Ike Ibeabuchi vs the K brothers

It's strange to me how Ike is rated so high by some, when his best performance is a slugfest with Tua....Tua who had all the
opportunity and chances in the world, but never made it to the very top because he wasn't good enough.

 

Who have either Klitschko beaten that is better than Tua???? C'mon don't hide

 

I wouldn't go that far. Ten times better? It was a loss after all but still the best line in Vit's résumé, granted.

What about Wlad? Can the same be said about him?


Ibeabuchi was showing promise and the results against both Tua and Byrd were very good wins; both against undefeated top-tenners; sufficient enough to consider Ike a significant player in the division. There were several other fights out there for him, post-Byrd (e.g. Briggs, Grant, Golota, Rahman etc), circa 2000 to 2002, and if one can entertain the idea that Ike could have won these types of match-up, which is not unreasonable, then a challenge of either or both of the Klitschkos, during this time, should perhaps be considered seriously.

The Klitschkos were not world-beating, at this point, and had their own dramas to come, within and soon after this timeframe.

 

You call it as you see it? OK, if you say so.

However, going on several of your posts, on recent Klitchko threads, it's more like you call it how the HeavyweightBlog.com sees it; a website, which is not only someone else's collection of arguments and conclusions but also a prime example of absolute bias, verging on being offensive.

Also - Could you please tell me what you mean by referring to me as an "ABC"?

Also - Given that I find you on almost every thread to do with the Klitschkos - what's your point?


My position on the Klitschkos is well documented. I don't believe they are as good as is purported by their fanatical followers. I point out the flaws in Klitschkonette arguments, as well as highlight aspects of the Klitschkos' game, which you can visually verify and or counter-argue, if you could be bothered or even knew what you were looking for.

You can't help yourself, can you? Your capacity for misinterpretation and misquoting comes naturally - it must do. Because, my comment about Wlad's jab was in response to newby johnson referring to it, as an "amazing jab". This response was: "His jab is an inconsistent mix of pawing, outstretched-left and, on occasion, it looks good. Even in the latter cases he tends to sweep the delivered jab right, across his chest/midriff." At what point in this response have I given the opinion that Wladimir "didn't possess a good jab"? I haven't. In fact, I actually used the word "good" to describe his jab. I just don't consider it amazing - for the reasons stated, which you are free to visually verify or counter-argue.


So, with your attempt to establish 'my bias', having now been nullified...

This thread is as much to do with Ike Ibeabuchi and what might have been, as it is about the Klitschkos, directly. With that in mind, I have briefly expressed when it is that Ike might have been matched against them and the route that could have been taken, in terms of other Heavies in the mix. This topic (and the topics of most threads) makes it impossible to avoid being subjective, because it poses a 'What-if" scenario but, at least I have posed the possibility of Ike's path to the Klitschkos, the period in which this could have happened and the opponents, which Ibeabuchi might have faced during this time.

What arguments are you presenting, in this case...??? Complaining about the 'Ibeabuchi vs. Byrd' stoppage and stating that "Based on watching his fights I'd say both bros beat the living **** out of him." These are not only subjective but also fairly mindless comments from you, to be frank. Your over 24 years a fan of Boxing does not serve you at all well, when discussing the sport, does it, really?

You seem to have no concept of what bias is, do you? If you had read posts, in which I put forward some considerations, which perhaps need to be made, when comparing boxers' records from 70-80 years ago, you might have a greater insight into why I consider your "facts" as greatly flawed. Whilst recorded numbers themselves are indeed facts, what those numbers actually support depends on how well you interpret them.

If one only ever quite obviously favors an interpretation, which supports their own agenda (which you always do), when there are clearly other, less supportive factors to be considered in their interpretation, then you weaken your arguments and overall agenda. You neither balance your use of numbers nor acknowledge your misuse of statistics and appear incapable of arguing a sensible case against this view. The fact you do misuse statistics, for the benefit of your own biased arguments, renders your viewpoints as unreliable, almost immediately.

