Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 03-07-2011, 06:28 PM   #16
El Bujia
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The dirty dirty.
Posts: 5,376
vCash: 500
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Jones would dominate McClellan after a cautious few early rounds. I would bet the house on it. McClellan was too poor technically (consistently over-reaching with the right without protecting himself), too telegraphed and one-paced in his assault, too poor defensively to not be countereed into oblivion by Jones. As I said, he'd stall him out in the opening rounds, find the openings, and eventually start countering and even teeing off at will once McClellan shot his wad. Jones wins at least 9/10, with McClellan having the chance to spring the one upset with the hail-mary right.
El Bujia is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 03-07-2011, 06:30 PM   #17
Jorodz
watching Gatti Ward 1...
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada, eh? Roy Jones, Jack Daniels and Grandma's Boy
Posts: 10,821
vCash: 1139
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Bujia View Post
Jones would dominate McClellan after a cautious few early rounds. I would bet the house on it. McClellan was too poor technically (consistently over-reaching with the right without protecting himself), too telegraphed and one-paced in his assault, too poor defensively to not be countereed into oblivion by Jones. As I said, he'd stall him out in the opening rounds, find the openings, and eventually start countering and even teeing off at will once McClellan shot his wad. Jones wins at least 9/10, with McClellan having the chance to spring the one upset with the hail-mary right.
agree for the most part but i think g-man was ENORMOUS at 160 and could still rehydrate to a huge weight at 168. his size and pressure would make it a fight imo but jones takes it in the end

if g-man had trouble (a lot of trouble before the knockout, he was stung a few times) against a faded and small julian jackson at 160, i see jones taking him at his 168 best
Jorodz is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 06:31 PM   #18
BarryWashington
newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 32
vCash: 500
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jorodz View Post
a) i also find it very doubtful but i'm his manager and he'll do what i tell him!

b)there's nothing to suggest from what i've seen of the g-man of the mid 90s to suggest he would win barring a first round blowout, which the supermiddle jones was not nearly that vulnerable to
haha, fair enough. i just think w/g-man draining from
180 to 160 was ridiculous. and if it is at super middle
i only see it benefitting g-man. freak accident stopped
what should have been a great career. i always say
that people should never assume what was going to
happen next (like when great musicians die in their peak
or athletes). but, i'm almost certain if the benn accident
didn't happen. mclellan would have been a force, on
some matthew saad muhammad freak shit. i remember
seeing some thing about benn being helped into the ring
by some dude sitting ring side and he was like "what the
hell was i doing?" he just had the natural reaction to help
benn because benn had been BLASTED out of the ring.
i remember benn saying he could feel the ligaments in
his neck been stretched when feeling those punches and
the bull shit with the ref jumping in front of gerald when
gerald could have easily gotten the TKO always pisses
me off. i think mclellan could take what roy had to offer,
i don't know if roy could take what gerald had to offer.
but, we'll never know.
BarryWashington is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 06:33 PM   #19
BarryWashington
newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 32
vCash: 500
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Bujia View Post
Jones would dominate McClellan after a cautious few early rounds. I would bet the house on it. McClellan was too poor technically (consistently over-reaching with the right without protecting himself), too telegraphed and one-paced in his assault, too poor defensively to not be countereed into oblivion by Jones. As I said, he'd stall him out in the opening rounds, find the openings, and eventually start countering and even teeing off at will once McClellan shot his wad. Jones wins at least 9/10, with McClellan having the chance to spring the one upset with the hail-mary right.
hey, you could use that same logic when marvin johnson
was beating up on matthew franklin/matthew saad muhammad
with all of matthew's glaring defensive and technical
bad traits, but matthew still got the job done. i personally think
gerald is going to land huge on roy, and i don't think
roy would react well. roy could go passive and out box him
for 12, but it's when he gets hit that i would wonder what
would have happened.
BarryWashington is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 06:58 PM   #20
The Morlocks
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 887
vCash: 1000
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by DonBoxer View Post
Monzon in 75. Where i would tell him to fight a 25-0-1 Hagler rather than a 36-4-0 Tonna. Monzons experience leads him to a UD.
IN 75, Monzon stops Hagler.
The Morlocks is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 06:59 PM   #21
The Morlocks
Contender
ESB Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 887
vCash: 1000
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Titan1 View Post
Dokes and Page, between 1981 and 1982.
Alex Ramos, after the Ted Sanders fiasco.
Mitch Green, around 1984
Jeff Chandler late 1983/early 1984.
Oddly enough, Teddy Sanders beat some good guys in the early 80's and was a dangerous fighter . Wayyyyy overlooked, I think.
The Morlocks is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 07:51 PM   #22
zacbox
Journeyman
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 75
vCash: 1000
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duodenum View Post
With the benefit of hindsight, I think Shavers finished him as a championship caliber heavyweight. His timing, coordination and reflexes never looked right after that, even in his final win. The brain damage Earnie inflicted on him compromised his fine motor function to a degree that no amount of conditioning could repair. Muhammad had no memory of much of it, a red light flashing and siren going off when he never had retention issues before. (Significantly, Ali was not interviewed in the ring after this one as Earnie was. If he had been, maybe the resulting conversation would have caused him to be hounded into retirement then and there.)

