Do you think David Haye is good boxing expert?

Every prediction I have seen on TV he stated went wrong. Klit will ko Fury in 4 rounds, BJ Flores will k.o bellew, Groves weill stop Froch.............list is endless, David /haye is not a boxing expert as he doesnt like boxing he does it for money only.

 

David Haye is an expert compared to practically everyone on this board who's never put on a glove ever and had a real fight in the ring. In boxing as with all sports people can view the fighters and stats and make an opinion. But that's all it can ever be. Until 2 fighters get it on in the ring NOBODY knows for 100% sure what the outcome will happen. That's why there have been so many upsets in boxing history.

Now sure Hayes back in the game for $$$$ not for the love of the sport...but, c'mon that's true also of most fighters. Very few would do this job just for the glory. Take all the money that it brings away and they'd be gone to. And the politics of boxing = all about money to! The ABC orgs are pigs with their noses in the trough. The promoters and mangagers are te same and the fighters are to. They ALL DO IT FOR THE MONEY FIRST AND FOREMOST. Believe different and you are NAIVE.

 

I've never seen Haye predict the outcome of a boxing match correctly

 

Apart from when he fought Audley Z-force Harrison. He got that bang on....

 

Wasn't exactly a hard pick was it

 

No I don't.

The guy doesn't really care about and isn't interested in boxing. You can tell this from his interviews and demeanor when on shows.

He's not a student of the game and it's usually those type of guys who make the best analysts.

 

I guess you'd have to consider his thoughts pertaining to a match up....other than that I don't believe his heart was ever fully into boxing. I always thought he should have remained at CW....he could have become an ATG at the weight class if he was disciplined.

 

That's a fair point...

 

As much sh$t as Paulie M. receives I've had several boxing conversations with the guy dating back to months after his fight with Cotto when I ran into him at a club called "Radio" in Manhattan NYC. We literally spoke for about an hour and this guys perspective on the fight game is second to none. Paulie's passion is legit.....

 

It's hard to evaluate his knowledge based on his predictions. Most boxers are always pushing some agenda. For example the obvious one where if a boxer has been conclusively beaten by someone, he will always pick that someone to win. That explains his Klit prediction straight away.

It was like Bellew swearing blind that Stevenson is the best LHW, and Cleverly saying it is Kovalev. Switch who they got KTFO by and you switch their opinions on who's best.

 

#1 boxing commentator is, Roy Jones, Jr.
Because he knows the sport, the boxers and the techniques.
Also, I love the way he puts the shoe-in network commentators in their place and basically, in a nice way, tells them tdksab.

#2 Paulie Malignaggi
Pauli was a feather fisted boxer, but he knows the sport, has a confident commentating style that doesn't grate on the ear and has pretty good eyesight, so unlike Bernstein, sees when punches land and when they don't.

Carl Froch
I hadn't seen Frochh commentate before the Degale-Jack card, but I was impressed with his commentating on that card.
Brits probably see him much more and may have a different opinion, but on that particular card, I think he did quite well.

David Haye is even worst than Bernard Hopkins.

 

Paulie is an excellent analyst I feel, in particular his work for Sky.

 

Haye is terrible at commentating. Roy Jones, Paulie, they give insight a layman and most boxing fans would not be able to see. That is what they are supposed to bring to the table.

 

He speaks fluently, he's rhetorically skilled but as a commentator he is plain awful. He's terribly biased and can't change his opinion when the facts change in front of his eyes.