Jake Paul Phony Fights Discussion

Yeah but even still Jake Paul is an amateur with bad fundamentals. He only started fighting well into his 20s and late starters always have a hard time in the pros unless they’re physically talented and Paul really isn’t all that physically talented. Getting beaten down the stretch by a middle-aged weed addict in Chavez Jr and getting beaten by a stiff domestic level guy like Tommy Fury I think speak to how limited and average Paul is. The guy Berlanga blasted out recently is more credible than any of the guys Paul has stopped imo, Gonzalez-Ortiz was a world-level amateur and a decent prospect for a while before his career came off the rails when he went to jail. Jake Paul hasn’t even beaten anyone as good as Steve Rolls or Marcelo Coceres. The size difference isn’t that big either since Paul carries way too much weight for a cruiser and could probably compete at 175 if he cut properly and tried to get more of a boxer physique.

 

Yeah, no ****. Berlanga would destroy Joke Paul, as would anyone with a pulse.

 

Would the Tyson From the Jones Jr. Exhibition have beaten Jake Paul?

Would that iteration of RJJ have?

 

No because it wasn't a fight, it was a scam

 

He seemed to have a lot more to offer.

 

I don't know if Tyson from the Spinks fight beats Jake Paul

 

No.

 

Both were fixed outcome bouts.

 

Joe Frazier wins

 

The Tyson of 4 years ago seemed a lot livelier and mobile. But im not sure what the score is with Paul and all these old legends falling to him.

 

No.

I don't think theres anyone except maybe Foreman/Archie Moore who could have beaten Jake Paul(or any prospect of Pauls caliber) north of age 52 or 53. And Tyson was cooked before he was 40. Hes not the sort of guy you'd test the limits of longevity with.

Oliver McCalls fighting at 60 and look at the caliber of guy hes struggling to beat now. Look at the guys Ron Lyle was beating in his mid 50s. You've got to dig deep into the professional ranks to find wins at that age.

The age gap between Tyson and RJJ was a mere 3 years. A lot of old fighters can look amazing on the senior circuit. If we have Foreman fight Bugner or Holmes in 2010 well all of a sudden Foreman looks pretty good. But its all an illusion.

A lot of middle aged people are in pure denial on this issue and the realitys of aging.

 

There were posters on this forum that were adamant this iteration of Tyson would look good.

 

They were in denial.

I've barely hit 30 and I'm struggling pretty bad with the mental reality of aging. I can only imagine the stuff a 40 and 50 year old is going through. I think to them defending Tyson was personal and they really weren't using logic. They were defending a past they identified with against a toxic present they hate. I don't blame them but Tyson never had a chance and deep down they knew it hence hedging their bets with various iterations of "if Jake Paul wins you know it was rigged". Do you think any of those people ever throw around accusations of fight fixing for regular fights? Nope they did it because they knew exactly what was going to happen and they wanted to deny it.

 

I didn't think the Holmes who beat Butterbean looked good .

 

Butterbean was 17 years younger than Holmes. If you give him another senior fight he could have looked amazing in 2002. Heck if you give Tyson the right senior fight right now he could look good.