Is this true? Or just your opinion? It makes it more unbelievable that he was allowed to carry on after this.
zacbox is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 07:53 PM   #23
zacbox
Journeyman
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 75
vCash: 1000
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

On an additional note how about Hopkins? Does he actually benefit from continuing to fight now, or would he be held in higher esteem if he had retired before the 1st taylor fight?
zacbox is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 08:00 PM   #24
BarryWashington
newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 32
vCash: 500
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by zacbox View Post
On an additional note how about Hopkins? Does he actually benefit from continuing to fight now, or would he be held in higher esteem if he had retired before the 1st taylor fight?
i don't mean to be rude, but, is that a serious question?
the fact that dude was 45 and probably should have
gotten the decision over pascal. hell yeah, b-hop
made the second taylor fight very close, destroyed
tarver & pavlik. got the decision over winky in a
closely contested bout. kept it close with calzaghe.
i think if he repeats his performance against pascal
(minus the knockdowns) he'll be the oldest champion
ever. i think his career after taylor has helped to add
to his legacy. no doubt.
BarryWashington is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 08:02 PM   #25
El Bujia
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The dirty dirty.
Posts: 5,376
vCash: 500
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by BarryWashington View Post
hey, you could use that same logic when marvin johnson
was beating up on matthew franklin/matthew saad muhammad
with all of matthew's glaring defensive and technical
bad traits, but matthew still got the job done.
I don't see the resemblance in logic at all. Essentially you're comparing Roy Jones to Marvin Johnson and Matt Franklin to Gerald McCllelan, neither of which make much sense to me. Franklin had a penchant for duking it out if neccessary (which it often was) because he could more than hold his own, but even in those situations he was very rarely wild, sloppy, or technically incorrect. On the outside he was one of the best left-hand oriented technical boxer-punchers of the modern era at the weight, in my opinion. Very sound technician who just happened to have the heart of a lion. G-Man had heart, durability, and power, but nowhere near the technique or mental reserve that Franklin did.

I won't even go into the Jones Jr./Johnson comparison, as there simply isn't any.
El Bujia is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 08:11 PM   #26
BarryWashington
newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 32
vCash: 500
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Bujia View Post
I don't see the resemblance in logic at all. Essentially you're comparing Roy Jones to Marvin Johnson and Matt Franklin to Gerald McCllelan, neither of which make much sense to me. Franklin had a penchant for duking it out if neccessary (which it often was) because he could more than hold his own, but even in those situations he was very rarely wild, sloppy, or technically incorrect. On the outside he was one of the best left-hand oriented technical boxer-punchers of the modern era at the weight, in my opinion. Very sound technician who just happened to have the heart of a lion. G-Man had heart, durability, and power, but nowhere near the technique or mental reserve that Franklin did.

I won't even go into the Jones Jr./Johnson comparison, as there simply isn't any.
you're missing the point. i'm not directly comparing
the fighters. i'm saying that in both fights, franklin
was soundly outboxed by johnson (if we did who won
the most rounds). so even with that all, franklin/
muhammad was still able to take out johnson.
THAT is what i'm saying. sure jones jr would probably
out-box mcclellan but mcclellan was tough as nails
and carried some huge power. that's the only
comparison, where one boxer (like johnson or jones jr)
could outbox the other, but, one of the boxers could
withstand power and still be able to unleash his
power (like franklin or muhammad) on an opponent
that wouldn't be able to withstand it (jones jr. or johnson).
confusing, i know, but that is what i'm saying.

if we don't agree after that. then we'll just agree
to disagree.
BarryWashington is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 08:25 PM   #27
zacbox
Journeyman
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 75
vCash: 1000
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by BarryWashington View Post
i don't mean to be rude, but, is that a serious question?
the fact that dude was 45 and probably should have
gotten the decision over pascal. hell yeah, b-hop
made the second taylor fight very close, destroyed
tarver & pavlik. got the decision over winky in a
closely contested bout. kept it close with calzaghe.
i think if he repeats his performance against pascal
(minus the knockdowns) he'll be the oldest champion
ever. i think his career after taylor has helped to add
to his legacy. no doubt.
Yes it was a serious question, I don't disagree with what you say I guess for some people losses are the be all and end all of how a career is rated. If he had of retired before Taylor people may have now argued he was the best ever at middleweight. The losses will tarnish that for some people.

