WHERES STAFFORD????????

These era discussions are beyond played out. We should enjoy that we finally have some fun hw fights, after the disaster that was the wlad era

 

If I had suggested (and I actually would have) that say, Mike Weaver who routinely weighed about 210 or so would beat the fuck out of AJ, you would've made allusions to someone's grandpa in 1966 talking about Ali and referenced Joshua's larger size ... the difference here is that now a guy that looks like a meme of a fat American at Walmart just turned that very trick

 

Mainly I've been criticizing how people jump to such conclusions after Joshua received two punches from Povetkin or Parker. At no point have I said he would destroy everybody in the history, that is your strawman that said it.

Plus, the fact that one modern guy proved to be overhyped hardly proves that all your theories about the sport being in ruins are correct

 

"Proved to be overhyped"... you mean like people who've watched boxing for decades by this point who somehow believed that AJ was capable not only of defeating Joe Frazier in a fight but doing so with crushing ease? That's not "overhyped", it's a state of complete denial

 

And this was the consensus N0.1 ranked heavyweight with three out of the four belts, who was pretty much destroyed by a small jiggling blob of adipose.

And if that adipose were to be removed he would probably resemble one of those "small" heavyweights from decades ago. Minus the skills.

.

 

Lol at Taco Bell era. Ha ha.

 

Everybody that knows boxing knew that AJ was the weakest link

 

Even if he were, it's a three link chain. That's a pretty shitty chain.

.

 

Again this logic. If a small, unskilled guy wins, how is it a statement in favor of skills?

Also, Michael Moorer was more than the consensus #1 of heavyweights, he was the true champion. Did his loss against Foreman tell the truth about the WHOLE division, of that moment? That's what you are claiming here

 

Oh I see, it's the fun element you were missing out, what the fuck is so funny about an obese bullshit merchant being the fucking HW Champ???

 

Yeah you won't power many bicycles with that chain. With a 3 link chain, you're walking.

 

The think about Frazier was that if, after he beat Ali, he got hit by the same uppercut that Wlad did, he would go out.

Frazier was never in an easy fight, he got hurt., a lot.

But in the intangibles..........Frazier beats him......because we are assuming Joshua get's his in first.

If Frazier lands on the top of Joshuas head before Joshua can get the uppercut off, then it's over for Joshua.

 

Think that through... Ruiz's extremely basic skill set combined with basic willingness was enough to completely dismantle a consensus top 3 kingpin in this division... it's not that Ruiz is unskilled, it's that his skill is very basic and fundamental and yet his wholesale lack of physical fitness didn't even matter; he still did the job. If his skill set were more advanced, if he were more talented, fitter like say Michael Dokes or Mike Weaver etc ... you do the math

As far as Moorer/Foreman... Moorer wasn't dominated by a heavyset man in his 40s... he was miles ahead in the fight and was taken out by a perfect shot from a man, that old or not was exceptionally durable and savvy and one of the most dangerous punchers the sport has ever known ... Michael Moorer was a talented, well skilled boxer with a very shaky chin ... AJ is a not particularly talented or skillful boxer with a very shaky chin yet only one of these guys was being earnestly hyped by people in mythical matchups against guys like Foreman, Frazier, Holmes etc ... the same people who insist against visual evidence that Big Baby Miller fighting in a boxing ring looks no different than Pinklon Thomas or Tim Witherspoon did

 

Frazier's difficulties are wildly overstated and he dished out a good number of one-sided ass kickings ... his defensive qualities and skill and talent are wildly understated ... there hasn't been a heavyweight since the young Tyson that could bob and weave in the same galaxy as Frazier... Joshua would have a terrible time even landing on him and he's not skillful enough to avoid the offense that is integrated into that defensive technique ... he's also not durable enough to survive the impact of that offense ... Frazier quite easily beats Joshua

 

A small, fat relatively unskilled guy, in this era can handily beat a top three opponent in this era. I am saying that is a pretty bad indictment of the talent level of today's heavyweights (Fury excluded). It then (to me) follows that a smaller highy skilled heavyweight from say, the seventies, eighties or nineties, would not find the size of today's heavyweights to be an insurmountable barrier to overcome in order to beat them. Which was what Stafford has continually maintained to be the case.

