Haye's last 8 opponents

So I guess he cant win as the Klitschkos are both mid-late 30's.

 

Interesting point by the threadmaker. I never thought about it, but its true. By a closer look only Mormeck was a world class fighter near to his prime, when Haye beat him.

The rest was from solid to complete joke.

Bonin is a polish C-level club fighter with one of the most constructed records. Silly fight.

Maccarinelli was a british hypejob without a defense or chin. Not so big win.

Fragomeni was a solid Top10 Cruiserweight. good win.

Barrett is washed up and dont come up with he had a draw with Tua. Tua is even more washed up then Barrett. Bad win.

Valuev was in for losing. Don King and Sauerland made a deal with Haye like they did with Valuev 3-4 years ealier to get rid of Ruiz. Bad performance in one of the most boring HW-title fights. even Klitschko-Ibragimov had more tension.

Ruiz is washed up.

Harrison is a washed up british domstic B-level fighter and barely Top50.



So out of the mentioned 8 Haye has 2 good opponents (Mormeck, Fragomeni) 2 solid opponents (Valuev, Maccarinelli), 2 washed up (Ruiz, Barrett) and 2 bums (Harrison, Bonin).

 

Just look how old heavyweight fighters are, there are five times as many fighters in the top 50 35+ compared to 25 or less. The division has never had as many old fighters as now. That is half the reason it is so crap. The division has been crap since the average age of fighters went over 30. Yes 30, check your history books. Young hungry fighters heavyweight division that's the biggest joke going.

Get yourself a 20-30 belly, fight once,twice a year, wait until you are mid 30's, do not learn to box properly. Spend years trying to find a guy who can box to lift your game.
And then get beat.

 

Look at the Olympics how many fat mid 30's blokes are breaking world records. phsyically you peak at 25, stamina is 27, big guys can be a couple of years late.
You get the odd exception but 99% of heavyweight fighters skills are worse at 32 than 28 at heavyweight. You get some that have not learnt their craft so get better boxing wise, but physically they are worse.

 

Yeah good post. Really in all fairness you gotta rate Chambers, Chagaev, Povetkin and possibly also Adamek ahead of Haye in terms of heavyweight competition fought. The problem is these 3 of these guys are just as inactive as Haye is and haven't been making waves lately, so given Haye's momentum he's rated the #3 heavy.

Agree Haye's 2 best wins are definitely Mormeck and Fragomeni. Macc, Barrett, and Ruiz were all entertaining and dramatic in how Haye knocked them out...but they don't lend credibility to Haye's world titlist pretensions. Haye's credibility is based on the fights where he got the cruiser belts and consequently Haye's credibility is fading.

With regards to Valuev, I give Haye credit for beating a better version of SNV then Holyfield beat, but ultimately it was a lame performance from Valuev and a disappointing performance from Haye.

 

good post, but nothing new... :good

 

Which is exactly why Haye is towards the bottom of the top ten. Ranking him at #3 is crazy.

 

Haye complains the Klits only box old nobodies but Haye himself is doing the same, just much worse. 38 year old Ruiz? 38 year old bum Audley?

Haye is boxing the weakest possible, hand-picked opponents. He's been doing *EXACTLY* what he has been accusing the Klits of over the last couple years. A typical trash talker looking for faults in others who ought to work on his own resume first before throwing dirt.

 

he should fight Solis to avenge his loss in the amateurs

 

atsch You're struggling to understand.

Bonin - When you have a fighter who has just won the European title in the CW division and has a record of 18-1. Fighting a 37-1 fighter in a higher division (HW), with his only loss being disputed isnt bad, for a first fight in a new division, when that fighter has no pedigree at all in the division. Get it now :good.

Enzo - Was highly rated at the time. In some ratings the man right behind Haye in some rankings. He was the fight that the British public were calling for and had a good record of 28-1, compared to Hayes record of 20-1. Enzo was WBO CW champ, had made 4 defences, compared to Hayes 0 defences and was considered the next biggest puncher behind Haye, and considered more of a threat to Haye than Wlod or Cunningham. The fact that Enzo has lost many times since isnt relevent because Haye beat him at the peak of his powers when Enzo was riding on the crest of a wave and when rated his highest.

Barrett - Was a 2nd fight in a new division, and the first time in over a year since Haye last fought in that division (HW). Barrett wasnt a great, and hasnt been claimed as, but was coming off a good win, and was one of a few that was willing to meet Haye. Fact

Do you understand a bit better now atsch.
Dont worry newbie, you'll get there

 

enzo wasn't highly rated at the time, it was just a fight that the british public were pumped about.
enzo's resume was typically warren at that time and it showed.

and i'll say it once more - don't use 'titles' and a fighter's record to beef up arguments about him.
who he fought and when is all you need.

 

Enzo was in the top 5 of The Ring magazine ratings and was rated higher in some rankings. Thats highly rated. HE was WBO CW champ, so a unification made sense, and had beaten -
M F Dominguez
B Gunn who was a good enough opponent for Adamek when champ years later.
W Braithwaite

It was considered the biggest threat to Haye at the time (whether he was or wasnt in hindsight, is a different thing), and Haye dealt with him.

Point proven :good

 

there you go again...

ratings and belts.

the fight made a lot of sense in britain but enzo proved to be nothing more than a euro quality fighter.

who they fought and when....that's all you need.