I guess you could turn those results to;

Lost to Taylor twice
Beat a one-dimensional Pavlik
An over-rated Tarver
Lost to Calzaghe
Lost to Pascal
Potentially will become an old champion in a weak era

With regards to legacy by retiring before Taylor it does remove a lot of that.
zacbox is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 08:28 PM   #28
El Bujia
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The dirty dirty.
Posts: 5,376
vCash: 500
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by BarryWashington View Post
i'm saying that in both fights, franklin
was soundly outboxed by johnson (if we did who won
the most rounds).
I disagree with that, especially in the rematch, where I think Franklin handled him pretty soundly.

Quote:
so even with that all, franklin/
muhammad was still able to take out johnson.
THAT is what i'm saying. sure jones jr would probably
out-box mcclellan but mcclellan was tough as nails
and carried some huge power. that's the only
comparison, where one boxer (like johnson or jones jr)
could outbox the other, but, one of the boxers could
withstand power and still be able to unleash his
power (like franklin or muhammad) on an opponent
that wouldn't be able to withstand it (jones jr. or johnson).
confusing, i know, but that is what i'm saying.
I hear what you're saying, I just disagree with the points of reference. I don't think pointing out that someone like Matt Franklin (who was an excellent technical puncher) could take out a defensively flawed, entirely offensively focused fighter like Marvin Johnson is in any way relevant to assuming the same thing is would hold true of a bout between two completely different fighters. McClellan has nowhere near the technical chops of Franklin and Jones nowhere near the defensive vulnerability of Johnson.

Basically, you're saying that McClellan has a puncher's chance due to his tremendous power and Roy's questionable chin, which I stated in my first post. I wouldn't count on it happening, though. I'd say the odds are largely in Roy's favor, actually.
El Bujia is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 08:36 PM   #29
BarryWashington
newbie
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 32
vCash: 500
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

Quote:
Originally Posted by El Bujia View Post
I disagree with that, especially in the rematch, where I think Franklin handled him pretty soundly.

I hear what you're saying, I just disagree with the points of reference. I don't think pointing out that someone like Matt Franklin (who was an excellent technical puncher) could take out a defensively flawed, entirely offensively focused fighter like Marvin Johnson is in any way relevant to assuming the same thing is would hold true of a bout between two completely different fighters. McClellan has nowhere near the technical chops of Franklin and Jones nowhere near the defensive vulnerability of Johnson.

Basically, you're saying that McClellan has a puncher's chance due to his tremendous power and Roy's questionable chin, which I stated in my first post. I wouldn't count on it happening, though. I'd say the odds are largely in Roy's favor, actually.
i get what you're saying, although i have to point out
franklin/saad muhammad's defense was atrocious, so
that's why i brought it up. any way, i just see roy getting
caught by mcclellan and not responding well to it. on some
julian jackson/herol graham shit. haha, i usually always
go with the boxer in these match-ups, but, i would say
the puncher would prevail. a damn shame it couldn't have
happened.
BarryWashington is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 03-07-2011, 08:49 PM   #30
El Bujia
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: The dirty dirty.
Posts: 5,376
vCash: 500
Default Re: With the benefit of hindsight If you could go back in time and manage a fighter..

I don't think Franklin's defense was atrocious. He's one of those fighters that gets painted with the wrong brush by the majority of fans based on his legacy and the arc of most of his fights. If you actually analyse his fights you'll see he was an excellent technician. Not a great defensive fighter reflexively, but very well sound as far as hand placement, recooperative techniques, etc. are concerned. Anyone who fights fire with fire as he did so often is going to get hit, and hit plenty. McClellan was being tagged up repeatedly by Benn even when he was offering up no offense of his own, but rather retreating on the defensive, arms by his sides, seemingly willing to eat whatever came his way. You'd never see Franklin doing something similar.
El Bujia is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > Classic Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013