You have a "tremendous amount of respect" for Louis but focus only on his questionable opponents; always quoting their records as proof but, as you have done again here, do not balance the view. This is a common trait of Klitschkonettes, who need every advantage and opportunity to accentuate the Klitschkos' worth and standing in Boxing history. This is also plainly biased.

You're funny - I really mean that. More misinterpretation by you of my post regarding Ike Ibeabuchi, on this thread. So be it. You are clearly incapable of English comprehension. Since when does "Ike beating the Klitschkos during [2000-2002], is not inconceivable" give cause for and equate to your ridiculous rant, above?

And, why do you insist on thinking that anything you write, whether it be your poor use of stats; poor paraphrasing or your personal attacks on me, actually matters enough for it to be too hard for me to bear? You are Klitschko-Fan-Fodder, dime a dozen, neither able to see past the last 10 years of Klitschko dominance nor understand why this has been the case, with only your numbers to comfort you. You humor me - on occasion. That is all.

And, by the way - Had I just said all of this to you in person or during a telephone call, it might have then been considered a "diatribe". Is that pseudo-intellectual enough for you?


Now do please do go forth and interbreed.

 

This is where these threads become confusing. What time frame are we supposed to be using? Any time a fantasy fight is proposed, unless given certain and specific times for each fighter, i use the best versions taking into regard who they fought, how they fought and where their comp was at that point. In other words we have a small list of comparisons for ike whilew have a much larger one for the Klits. Tua and Byrd were good wins, im not trying to take away. But both Vittles and Wlad have had better performances against equally if not better comp and have fought a wider variety of styles. Than theres the fact we dont know how Ike would deal with giving up the height and reach against guys who know how to do more than just come forward or fight defensively. All this is based on my own proclivity to match fightes at their best. If we're talking the wlad who lost to Sanders, it wouldn't be surprised to see Ike win. Against Vits, im not sure if he ever wins. Vittles was much more durable. Would have been a helluva fight the Ike and Vits from their respective Byrd fights.

 

Scoreboard: Wlad and Vitali: heavyweight champions.
Ike: full ****** jail bird.

 

Agreed. There is a lot of subjective extrapolation to be done, in a 'Prime-for-Prime' what-if scenario, because Ike's ledger is limited in the number of opponents and he never really reached his peak - so there remains questions.

This is probably why I opted to look at it from the point of view of the relevant timeframe. Even then, there is still a fair bit of subjective estimation involved but, by taking the view of the heavyweight scene at the time and considering where each of the Boxers were in their respective careers then, it makes for an interesting, alternative landscape.

I agree on the potential of an Ike/Vitali fight. It would have been a barnstormer and I think we can at least be confident in Ibeabuchi bringing it, no matter the competition, win or lose.

 

Arguing with this clown is pointless. Anyone who puts any credence in the racially motivated heavy blog is a moron.

 

Ike kills wlad early within 2 rounds.

vitali has a chance.

 

Your boxing knowledge is suspect. I know this because you repeatedly undermine ATGs like Calzaghe.

you're guilty by association.

 

I believe he is the author of that blog. He was here before and had all of accounts not only banned but deleted out of existence. It must of been a good 8 or 9 accounts.

 

aha sly, a trick post, since there is no atg called calzaghe, though perhaps there is one in the 18th or 19th century I am not aware of.

clever, my friend, but you aint catching me out.

 

He never showed any mental weakness or lack of focus in the ring.

 

Exactly. We hadn't even seen the best of him yet. He hadn't come close to peaking. You could see the improvements and potential the more fights he got. He also had a boxing IQ, something you don't see in most heavyweights. Just look at the Byrd fight. A fight where he was said to be out of shape, and had done all of 5 rounds of sparring in training. Each round he got closer and closer, you could see his boxing mind working, until that final round, where he backed him up against the ropes, feinted that right, then delivered that half left hook uppercut thing with precision on Byrd's face. A thing of beauty.

 

only the bold would could or even 2 of them did. the rest are very very long shots or no shot what so ever