Thoughts on Oleg Maskaev?

Whatever, even if Maskaev came out of that round, he needed 2 points in the last round just to have a draw, which was highly unlikely (that he could knock Tua down).

 

Okay, then he STILL would have won in everyone's eyes except the judges like Rahman did in the second Tua fight.

 

I think Oleg was a hell of a fighter. As previously mentioned, his management was absolutely horrible. I remember watching him fight (get thrown to the wolves is a more accurate reference) McCall n his 10th pro fight and get slaughtered. He comes back slowly from that to KO Rahman, only to get caught and creamed by K. Johnson. Then his bad management throws him in with a hot Lance Whitaker, only to get creamed in 2 rounds. Later he KOed again by T-Rex Sanders. Then, once again, he comes back slowly to KO Rahman and win a title. Considering all the ups and downs, that's amazing. Sure his chin wasn't the best, but his heart and determination, I greatly admire.

He is a good example that if you keep giving it your best, there's a good chance things will work out.

 

Those who think that Oleg was badly managed are completely wrong.

He was brilliantly managed. His debut is criticised, yet he won this fight. Would he have done better if he fought a nobody with a losing record?

He losts fights, not because he was thrown to the wolves, but because in reality he simply wasnt quite good enough and didnt have the chin to fight and beat the very top contenders regularly. Saying this, the fact that he always sought the best fights available and that he gave it his best meant that he was able to pull a few upsets and even earn a world title. Compare that management style to the ridiculous style of a Kirk Johnson who was fed the traditional method of cream puffs and handpicked fights, before losing in his world title fights when he stepped up. (by which time he had pretty much lost focus and put on too much weight) Or the career of a Lance Whittaker or Corey Sanders. Both of whom knocked out oleg Maskaev easily but none of which are as highly rated as Oleg.

Oleg was well managed and the fact that he fought the best before he was "ready" (i doubt that is really all that possible) only helped his career. He did very, very well considering his abilities.

 

Should of stopped right there.

 

I would have, but most people fall without question into the traditional line of thinking and might have thought i was being sarcastic.

Glad to see you agree though.

 

The fact that he beat a 20 something and 0 guy speaks volumes about his ability and natural talent, not the fact that he had some subtly genius team behind him who were assured he could win it.

If you knew anything about the mans career you'd know that the people closest to him, this "great" you feel was backing him, all left him with a big hearty "**** you' after he lost for the second time. They were in it for themselves, not for him, and they never were.

If they bailed after the McCall loss they wouldn't have tried to get him the damned fight to begin with. Setting themselves up for failure?

So much for the tactically brilliant and orchestrated career of Oleg Masaev.

 

I know nothing about the actual managers so i will give you the point about them leaving him. I am assuming that Oleg played a large part in picking and agreeing to fight certain fighters at certain stages and that is what i was focussing on.

Oleg lost to McCall because he wasnt as good as him on the night. IN reality, he was always a top 10 contender at best and he didnt really have the chin/defence to become a world champion. Yet, he did become an alphabet champion. Many other more talented fighters had better credentials but couldnt do the same thing. Take a David Tua for example. If you want to be the best, you take the hardest fights you can. Oleg did this, and as a result he overachieved. This idea of taking tune up fights is a dangerous proposition. By the time you reach the top you are starting to get long in the tooth. It is far better to sign the big matches like a Jeff Fenech did for example, than to waste time on tune ups and hand picked fighters. Muhammed Ali is perhaps the greatest example. When he was chasing his second world title, he mixed up with the likes of Norton and Frazier, he didnt waste his time slowly building up to speed or handpicking opponents. Even after the HOlmes loss he fought Berbick who was a top contender. The only way to go through the ranks is to take the hard fights and learn what it takes to reach the top. Especially nowadays, where it is not uncommon for a fighter to lose to a good fighter, come back and beat a string of nobodies and suddenly be a number one contender. Andrew Golota is a great example recently of this technique. Expect Holyfield to do the same soon. Losses against good fighters mean nothing to a career.

Anyway, i am interested, who would you have scheduled his fights against to give him such a better career?

 

Fighters without iron/good chins, unless there was a solid risk to reward ratio.

Maskaev's chin was mediocre. Coupled with him fading late that was a disastrous combination, one compounded the other.

Seriously, McCall AND Corey Sanders? Two of the best HW chins of the past 20 years? Then Tua, with a great chin and late fight power to boot.

Power wasn't as dangerous a prospect for Maskaev as those chins.

Derrick Jefferson, Alex Stewart, Tshabalala, Rahman, Francis... Every last one of those guys could bang and some were among the hardest heavyweight punchers of the 90's. But they WERE heavyweights, big ones, and they all had iffy stamina, so Oleg's wasn't as big of a problem.

But against Sander's and Tua, who both had huge one shot power, and at times low workrates... It got him in trouble.

 

OK, so I guess we can agree to disagree.

 

Yes --- he was 39 years old.
But --- Peter really sucks. He is a lazy fat **** that with very poor skills. My 12 year old looks better in the gym and he has only been training a few weeks.

 

How about we put your 12 year old in with Peter then, hmm? :thumbsup

 

he is done but he can beat valuev

 

Does anyone remember how HBO used to hype Maskaev as if he was the poster boy for an iron chin? Very ironic in retrospect.

Also strange is that he seemed to show a solid chin only when he fought Rahman.

He was definitely mis-managed early, being thrown in with ex-champ Maskaev and then hot prospect Tua, but he seemed to have found his footing with a string of wins against Rahman and Derrick Jefferson on HBO. The Jefferson fight was expected to be a hotly contested war, but Jefferson injured his ankle after being dropped in the first round, and after that was slaughtered. HBO jumped on Maskaev's nuts after that, after which he was promptly upset by unheralded Kirk Johnson. In his "comeback" fight, he was KO'd by some swatting punches by Lance Whitaker, and I remember thinking it looked like he either took a dive or just quit. He put together a string of low-profile wins after that, only to be KO'd in come-from-behind fashion by Corey Sanders. I remember thinking after that that he looked like he had brain damage and shouldn't even be licensed to fight anymore (and I know others shared that sentiment as well). I was shocked to see him once again walk though Rahman's shots and KO him.

As far as his historical ranking goes, he's definitely among the weakest heavyweight champs ever. Lost to McCall, Tua, Kirk Johnson, Corey Sanders, Lance Whitaker, and all by KO. Really, his claim to fame is having Rahman's number, and that's basically it.