What a bizzare post. Klitschko looked all at see and clueless against Fury, utterly confused by his style and unable to set up any punches. He was able to floor AJ and put in a better performance against him where father time cost him the fight
Judging a fighter based on how you score their fights as opposed to how judges score them is plenty valid when analysing an upcoming fight IMO. A lot thought Mayweather lost that fight, pretty much all of them think he won the rematch. I'm not sure what point it is you're trying to make.
Was Mike Tyson not a natural HW cos he got knocked out by CW Holyfield? Was Nick Valeuv not a SHW cos he was beaten by CW David Haye?. What an utterly stupid retort. Chambers was a mostly a flat footed fighter regardless of of his hand speed. Canelo is a very athletic explosive fighter , but he is by no means fleet footed. Neither were Chambers and David Haye. You don't seem to know the difference which is why you can't understand the concept. Here's Chambers after he moved down to his natural weight class. Without the added bulk he had up at HW , he is still heavy on his feet. Just like he always was. Chambers was NEVER a fast mover who ussd every space the ring had to offer. You are parroting a common misconception! This content is protected
Well that tells me for certainty that you never watched David Haye's career , either that or you just don't know what a fleet footed mover looks like. Here's Haye having to fight Chisora off him for every round up until the knockout. His feet are planted into the canvas and what you think is fleet of foot is just simple back steps. Haye is never on the balls of his feet , he's never changing up the angles , there's no lateral movement and he doesn't use the ring. Haye was right in front of Chisora all the time. Fury who is twice Hayes size danced circles around Chisora and literally toyed with him. Agit Kaybel used agility and footwork to box rings around Chisora. Even Vitali Klitschko who was 40 years of age used the ring to better effect against Chisora than Haye did. y simply dksab. Fact! This content is protected
I don't believe Bryant Jennings is any more a 'cruiser weight', than Eddie Chambers is and vice versa. And I also don't believe Eddie Chambers is any less a heavyweight, than Bryant Jennings is and vice versa. I'm simply using your own stupid statement against you, since you claimed Eddie Chambers wasn't a heavyweight when there's literally no basis for Eddie Chambers being any less credible a heavyweight than Jennings. Chamber's fights at cruiser weight have no relevance to his fights at heavyweight! Compared to heavyweights, he is as fleet-footed as they come and is certainly quicker on his feet (and hands) than Bryant Jennings according to my eyes (and to many others as well). "Chambers was NEVER a fast mover who ussd every space the ring had to offer." Except that's exactly what he did against Wladimir Klitschko, especially in the last round before hr got KTFO. So thanks for proving my point, whilst failing to prove yours, as that very statement of yours, fulfills what Eddie Chambers did against Wlad. Here: This content is protected Right, so Haye didn't look fleet-footed against Dereck Chisora therefore he isn't fleet-footed and never has been in any other fight? Well then, let me play you at your own game then. Bryant Jennings is not fleet-footed either because he looked totally stationary with his feet, planted to the ground against Mike Perez whilst getting a questionable decision win. Or against Wladimir Klitschko (SPECIFICALLY), he was fleet-footed and was moving all over the ring laterally. Yes, faster and quicker than Bryant Jennings could ever hope to do.
I have to assume you haven't seen a lot of boxing if you think thats what an agile quick moving fighter looks like. Half of the time he's either completely dead on his feet or laying on the ropes! Compare what you just posed to this.. See the difference? Its night and day. This content is protected
Irrelevant! The topic is in regards to a comparison between Bryant Jennings, to Eddie Chambers and David Haye (two of Wladimir Klitschko's PRIME opponents). Herbie Hide has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do with this topic! And the reason why Chambers was stuck (despite trying his best to move around) was because Wlad cut the ring off, cut off the escape routes and forced him into those vulnerable positions.
But we're not talking about his fight with Takam in which he didn't move all that much. I agree with you on that. But Takam didn't move that much either so you could say Takam wasn't a good mover based on that fight , but then he produced a different style against Joshua when he pranced all over the ring. Furthermore , i can reference Fury's fight with Cunningham to make an argument that Fury wasn't a fleet footed mover. Thats basically what you are doing. You are taking a different fight in which Jennings fought differently than how he fought against Wlad to make a point. Jennings used his feet a lot more against Wlad than he did against Takum. The Takam argument is a non-factor because we're discussing the Wlad fight , NOT the Takam fight. Haye on the other hand fought Wlad like he did everybody else. Minimal footwork with plenty of upper body movement. He was banking on walking WK onto something , but WK never took the bait and boxed safe from the outside. Both of them produced a stinker , but the Klit fanboys didn't like that WK was completely unable to put a hurting on Haye , so they deluded themselves into believing that Haye ran around the ring like a young Cassius Clay. No, Haye stood right in front of WK and de-armed him with basic movement and upper-body movement. The film doesn't lie! This content is protected
Chambers was completely spent because of this https://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2011/06/30/article-2010040-0CCE213000000578-863_1024x615_large.jpg https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/9tk...f8a376-e7c8bf9b6fa44761a50cab1ca5f8a376-0.jpg If he wasn't so knackered from having a behemoth like Wlad draped all over his 6 foot frame then he would have went the distance easily !