The Michael Moorer analogy is a poor one, as he was handily winning the fight, but was always vulnerable to losing by KO. That can, and has, happened in all eras. He wasn't hammered from pillar to post and completely demoralised by his opponent like A.J was. If Ruiz had landed a hail-mary haymaker that sparked Joshua it actually would have looked better for the division. That happened to Moorer and it happened to Lewis as well.

However, it's a big difference between that and getting dominated like A.J. was by a small, crude fighter who was grossly overweight. If Tony Galento had dominated Louis and beaten him up to the point he basically quit, there might be a comparison to be had. As it is, I don't think there is one.

.

 

Ha! Just beat me to it, saying pretty much the same thing...

 

Pretty much, plus Moorer was a former 175lb Champion. He really was a very small man with good skills facing an older less roundly-skilled guy who had a massive advantage in natural power.

There's simply NO WAY that what Ruiz brough to the table should have been enough to dethrone Joshua if it weren't for a very particular set of deficiencies on Joshuas behalf.

I mean Ruiz isn't even a 1 punch artist.

 

Right this isn't Earnie Shavers taking out Ellis or Young or Norton

 

At best, it's Scott LeDoux getting close to Norton.

Even then Norton somehow survived.

Andy Ruiz wouldn't have done this to Cooney, himself a laughing stock.

 

He was the house fighter and cashcow and hypejob. One judge scored Floyd - Canelo a draw ffs, it doesn't mean anything.

Hamed got dominated from start to finish.

Show me what 5 rounds he "won".

 

So 5 is a stretch, but 3 of 4 judges gave him 4. And for the first 6 rounds it was a back and forth thing.

House fighter or not....I doubt there was any fix in here and that Canelo outrageousness is just that it turns on it's own facts, and he has had MULTIPLE cases of it.

Close fight early, Barrera took over late, lost a point for roughousing, 115-112.

 

And what made it feel closer to me as I recall it.......the feeling that Barrera was always on the edge of a dangerous situation, right up until the 12th, only then was it truly apparent Hamed couldn't do shit.

The point I was making, my original point, was that Hamed was always far more "In it" than Joshua was vs Ruiz.

Joshua basically got dropped and it all fell away from him....Hamed was at least looking to redeem the situation, ,maybe off one punch,. perhaps, but looking nonetheless.

And Hameds loss was based on a GENERAL collapse in his training ethics rather than on some innate fundamental flaws.

 

The division has only ONCE been stacked with real talent across the top 10 slots. That was for a short period in the 1970's.

This we can agree on.

Eddie Chambers wasn't a bad fighter.........he knew how do defend himself. He was limited in that he couldn't do much more.

 

We are again talking about slightly different things.

Yes of course, if a skilless guy beats Joshua, then of course a more skillful guy beats him more easily. No disagreement there.

What we disagree about is how much Joshua's demise tells us about the level of the whole heavyweight. That is also what I meant with my Moorer comparison, not that his loss had been similar with Joshua's. The result of a single fight MAINLY tells us about the level of that single fighter in question.

Yes, Joshua was a consensus top-3 guy, wrongly so. Turned out he was overrated, based on some flashy performances, also by me.

Michael Grant was a consensus top-3 guy too. That didn't tell us the whole truth about the era of Lewis, Holy, Byrd, Tua etc.

This is what I am saying

 

I think there was loads of talent and skill in the 80s but also loads of cocaine and booze and guys who liked both a lot or just could not consistently apply themselves... which is why until the uniquely talented Tyson, the kingpin of the division was Holmes- very much a 70s heavyweight

The 60s had many skillful heavyweights but also kind of represent the point where size seemed to officially become too much for what we would today call cruiserweights to overcome ... the last genuine contenders around 190-200 were dying off by the end of the decade ... People overlook that Ali was not only a freakishly talented fighter with unbelievable speed for his size but he was a big guy in the 60s heavyweight division...

 

yeah he was 6'3 200lbs and that was rare before 1960........there was a big Cuban back then whose name I forget that Marciano was supposedly afraid of {more Al Levin Rosenbaum Tumblebaum Goldstein, his manager, was afraid of him}

 

Michael Grant wasn't even a title holder

 

Nino Valdez... He could've had the Rocky fight... but Archie Moore schooled him and got it instead

 

Could Miller have won Saturday?

 

LOL that's another myth knocked on the fucking head then.

I read a story that Rocky was scurred and avoided him.

It's ironical......Moore was one of the guys who kept crying about how Rocky wouldn't give anyone a chance