Wladimir vs. Tony Thompson Question

Thompson is not miles better than Ray Austin. It appears he may be light years better than him. C'mon, Ray Austin got obliterated by Wladimir. Thompson gave him a fight. Yes, Thompson lost, but the guy did much better than many other opponents have in recent history. Think about it, Peter, Byrd, Brock, Austin, Brewster and Ibragimov were all considered to be better than Thompson. Wlad stopped five of those seven guys. Thompson lasted 11 rounds. That's only one round less than Peter and Ibragimov, who have each held or hold a belt. What the hell does Wladimir have to do to get people to respect his accomplishments? KO everyone inside 18 seconds? Wladimir is not Mike Tyson who understood he had a size disadvantage and had to get people out of there quickly because otherwise he ran the risk of fighting a boxing match against a taller guy with a jab. That's always bad news for short fighters. Wladimir is a tall guy with a jab and power. He fights in a way that's best for him. So it's not what people want. So what? If people want to fight a certain way, maybe they should try it first before they openly criticize the guy.

 

OK yeah, Ray Austin didn't even put up a fight, and has a horrible record, and Thompson was undefeated except for early in his career.. There is a huge difference there. I don't see what you're talking about.

 

Its funny how these guys keep winning, getting belts and then they fight Wlad lose every round in a boring fight and all of a sudden they are nobodies or average.

 

Maybe it's got something to do with Wlad being his typical cautious self for much of the fight against Thompson ...???

I don't think WLAD was as bad as usual in the fight though...

He wanted to hurt Ray Austin, and he did.

 

I'm just saying Thompson is better than Austin.

 

Exactly:good
Im tired of these guys being so good and then wlad beats them and all of a sudden they are "bums"

Even the guys that pick Wlad opponents turn and talk **** about them after Wlad destroys them rather then giving Wlad the credit he deserves. This happens not only to Wlad.. Its bull****

 

:-(

[url]http://www.eastsideboxing.com/forum/poll.php?do=showresults&pollid=4917[/url]

 

I wasnt talking about only the Thompson fight. You see it all the time. They praise fighters and when wlad beats them there are nothing...or they say "Wlad has not beat quality guys". This **** happens to Toney as well. If you think your fighter is going to win and he doesnt, dont be a ***** and drop his ass so so you can slam the guy that won.

I hope that made sense.:huh

 

I understand your point, I just don't think it applies well to WLAD...if you count the people who think anyone who hits him will knock him out, you would have a point.

However those people don't count.

The sensible boxing fans are almost always picking KLIT over his mediocre adversaries.

 

True. I guess its the "haters" that get to me. They hate just to hate. NO boxing knowledge at all.

 

option 2.

 

Somewhere in between the two options. Wlad was not that good but Thompson was also tougher than expected, until he started to fade later in the fight.

 

i thought wlad looked lost early. i didnt like the gameplan they came with. thompson neutralized the jab and it had wlad off balance for a bit. however, he adjusted by throwing lead right hands and body shots gradually wearing thompson down. that's what impressed me. he adjusted mid-fight and executed. his power and clinching did tony in...thompson did not quit like many of the idiots here claim

thompson was far more durable than i thought. he's got a very good chin and very awkward style. he outpoints valuev and gives peter fits.

 

I agree, it was shameful. However, that was a better era for heavyweights than this, with better champions. Simple as that.

 

I didn't mention them as examples of high quality boxing though, I mentioned them as they were prominent champions in a better era with better champions and far better fights than this one.

However, since you ask, I do think Tyson was a high quality boxer, in the late 1980s.

If you are going to criticize Lewis and Holyfield's resume, then you really are a joke. Have a look at Wlad's and get back to me . No-one can have a superfight every single fight.