Joshua-Povetkin predictions

Sly and his mad idea that Joshua is some kind of whirling dervish early doors. He let Povetkin bust him up for the first three rounds but he doesn't let Joe Frazier get into his stride?

MTF

 

Most of the reason Povetkin slowed down was that he was 39 years old, I'd have thought, rather than Joshua being 'big'. Frazier, on the other hand, had absolutely limitless stamina. He might have had the best engine in HW history.

MTF

 

And lets not forget that Povetkin pretty much always look like shit when he isn't roided up like a Mr Olympia winner (when he isn't fighting in russia).

Guy barely got past Marco Huck in his prime, who was a pretty shitty cruiserweight, never mind a hw

 

It's because people like you are telling lies about what is happening. No offence Ugo - you are a sound fella and all - but you are taking the BBC (and others') line of running a false narrative because it suits an agenda. There's is that Joshua is the greatest thing ever because he is 'nice' and black and British. Your agenda is that contemporary fighters are better than older ones. It means they want us to believe that 'Joshua v Wilder is no problem' or that Joshua fought with 'control and poise' and you want us to believe that Joshua was 'in control by the 4th' and that 'having a 59 - 55 scorecard wasn't scandalous' but these things are simply not true. Absolutely, entirely false.

When people tell lies they deserve to be pulled up on it.

MTF

 

Like, honestly, the skill difference between a prime Joe Frazier and 39yr old, roid-free Povetkin is beyond massive. Povetkin wouldn't have gotten a job as Frazier's fucking sparring partner.

MTF

 

You have to be able to box too, maintain discipline, hands up.

If you do that, you can box rings around Joshua.

He is not like Lewis, he doesn't really have a commanding sense of the ring.

He just is heavy handed, likes guys to tire, finish them.

Joshua is a great finisher, but not too much more besides.

 

If he fights the elite of the division, AJ will always have to turn it into a brawl to win. Fortunately for him, he seems to have the warrior mentality and the self belief that enables him to do so

 

He's a good finisher, certainly. That's probably his main strength. He also has good power in the right hand. Not great power, but good power sufficient to bowl guys over. He's a very big cunt as well. But his stamina is dire - he had his mouth open in the fifth last night - and his footwork is abysmal. He also moves in almost complete straight lines and has no head movement at all.

MTF

 

Right across the media, it doesn't matter if it is the UK or the USA or Germany or whatever, there are large blocs of personnel and their outlets {sites, streams, opinion pieces etc} which cater to a very specific narrative and cater to the people who subscribe to same.

It exists in political, sporting, cultural affairs. Right across the board.

Sports, in any case, is itself an interesection of all 3. It is political and it is cultural.

Accordingly, places like the BBC {and it's just an example, I am not picking on them} bang out the narrative, safe in the knowledge it's what the plebs want to hear and safe in the knowledge that the class of people who don't believe it is so comparatively, relatively small that our retorts and contradictions won't really matter.

In the UK, the narrative is that AJ is the good guy, people's champion who was just waiting in the wings to take advantage of inferior fighters and stamp a new brand of authority on a moribund division. He has destroyed everyone, he has fought everyone, he's a modern behemoth with mad skillz yo and even better poise and control.

It is of course abundantly clear that the guy has none of the fundamental talent that people speak of.

But it doesn't matter...............he won, they saw him win, he won by KO.

The fact that he only looks world class when he gets around to bombing out tired, jaded, already shopworn opponents is neither here nor there.

The {rightful} criticism {objective as it was} doled out to the likes of Joe Bugner or Frank Bruno {bought of whom fought immeasurably better opponents} has completeluy disappeared, replaced as it is by a strident narrative that must be adhered to by people who know better, and which is lapped up by those who do not.

Nobody has anything against Joshua. Nobody here is an Uber-Povetkin fan. What we are railing against is the insistent narrative-driven agenda of a pile of money-grubbing clowns donning suits and telling us to applaud things we didn't see happen, cos they didn't happen.

It's infuriating. It's why I didn't pay for the fight and it's why you didn't pay for the fight and it's why when I had £20 to spare, I spent it on GGG vs Alvarez at 4AM and not on a card from a fight which took place 1 hour cycle from me at 11pm last night.

 

What you describe above is a sort of Frank Bruno for the 21st Century.

Which is fine. If people would call it just that.

