Chris Byrd's resume is underrated

No it wasn't level.You need to watch the fight objectively,you're much too biased towards Byrd.
Your every post shouts it!

 

You mean, Byrd lost the first four rounds; mounted some sort of resurgence in round 5... ...then proceeded to lose the next three rounds?

 

You just proved my point!

 

Unlikely - but each to their own.

I can't see how Byrd could have been given any of the first four rounds. He easily lost round 6 on my card, as well.

Rounds 5 and 9 are the only rounds one could score for Byrd, with any type of confidence, and it's rare I find anyone giving Byrd any more than two out of the nine rounds.

 

Lewis dropped a belt and avoid Byrd, didn't he?

Byrd was a tricky boxer with good defense and a chin, meaning he could out box many and take the decision.

He has his share of big wins for sure, and should be viewed as a top 75 all time heavyweight. The Tua and Holyfield wins by the margin were impressive.

 

I don’t know why people keep saying Vitali was injured...he was injured because Byrd injured him lol

 

Are you Byrd’s son?

 

Read carefully. A great fighter, not a great heavyweight. A boring at times but very respectable world class contender heavyweight.

 

Dunno about great fighter but he won a world title belt so he should be happy enough with that.

 

I dont know why people are giving Byrd so much credit for the bull**** feather in his cap that he was "a blown up supermiddleweight" thats nonsense. Its a great way to give you an out when you are hemmed in by the fact that his resume isnt particularly impressive but its nonsense. He was 193 in his third fight. He was 207 in his fifth fight and 217 in his eighth fight. He stood just under 6' 2". The guy was bigger than almost every heavyweight prior to Muhammad Ali. Why is it such an out for his record that he was a "blown up super middleweight" (a weight he never weighed in his career and when he tried to get back down to light heavyweight later in his career he looked like he walked away from Aushwitz. That claim is almost as ridiculous as giving him so much credit for beating an ancient Holyfield. Yes Holyfield had just beaten Rahman (using headbutts) but it was one of two wins Holyfield had in his last six fights and would lose his next two as well. Im not trashing Byrd to trash the Klitchkos because frankly I dont think he won a round against either of them.

P.S. Youve got to love Byrd coming on as "Brydie" and spinning his narrative... Prime Tyson vs Byrd is a tossup?? Good luck getting anyone to buy that.

 

He excelled as an amateur at 168. His first three fights were below 170. He made a conscious decision to move up in weight to fight bigger men for his career, the challenge and the money ... he jumped thirty five pounds in one year at the age of 24, one year. His body did not morph like Cassius Clay at 175 to a sculpted 212. He has always fleshy at heavyweight with sagging pecs and thin legs.. He wasn't bigger than past champs he was taller. So were Nunn, Hopkins, Pavlik and many other 160 to 168 pounders. Then fourteen years after fighting between 205 and 215 he drops down in six months to fight at 175 at the age of 38 and looks like **** and you use that as a point ? Particularly weak argument.

Perhaps you can name four or five fighters that moved up from 170 at any time in their careers in the past forty years to fight world class big men on the level Byrd did on a consistent basis and did better since he was nothing but a over rated spoiler ?