If Wlad ads another notch to his belt against Chambers, will it help his legacy?

Yet Frazier burst off the canvas with power countless times.

 

you're either too prideful to admit you're wrong, or as originally thought, you don't know **** about the actual machinations of the sport. sorry, this is becoming embarrassingly more obvious with every post you make.

 

I don't know about Steward telling his guys to do it but I've seen many others do it before and am aware what it gives them. I think it shouldn't be allowed at all. But ordinarily it takes some blatant stuff to get the ref to bother with it when I see them do it. Again, I think Chambers was well within his rights to rough back. Seemed like fair play, considering. Actually I applaud Chambers not rolling over for it. When I watched it, I said "Good for you, son."

 

Christ, is that Eddie M. Muhammad in the avatar? He looks ancient...... Age is a terrible thing........ Off topic.... I just taped Eddie M. in his 1982 KO over Lottie Mwale off ESPN a few weeks ago.... Wicked KO.....

MR.BILLthumbsup

 

I'm beginning to feel this way. It's becoming like a disagreement with Rooster.

 

I didnt watch most of this fight, but i thought that there were some pretty interesting observations, from a historical/Classic session point of view.

1. The Klits are often referred to as the prototype (along with Lewis and perhaps prime Bowe) for the modern super heavys and giw ut us clear that smaller heavys cant compete. This seems misleading. I think this fight is a tick for the old school guys and Wlad is more old school than Chambers.

2. Chambers was very overweight (despite all the hoopla of him dropping weight). With old school training methods, i think he ways in closer to 190. This would be a much better weight for him.

3. Chambers is too slow and doesnt hardly throw combinations. From What i saw, his guard was high, his defence solid, etc. But, he rarely threw more than 2 or 3 punches and he had a work rate which was unbelievably slow. this is not too different to what i watched on you tube in some of his earlier fights. Certainly who threw nothing like a Rocky Marciano or Joe Frazier, but also nothing like Billy Conn, Ezzard Charles, or many or most other old school champs or challengers. He was maybe on par with say, a Tony Galento?

4 Wlad, seemed to be easily the better conditioned of the two fighters. Obviously his power and reach helped here, but he simply looked better conditioned, One would expect that his routine (like old schoolers) has a lot of cardio vascular work in it.

5. Chambers was nothing special size wise and certainly strength wise, yet he did still land his share of shots and muscle Wlad around his share of times. Other greats like Dempsey, Marciano, Louis, Johnson etc, while not necessarilly any bigger than Chambers, would certainly do the same and almost certainly better than Chambers. A few Dempsey or Louis combinations landing early in the fight would certainly make things interesting enough.

6. the low guard is criticised nowadays. Yet, i found it very interesting that in the last round, when it looked like chambers had tired and Wlad was looking for the bigger shots, he returned to using the low guard. And, his punches seemed to have much more sting, because of it. Well certainly that finishing hook did, anyway. Is this not proof that the low guard can be successful today. In fact, is it not possible that the low guard is better for offensive fighters and the high guard used more when a fighter is in trouble and trying to defend?

 

I hope to Christ that you are NOT suggesting that Chambs THREW the fight in round 12.?.?
:tired:-dead:roll:atsch

MR.BILL:admin

 

...:?... I uh...:?

 

Nah, that´s not the reason. There was a show on German TV yesterday where Wlad talked about his private live but although about his career and losses. He said he thinks too much. He sees the openings but instead to just go for it he thinks about every possibility resulting out of going for it, good and bad, and when he finally decides the opening is already gone most of the time. He thinks too much in the ring and he knows it himself.

Well, Holyfield for sure is no average contender that´s what we are talking about here. I have no doubt he would beat Norton, Tucker and McCall. Ruddock would give him some scary moments but in the end would lose too I think.

I as much as I would wish for more excitement, I don´t see much wrong in this.

 

Threw the fight:shock: How do you get that?

 

Well, from what i have seen, despite the nickname, he certainly isnt fast. I doubt he was as fast as Wlad, that is for sure.

Incidentally, when i said that he landed some shots, i meant that literally. Certainly not implying that he landed anywhere enough to trouble Wlad. Incidentally, as i said, i didnt watch the full fight and did see only some small clips and read the round by round, (from the general forum of all places!). Still, i think i am correct in saying he landed some punches. Would boxing stats not back this up?

 

I don't know what the stats say but I actually watched the fight in its entirety and don't recall that he landed one meaningful punch the entire night. I also think he is possibly the fastest handed HW in the division, making Wlad's performance rather impressive to me. So, that bit took me aback. Funny how we all see things differently. If you check youtube for Chambers+Klitschko+12, you'll see the whole fight broken up into twelve parts, round by round.

 

14 pages because of one single sentence on Wlad's technique. I love the Classic Forum.

I thought that was interesting actually. But also stupid. It costs a shitload of energy to lift a 245lbs man who leans his entire weight on you while your upper body is bent down.


Stonehands, i like how you manage to criticize Wlad's performance because... he didn't get hit. The only way it would've satisfied you is when he let Chambers hit him. Why, for God's sake, why??

 

I guess you could go two ways with that. Because I think maybe it takes less energy to prove your point that way after he does it a few times than if you don't prove your point and he does it to you all night long. But either way, whether it was right or wrong...It was worth it for this picture:

This content is protected

 

I think Chambers proved his point early on, ............. the point being, "OK, we might not have the best boxers any more, but us Americans still rule the roost in pro wrestling !"