70's HEAVYWEIGHTS SUCKED!

"Right or wrong that’s the way I see it. You may disagree with me and that’s fine. So send all responses, whether in agreement or with the usual hateful venom, to the usual place. "

He actually is admitting how ridiculous his whole analysis was and is fully expecting a barrage of negative response and disagreements... I don't see how a guy who's been involved in boxing for over 50 years like he said and come to these conclusions...

I'm blown away.

 

I didn't bother to read the article, I never do. I see the headlines and the first paragraph of some of these, and they are just a slight touch above "So, I seen this fight yesturday....."

Just atrocious writing.

 

I know ive commented already, tragic tragic on so many levels.

 

Here's a few gems from the article:

• Vitali hits as hard, if not harder than Foreman.
• He easily absorbs Foremans best shots.
• Tyson walks through Ali.
• Ali doesn't have the power to trouble Wlad.
• Tua is virtually knockout-proof.
• Norton doesn't possess the power to hurt Arreola.
• Arreola is deceptively skillful.
• Nobody did to Barrett what Haye did to him, apparently.
• Cobb was 'soft-punching'.
• Quarry is comparable to Brian Minto.
• Povetkin would be too big for Quarry.
• Chambers hit hards than Jimmy Yonug.
• Lyle couldn't handle Austin because he lost to Ball & Cooney and Austin is 6'6" and 240lbs.
• Holmes couldn't beat the Klitschko's.

 

Despicable tripe. :verysad

 

These can be argued. Tua, in his prime, was fairly bullet-proof. That's not really debateable. Arreola has an extensive and awarded amateur background and does possess excellent skills which he does not always demonstrate. Cobb was not a devastating puncher. Povetkin would have a fair chance against Quarry because he is very skilled and in small part because he is larger.

 

In the United States we call it freedom of speech. I personally think the article is preposterous, but there's nothing wrong with posting an opinion.

 

It was just funny up until "Arreola TKO Norton", then I got mad.

 

"IB stands up a-la George Costanza........'All right!!! THAT'S it!"

 

"George is getting upset!"

 

Actually those are bull****.
Tua got stunned by freakin' Chris Byrd... Who I think, doesn't punch particulary hard.
Cobb could certainly punch, but not devestating.
Povetkin would definitely lose to Quarry. Quarry was just way better imo

 

You ask anyone who was in the biz in the 90's who had the best beards in the division and it came down to McCall and Tua. It's not even debatable. I don't know many fighters who could take those monster shots he took from Ibeabuchi or even later from Lewis and keep upright.

Cobb's best KO was of the not so durable Shavers, who was gassed. It was attrition KO. He was not a particularly hard puncher.

Quarry had a lot of problems he brought into the ring. And in retrospect his legacy seems to bask in the glow of his better contemporaries. He was a fine fighter. I think Povetkin, if his career is not derailed through activity, has a chance to be quite a bit better. He has the talent, fast, decent clout, moves well, sees angles... a bit Quarry-like in those respects. However, he is an unfinished work.

 

Yeah there's little doubt that he can take a good shot, but he is NOT bullet proof and he would certainly lose to some of the 70s heavyweights.
Cobb could still punch though. nobody called him a ko puncher.

And Quarry was definitely on a higher level then Povetkin, based on his victories against Lyle, Foster, Shavers, Thad Spencer, Patterson, and Bodell. Plus I think he's just a way better fighter, with his counter punching and speed.

 

As opposed to deliberate contrarianism purely for the purpose of combating the views of those you mock?