When Bruno got past Bugner the press in the UK fell between accurately reporting the fight and condemning Bruno for beating a guy way way past his best.

I get the feeling Joshua could beat Bugner tomorrow and Hearn would be on TV telling us that "Ali and Frazier needed to go the distance with this guy"

I remember watching Joshua on the sofa in my old gaff in 2012 at the Olimps and I felt then he had major shortcomings which persist to this day.

 

I would give Joshua credit if he makes those fights and wins in style. I would have to do it and I would do it.

But somewhere out there there is a guy who, some night, is going to make absolute shit of Joshua.

You cannot get away with the sort of technical deficiencies he has forever.

 

AgREED on all points and I'll say this - Bruno would have been castigated for the same performance as Joshua gave last night. It would have been the whole 'relying on his power to bail him out', rather than 'control and poise'.

MTF

 

Ok.

I may have an agenda of 'contemporary fighters are good'. Personally, I try to be objective, but according to most I don't succeed.

In my opinion the main problem is that for whatever reason, modern fighters are judged unfairly. They even might be worse than ever in the history, but still the criticism Joshua gets for last night's bout is over the board.

Shit, if getting tagged early and rallying to win in seven rounds is a failure of a performance, then Frazier failed all the time. He was a prototype of a slow starter.

For some reason, we expect the fighters to go through their fights without getting hit at all, even though all the best fighters, especially the ones who are even a little bit aggressive, have never done that.

Watch Holmes-Weaver, Holyfield-Dokes, Frazier-Quarry, Lewis-Briggs or any past fight. People do get hit in boxing

 

Don't try to pass as some paragon of impartiality. We all rebember that, after every pathetic and cowardly wlad pussy performance against nondescript opposition, you were constantly trying to convince us that we were witnessing greatness

 

what you fail to comprehend, is that the main reason we criticize AJ is not cause he got tagged early, it's because he looked like a big gigantic robot once again

 

Ok. I usually don't judge fighters based on their looks

 

I have no problem whatsoever with people 'getting hit'. Of course people get hit. What I object to, in strong terms, is being told that said person is not getting hit and is, instead, 'in control'. That's the difference.

MTF

 

Frazier was what....5’10, 205lb?

Joshua is 6’7, 250lb.

That’s the same relative difference in size as between a Welterweight and a cruiserweight.

And it’s not like Joshua is some prima carnera or Jess Willard, he puts his punches together very well and has every punch in the repertoires.

Physical mismatch

 

You didn't even watch the fight yesterday, from which those of us making an analysis are basing their findings. All you are doing is saying 'this bloke is much bigger than this bloke so he wins'. A child can do that.

MTF

 

It's almost like you've never actually seen Joshua fight and base your entire analysis on the fact that he is a geet big black man. You claimed he likes to start really fast. He doesn't. You claim he likes to 'go to war'. He doesn't: it's what he does when his limitations mean he has to go to Plan-B. Now it is 'has every punch in the repetoire'. He has a good straight right hand, a good right uppercut when he throws it and a pawing jab. That's it.

MTF

 

Joshua bout to get the "Wilder is pulling a Dillian Whyte on him" and the "End of the Joshua story" treatment by Ian Darke

 

Well, you defintively should.

 

So you don't criticize Joshua's performance, but the reports of the fight?

 

Sure I'll criticise him for being hit. He's a professional boxer; he's supposed to not get hit. What exacerbates the problem is when people then act as if he did not get hit. My issue in this thread is you, and others, pretending that Joshua was 'in control by the 4th'. He was in no such thing.

MTF

 

Yet you just said you have no problem with fighters getting hit?

Sounds like you have an agenda, you pretender

 

I said 'have no problem with people getting hit'. I do have a problem with professional fighters being hit, though.

Learn to REED young man...

MTF

 

Post-fight Joshua last night:
"Wembley first and foremost thank you. Can we give a round of applause for Eddie Hearn?"

Eh? What?
Because all boxers do that, right?

 

To be fair to him, I think that was 'banter' because he knew the crowd would boo. He did it after the last fight too I think.

 

Joshua's vulnerability and power can make him v entertaining when faced with a fighter who will give it a go. I can easily imagine Wilder sparking him but it would be a great sloppy match of two good finishers with fighters mentalities. Can't see why anyone thinks Fury would be competitive with either though, wait and see.

 

So you judge them by their "results " against terrible opposition?