Froch, but did he ever fight in front of 80,000 people at Wembley?

Yeh lamotta would have toughed it out in the trenches with Froch, but no he never fought at Wembley in front of 80,000.

Oh you're talking about Ward? Trying to get a thread back on track is against house rules huw. Not got an opinion on floyds top 10 worthiness, you can share?

LionsV2 wrote:Nice use of Boxrec but it's not adding a great deal; Zivic, Bell and Williams were all Welterweights as was Robinson when they fought. Satterfield is really scraping the barrel and there is no chance he's top 10 at Middleweight.

I'm sure that Burley, Wade and Chase all  avoided him, he was a mob ruled boxer who benefited from there influence getting many decisions he didn't deserve.

LaMotta probably threw as many fights than he was gifted (rumours suggest a further two fights alongside the Billy Fox affair).

Focussing on middleweights: he beat one of the top five (perhaps top three, maybe the best) middleweights ever in Robinson. Holman Williams is somewhere between 10-20. He also beat Cerdan, Dauthuille and Robert Villeman.

As for ducking the best black fighters of the period - he fought three of the best in Robinson, Marshall and Williams (along with Bert Lytell). Seems an odd accusation to throw at a fighter renowned for fighting anyone.

milkyboy wrote:Yeh lamotta would have toughed  it out in the trenches with Froch, but no he never fought at Wembley in front of 80,000.

Oh you're talking about Ward? Trying to get a thread back on track is against house rules huw. Not got an opinion on floyds top 10 worthiness, you can share?

Ok, no more Floyd talk. Here's one for you:

If the following (recent retirees) were all eligible for first ballot entry to the HOF, who misses out?:

Wlad
Floyd
Bradley
JMM
Ward

I think it's Bradley and Ward.

That's a corker that one Haz (you should have added Manny and taken off Marques or Bradley to make it even more difficult).
I'm thinking Bradley as a definite and i'm really not sure who over JMM or Ward but i'd probably but JMM in due to the excitement factor and the fans he'll have brought to the sport.

hazharrison wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:Nice use of Boxrec but it's not adding a great deal; Zivic, Bell and Williams were all Welterweights as was Robinson when they fought. Satterfield is really scraping the barrel and there is no chance he's top 10 at Middleweight.

I'm sure that Burley, Wade and Chase all  avoided him, he was a mob ruled boxer who benefited from there influence getting many decisions he didn't deserve.

LaMotta probably threw as many fights than he was gifted (rumours suggest a further two fights alongside the Billy Fox affair).

Focussing on middleweights: he beat one of the top five (perhaps top three, maybe the best) middleweights ever in Robinson. Holman Williams is somewhere between 10-20. He also beat Cerdan, Dauthuille and Robert Villeman.

As for ducking the best black fighters of the period - he fought three of the best in Robinson, Marshall and Williams (along with Bert Lytell). Seems an odd accusation to throw at a fighter renowned for fighting anyone.

Where to start with that nonsense.

He may have thrown fights but they weren't against the best men and in truth the fact he was involved with the mob goes against him, his whole record has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

You just make it up as you go along, where exactly does this reputation for fighting anyone come from especially when it couldn't be further from the truth nor was Williams is between 10-20 at Welterweight not Middleweight. He beat Cerdan much the same way Chris Byrd beat Vitali, we'll never know how a fully functioning Cerdan fairs while Dauthuille and Villeman lost to any half decent boxer they faced.

LionsV2 wrote:

hazharrison wrote:

LionsV2 wrote:Nice use of Boxrec but it's not adding a great deal; Zivic, Bell and Williams were all Welterweights as was Robinson when they fought. Satterfield is really scraping the barrel and there is no chance he's top 10 at Middleweight.

I'm sure that Burley, Wade and Chase all  avoided him, he was a mob ruled boxer who benefited from there influence getting many decisions he didn't deserve.

LaMotta probably threw as many fights than he was gifted (rumours suggest a further two fights alongside the Billy Fox affair).

Focussing on middleweights: he beat one of the top five (perhaps top three, maybe the best) middleweights ever in Robinson. Holman Williams is somewhere between 10-20. He also beat Cerdan, Dauthuille and Robert Villeman.

As for ducking the best black fighters of the period - he fought three of the best in Robinson, Marshall and Williams (along with Bert Lytell). Seems an odd accusation to throw at a fighter renowned for fighting anyone.

Where to start with that nonsense.

He may have thrown fights but they weren't against the best men and in truth the fact he was involved with the mob goes against him, his whole record has to be taken with a pinch of salt.

You just make it up as you go along, where exactly does this reputation for fighting anyone come from especially when it couldn't be further from the truth nor was Williams is between 10-20 at Welterweight not Middleweight. He beat Cerdan much the same way Chris Byrd beat Vitali, we'll never know how a fully functioning Cerdan fairs while Dauthuille and Villeman lost to any half decent boxer they faced.

If you're going to start with such a swashbuckling statement "where to start with this nonsense" you really need to be backing that up with a better argument.

Robinson was controlled by Jim Norris (connected to Palermo and Carbo) for much of his career - do we strike his career off (along with an entire golden age of boxing)?

Stick to the facts - LaMotta was a fine fighter that would make a good number of middleweight top tens (all time). His series with Robinson accounts for much of that standing.

How about elaborating on how LaMotta actually avoided fighters (rather than being avoided). I mean I've seen this on here about Golovkin, so LaMotta would be another eye-opening expose).

milkyboy wrote:Yeh lamotta would have toughed  it out in the trenches with Froch, but no he never fought at Wembley in front of 80,000.

Oh you're talking about Ward? Trying to get a thread back on track is against house rules huw. Not got an opinion on floyds top 10 worthiness, you can share?

Floyd is in or around my top 10 depending how often I let my dislike of him get in the way of judging him fairly....

Don’t think Ward’s chin would have held up at 75 to be honest and I think he knew it. Pretty obvious for some time he was never going to fight Beterbiev. Very disappointing he didn’t stick around to defend his title. Wish Kovalev had got the decision first fight at least he wants to prove himself. The division is very hot atm lots of good fights to be made:

http://www.boxingscene.com/beterbiev-i-ready-andre-ward-im-ready-anyone--121508

His chin held up against Kovalev.

Ward and Weeks colluded before the second fight, Weeks is a master of nullifying a boxer’s strengths. Hopefully though he won’t be able to get away with it for much longer. When Ward spoke of retirement before the second Kovalev fight that’s when I knew he was running from Artur

Running from Berterbiev haha, your trolling isn't even half decent anymore.