Didn't he beat Short in the early 90's, when he was in his prime? A Brit, right? More impressive perhaps is that he defended the title against Anand who now is champ for a few years. Some Lewis-Klitschko / Louis - Walcott stuff right there, beating the future champ while having seen better days yourself. Thing is, some people play brilliant, entertaining chess (Fischer), but as a result leave themselves open. Others aren't as brilliant, but play so extremely solid and on safe that they're utterly boring to watch but incredibly hard to beat (Lasker). Kasparov is somewhere in between.
Yes, that's him, but Kasparov was already dropping of by then. His weird Linares tournament wasn't far away, but it's his own commentary on his paly is the real kicker. Never heard him so hard on himself. In his own words his play was rife with "serious, serious mistakes". Short did well in the second half of that match playing for dirty pawn structures and activity - totally counter-intuitive but it worked. In the first half of the fight Short tried to play clean and got utterly destroyed. I think Kasparov was losing his edge in terms of calculations. Considering what Karpov era Kasparove would have done with Short is frightening. It certainly would have been a white-wash it nearly was anyway. You're right about Kasparov-Anand though. Kasparov had recognised his short-comings by this point IMO. The short match was him at his most vulnerable until he fell of and he still utterly destroyed the world's #2 matchplayer. Horrible genius *******. One of the most dominant protagonists of any sport ever. Tragic.
Sullivan may have looked like an old man ,but he was actually 52 when that footage was filmed,8 years later he was dead.
Janitor and my votes are woth 5 points each. And Wlad loses 30 points because Frankenfrank picked him.
Obviously I agree with the majority. I happen to think Marciano beats Tunney even more convincingly, but glad he won. I watched the first Charles fight and he is actually better than I thought from the last few times I watched it. In fact, Charles from the first and second Rocky fights are two different animals. Charles was a hungry and willful and very game fighter that had a lot more than 75% of it left like I had thought. His mobility, I also underrated. His combinations, were very fluid, quick, and sharp. The difference from the first and second fights is the quickness, freshness, speed in hand and foot and the motivation and stamina. Charles had more than enough to beat many fighters from the first fight. On the other hand, I re-watched the Tunney fights with Dempsey. His footwork is overrated. He has no rhythm and just dances around - honestly I believe I can move better and more fluid than him. He doesn't have quite the rhythm and ability to shoot off and move like Ali. It's not the stick and move and distribute weight as effectively like an Ali. On the other hand, his offense is underrated. He shoots quick dashing combos that are very effective and strong. Strangely, Tunney doesn't reminds me of Manny Pacquaio more than Ali. He dances, but dashes in and out offensively in the Dempsey fight. It's hand speed and offense is great to watch. His dancing is just complete defense for the time
You still don't get it. Sullivan was not particularly small, he sure as hell wasn't untested, and he didn't even fight under a particularly different ruleset when all is said and done. At least Wlad gets $1000 for lasting four rounds against Sullivan.
This is not actualy true. Many people rated Sullivan as the greatest ever into the reign of Jack Johnson and beyond. He only started to slip when the people who had seen him started dieing off.
No, that's some pretty large padding he's got there, almost a front-butt, too! This content is protected Yeah, he fought terrors who looked like this... This content is protected Ahh, that 19th century physiognomay... Oh, I know, they had that one-inch phantom crucial punch to the solar plexus that would kill you three weeks later.
It was raining in one of the Tunney Demspey fights. Tunney had quick feet, and could move. To say he's over rated in this department is way off unless someone says he is on par with a prime Ali.
No, he's no where near a prime Ali with footwork. He has great footspeed, but no rhythm and doesn't have a great ability to stick and move and distribute weight in the motion of his dancing, and that's because he has no rhythm. He bounces in and out from attacks, and it's his awesome offensive that's better than his legs/footwork. Ali's footwork coupled with his best was always his best arsenal, but his legs were more valuable.' Err, I read what you wrote again. Got mixed up. I think his footwork is touted on about too much. I prefer his slashing offensive, personally.