BJS rarely appears at his best though. Once again he seems like a fighter who has had one excellent performance (Lemieux) and we are supposed to accept that's the version that turns up against Canelo or Golovkin. I'll tell you this; the guy that turned up against Lee, Eubank, Monroe and Akavov gets battered by them.
Many fighters, not just Saunders, raise their game against the best and often allow their standards to slip against "lesser" boxers, sometimes boxing to their opponent's level rather than their own potential. Saunders was punch perfect against Lemieux who, after Golovkin, is generally recognised as the biggest puncher in the division. Clearly the fact that one mistake could result in a brutal KO loss meant that Saunders performed to the elite standard he is capable of and won every second of every round. Against Eubank it was well known that Saunders had not been training properly, eating microwave ready meals and training poorly. His boxing was levels above Eubank but it was his lack of fitness that allowed Eubank to claw back the latter rounds. Against Lee, Saunders boxed very well early on, landed punch of the year for me with that short straight that knocked Lee down. Lee is an intelligent boxer with a fantastic tactician in Booth so it's no surprise that he clawed his way back into the fight but it was a clear win for Saunders. He boxed well in that fight although not as well as he can. I don't see what the problem is. Against Canelo, Golovkin and Jacobs, Bill would be in the same boat as he was against Lemieux. Fighting abroad against heavy punchers who would punish any mistake possibly by KO. With the above in mind, I would expect a Lemieux-type performance from him. It's worth pointing out that nobody has schooled Eubank the way Saunders did in the first half of their fight. Even Groves wasn't as comfortable as Bill was in the first half of their fights. This point will fall on deaf ears though because the vast majority on this forum insist that Eubank is a complete joke.
totally agree. That's what makes him frustrating (that and spending time making stupid videos). A wasted talent.
So basically, an excuse for every fight where Saunders isn't the same as he was against Lemieux. Remember, Golovkin also won every round when he fought Lemiuex, but he stopped him. Saunders' lack of power is a big issue. Beyond the two light heavyweight stay busy/nothing fights he's stopped one opponent in six and a half years. That's a serious lack of pop. An unpopular guy like Saunders in America without any power trying to nick a decision against a guy like Canelo? He'll need an absolute masterclass.
You’re p*****g in the wind @CutThroatFade talking positively about Saunders. Some people are just more interested in the personality/popularity side of things than what a fighter can do in the ring. Saunders is a massive weapon, whilst he’s been world champion is career so far has been massively underwhelming for a number of reasons that are mostly his fault. He does my head in & I don’t like how he presents himself in the media and in these daft IFL type videos. However, Tony Hayers and McVey, you are massively wide of the mark if you a) Don’t think he’s a world class fighter with the tools to be the very best and b) don’t realise that promoters can also recognise point a.
Saunders has all the tools but is too thick to apply them and has the wrong promoter who won’t get him in line properly and won’t tell him what’s what.
That’s quite possibly all true bud. My only real issue was a couple of people disputing the first 5 words of your post.
I couldn’t dispute that all, Saunders is an unreal talent. Saunders lacks something mentally which will stop him from being what he should be, he said Tyson had a word with him and made him think about what he was doing. It shouldn’t be Tyson doing that and Tyson shouldn’t need to be doing it anyway, he needs a strong figure guiding him...
I never said he wasn't world class,I just don't think he beats either Canelo or Jacobs.He might get by a fading GGG,but I wouldn't bank on it.
You come across as incredibly black and white with these things. Fury has the skills of Mayweather. Saunders is a world class fighter with the tools to be the very best. Pardon me for saying but Canelo and Golovkin aren't the sort who, to date, have scraped past opposition like Akavov, Eubank and Lee, and when one of them bumped into Lemieux, they beat him up even easier than Saunders did. It feels like you're just overrating these fighters without even thinking about it. I'm not saying Saunders is rubbish; far from it. But the Lemieux performance was the exception as opposed to the rule. As for what promoters think of him. Two words: leisure centre. He can be as good as he likes but people will never warm to him.
I have watched many BJS fights and his performance against Lemeuix shocked me. Definitely ' one out of the box ' and not the norm. However like you, just pointing that out doesn't mean I don't rate him as ' world class ' just pointing out an observation.
There's not much to it Tony. You take their best performance (Lemieux/Klitschko), and assume they would bring that level of performance for the biggest fights of their career. Most issues for Billy and Tyson in the ring have been ill discipline and lack of motivation. Those issues would likely go out the window if they landed the biggest fights in boxing. We saw it with Tyson against Wilder, how he easily went up the levels from Pianeta to Wilder. If Billy can train his heart out for Lemieux, he can do the same for Canelo. All those poor performances listed he was the favourite. Not a good mindset for Billy. Granted it should be a given that fighters come in their best shape every time but unfortunately with the traveller boxers, they appear to only do it for their best opponents. I put it down to a poor upbringing.
I switched off in the first paragraph if i’m being brutally honest. Fury and Saunders imo have elite level skills. I would definitely compare Fury with Mayweather in terms of defensive skills including his footwork, lateral movement, reactions etc in defusing and nullifying opponents. Saunders has a very similar defensive skillset. I know you’re more obsessed with popularity and where a fighter is on the Forbes list but i’m talking about the technical side of it.
That last sentence is bang on and it’s not even a sarcastic remark. The genuine boxing fans here are having a discussion about the actual skill level of Saunders and all Hayers can say in retort is “Leisure centre” which he has repeated in multiple posts. Embarrassing stuff. I figured out which alt this is by the way. It’s OpinionofaCasual’s new alt after he got booted. New account, same bellend.
The comments about leisure centres are in direct response to the likes of you suggesting anyone who doesn't recognise the vast commercial potential of this world beater is an idiot, and that promoters recognise it to. You sound like the guy managing a band telling all and sundry that they're the next Beatles when they've been playing back rooms in pubs for five years. If Saunders was that popular why is he defending his title in a leisure centre?
