When was the last time the #1 and #2 HWs squaring off looked as bad...

...as Wlad and Pulev did last night? And if your answer is Wlad-Povetkin go further back as well.

For me (who haven't watched Wlad-Povetkin), I think I'd have to go back to Sharkey-Schmeling or something like that. No, they looked better, actually. Perhaps all the way to Corbett-Fitz.

 

Tyson always looked good, and not even effeing Berbick lacked basic fundamentals like Pulev did last night. Wlad and Pulev both looked crap in terms of technique fundamentals. Tyson didn't look crap in those aspects even when Lewis beat the crap out of him.

 

Probably, yeah.

That wasn't a pretty fight either, but still think they looked better by a margin. Take away the setting and knowledge of who Pulev and Wlad are, and I'd guessed they were mid level amateurs. Most amateur fights I've watched have had more technical quality, I'd say.

 

I don't deny or doubt the man's effectiveness, but I think he looked **** from a technical standpoint. Better than Pulev, but still ****.

Haven't watched him for a while, and I was chocked actually.

 

You and I obviously have a very different opinion of what sheer class looks like. Jerky motions, wavy hands for a guard and having no head movement besides pulling it back at times is NOT sheer class as far as I'm concerned.

He's quick for such a big, strong guy and he's excellent at controlling range, but the **** does he look sheer class.

 

You can't be seriously suggesting that Tyson didn't look better in terms of fundamentals than Wlad does.

 

I've said several times that Wlad obviously is effective.

But then, of course, you have to look at the quality he's faced. I did rate what I'd seen of Povetkin and I also think Haye was a good fighter. Byrd as well. So obviously Wlad does something right in beating such guys, but that doesn't mean he looks good. And last night's fight. Jeez...

You complain about the WW division today, but even effing Margarito looks like Napoles in comparison to those guys.