Eddie Chambers vs Alexander Povetkin

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by mr. magoo, Dec 10, 2007.


Page 3 of 3
  1. RDJ

    RDJ Boxing Junkie banned

    13,158
    9
    Sep 27, 2005
    Chambers a big step up compared to Byrd? :huh
     
    RDJ, Dec 11, 2007
    RDJ, Dec 11, 2007
    #31
  2. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    52,223
    27,729
    Jan 3, 2007
    For whatever reason, people seem to have a hard time acknowleding the fact that Chris Byrd was 37 years old in that fight, and hadn't done anything spectacular in recent years. This is a far cry from a 25 year old prospect, who's fighting regularly beating quality opposition and who's unbeaten in 30 bouts. Outside of mere experience, and shear name recognition, why don't you tell me why you feel that Eddie Chambers isn't a step up from Chris Byrd?
     
    mr. magoo, Dec 11, 2007
    mr. magoo, Dec 11, 2007
    #32
  3. Odo

    Odo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,145
    169
    Jul 25, 2004
    Well,Byrd was probably over the hill when Povetkin met him inside a box ring.I wouldnt say the same about Donald though.
    I stick to my argument that it doesnt mean anything at all to beat 20 no-hopers at the pros to boost your pro record.According to your logic someone like Faruq Saleem must be a top 10 fighter,or Malik Scott.
    Sam Peter and Calvin Brook couldnt hold a candle to Povetkin at the amateurs.
    He was in his mid 20's facing kids who were either teenagers or in their early 20's,eh? You make it sound as if Povetkin had won his fights due to his age.
    Unlike the pro business you regularly meet the best counterparts from all parts of this planet at several big tournaments.Some fighters are younger(like a lot of Americans,but the Americans are no force anyway at the amateurs,so that it doesnt matter),some fighters are older(like a lot of Cubans).
    And lets not forget that not only did Povetkin win gold at the olympics but that he hadnt lost for ages before he won that gold medal.He was one of the most dominating heavy weight fighers of all times.
    A truly outstanding amatuer heavy weight champ!
    Compare this with Chambers ' pro record! Do you really think that any true fighter is impressed by Chambers' victories over part time taxi drivers with fight records of 4-30?
    I dont try to belittle Chambers as a fighter.I just try to point out that a 30-0 doesnt mean that much if you can hardly find any recognisable name among Chambers ' scalps.
    Yes,he beat Brook.Therefore he deserves respect and the upcomming final eliminator against Povetkin.Nevertheless I still think that Povetkin is head and shoulders over Chambers in terms of experience.
     
    Odo, Dec 11, 2007
    Odo, Dec 11, 2007
    #33
  4. reebok4

    reebok4 New Member Full Member

    46
    0
    Jul 12, 2007
    This content is protected


    This content is protected


    This content is protected


    Fragments of Chambers - Rossy fight.

    Chambers is noone. Think about it. Really, noone. It's easy to be fast against unskilled fat clumsy Rossy. It's easy to outsmart no-brained Guinn (ask Sergey Liahovich). Was Chambers prefomance against Brock good? No, he was crappy. Against Povetkin he will be horrible.

    Povetkin and Chambers had common foe - Ed Mahone. You might think that Chambers did better against Mahone than Povetkin. But Chambers stopped him only on cuts. As for Povetkin - Mahone, I think you can find it on YouTube.

    Chambers punch is weaker definately, and workrate is lower several times. Povetkin will shred Chambers.

    End of story.
     
    reebok4, Dec 11, 2007
    reebok4, Dec 11, 2007
    #34
  5. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    52,223
    27,729
    Jan 3, 2007
    I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here, but if you're implying that Donald wasn't washed up, then I have to disagree. He was 40 years old, and hadn't fought in two years, nor scored a win in more like 3.


    I think there is definately something to be said for staying as active as Eddie has though, and not all of his fights were against no hopers. Povetkin has yet to prove that he can beat a quality opponent as well, and neither Byrd nor Donald quite fit the bill for me.

    And Tyrell biggs and Henry Tillman were also better than Tyson in the amatuers. Doesn't prove much once you get to the pros. Especially seeing as how those guys were men fighting fighting kids in the amateurs, which I know you address later in this post.


    You don't think that a 24 year old man has an edge over a kid who's between 17-21? Believe me, age has EVERYTHING to do with it. If it wasn't for age and physical maturity, Tyson would have won the gold in the 1984 olympics rather than stopping short in the trials.


    The best counterparts, many of whom never continue after their amatuer days are over. The pros are a totally different ball game.


    Fair enough.


    I only counted about a 11 or 12 fighters in 30 bouts on Chambers record who had more losses than wins. Besides, I think that its pertinant to look at what he's fought recently. Povetkin doesn't have a win of the quality of a Calvin Brock.

    I agree that a padded record doesn't say much, but I disagree that there aren't any recognizable names on Chamber's resume.

    Let's take a neutral stance here. I agree that Povetkin has far more amatuer experience than Chambers, but Eddie has far more pro experience. Fighting a lot of 3 round matches doesn't exactly say much for how you'd do in the pros, and Eddie has gone rounds on numerous occasions already. His last 3 or 4 opponents were younger and fighting more actively than Povetkin's last few opponents. We'll see what happens when they fight.
     
    mr. magoo, Dec 11, 2007
    mr. magoo, Dec 11, 2007
    #35
  6. Odo

    Odo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,145
    169
    Jul 25, 2004

    I can see your points,mr.magoo! I dont intend to argue the toss about whether Donald has been shot when he met Povetkin or not or whether Chambers' pro victories against very limited opposition mean as much as Povetkin's quality victories against top opposition from all parts on this planet.
    I just disagree with you that the pro game is that much different from the amateur sport.A lot of people tend to agree with.No doubt about that.However,whoever has fought with head gear at the amateurs knows for sure that a fight is a fight.
    An outstanding amateur will be a good pro ,too.There are exceptions like Audley Harrison or Tyrell Biggs.Both both fighters hadnt been outstanding amateur before they turned pro unlike Povetkin who had won whichever medal can be won at the amateurs.
    Chambers vs Povetkin reminds me a bit of Lacy vs Calzaghe.
    I have heard the same arguments about Lacy when I mentioned that he was schooled and stopped in his last amateur fight against Gaidarbekov and that he didnt have a proven track record at the pros either before he met Calzaghe.
    Lacy is no bum,but no real top gun either.I for my part think the same about Chambers,Mr.Magoo.I may be totally wrong of course.Anyway! I am certainly looking forward to see Chambers in action against Povetkin.
     
    Odo, Dec 11, 2007
    Odo, Dec 11, 2007
    #36
  7. mr. magoo

    mr. magoo VIP Member Full Member

    52,223
    27,729
    Jan 3, 2007

    Whoever wins, lets just hope that its a good fight, and not a 12 round sleeper. In either case, I think the winner is in for a tough night with Klitschko.
     
    mr. magoo, Dec 11, 2007
    mr. magoo, Dec 11, 2007
    #37
  8. ralphc

    ralphc Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,352
    0
    Jan 11, 2007

    Anybody has a chance against Klitschko, because in the past it was anybody who beat him.
     
    ralphc, Dec 11, 2007
    ralphc, Dec 11, 2007
    #38
Page 3 of 3