Booth says Haye prefers Wladimir

Ruiz doesn't fit the definition of a shot fighter.

 

"Washed-up", "over-the-hill", "well past his prime", "old".

take your pick.

 

When was 'prime' John Ruiz? Looked the same as always.

 

Yeah, Ruiz was always crap.
But at 38 he was slower than at 28. And he was never quick to begin with.

 

Probably late 90s and early 2000s, around the last time he won a meaningful match.

 

http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/13042010/58/haye-fight-klitschko-soon.html

from April earlier this year:

Can any journalist out there (I know we have one British boxing journalist on this section of the board in Mr. Bunce), call Haye and Booth and point this out to them?

In April, Wlad was challenging and they wanted Vitali. It's in the link above listed clear as day.

In November, Vitali is challenging and they want Wlad.

This is not hyped up bullsh*t from a message board poster. This is Booth's own words with sources quoting him.

 

He beat Jameel McCline easily and many were arguing he was robbed against Valuev so he was hardly as bad as people think. He looked about as bad as he did against Roy Jones in this fight because he's slow and he needs somebody he can grab hold of and maul. Only difference being Haye had the power Jones did not.

I don't buy it, he was always an average fighter and he still was the same average fighter.

 

Most people were arguing Holyfield beat Valuev too, just a few months after Ruiz fought Valuev.
Ruiz fought Haye over 18 months later still, and only had one fight against a nobody in the meantime, a fight in which he laboured and picked up a cut.

McCline, Ruiz, Holyfield, Valuev .... all of them are old, decrepit or slow fighters.

Your point is valid, he was so average and dreary it's hard to say he looked much better when he was younger. But I think he was slower at 38 than at 28.

 

I have literally just filed an article quoting Mr. Booth's volte-face for Yahoo-Eurosport so I did an almighty double-take on seeing your link, thinking, but my article isn't up yet, and they've changed the title! Article should be up by Wednesday at the latest, depends on my editor, the title is 'Haye must Put Up or Shut Up' - I think you'll like it.

 

looks to me like K2 have done plenty of compromising.

 

I can see why they want to fight Wladimir.

Both are tough fights but I fancy Haye against Wladimir. I can just see his power troubling Wlad, Wlad likes to clinch and haye throws those wide bombs when guys clinch, something Wlad won't enjoy. It will be tough getting past Wlad's jab especially as he was cautious against Audley. What will their strategy be versus Wlad, it's an interesting question...

Vitali I am not sure on, he's a big guy and unlike Wlad he likes to lean back to avoid punches. Yes it is technically not necessarily the best thing to do but with Haye already having to negate a large reach advantage he could find it tough to land his power shots imo as he'll be forced to leap in, it just depends how slow Vitali is and whether Haye's speed is enough to hit him before he gets to react.

 

Haye doesn't really deserve 50-50, in my eyes he is still just a challanger. That WBA "belt" he is holding is phony and rightfully belongs to Wlidamir when he beat Chagaev, who held it untill the WBA stripped it because he was going to fight Wladimir, and gave it to Valuev. That WBA is a completely phony paper title imo.

 

I don't want the Hayemaker to end.

He's bringing back some attention flare and swagger to the game.

He should fight on for another few years, but he's the type of guy who needs......

Massive fights/events, to get really motivated.

 

The WBA is a paper title, the "problem" in these negotiations is that is generating a lot more money with Sky than Wlads genuine title is and thats giving Haye more leverage than he strictly speaking deserves from a purely boxing point of view.

 

Very true and David needs to realise this. Fighting and defeating one of those two buggers could give the belt some value. Not just financially but morally.