Metalartin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 12,373
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
The Boxing thread
- Thread starter ono
- Start date
Bluemoon1979
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 22 Sep 2010
- Messages
- 216
Ok night Mr Joshua get a good sleep
Metalartin
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- 15 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 12,373
You do realise all you've done is quote opinions you don't agree with, that have been well reasoned and contain facts(same as bluesmith did). Night anyway.Ok night Mr Joshua get a good sleep
Last edited:
Scottyboi
Well-Known Member
Was great to see Steve Egan in Furys corner he must have been so proud.
Agreed. This rematch bollix is destroying the sport, a rematch should only be given if the previous result was in doubt. There was no need for Fury Wilder 3, just like there is no need for Uysk AJ 2. In a properly regulated sport Fury and Usyk should have fought for the UD title.I think we seen the best and worst of boxing from a fan perspective tonight.
On one hand, a huge boxing fight is probably the most exciting spectacle in all of sport. IMO, a huge boxing bout and the build up is more enjoyable than a Super Bowl, CL final or F1 race.
Yet, the lack of unified regulation and pursuit of money over competition really lets the fans down. The undercard tonight was a joke and for the entertainment factor alone, UFC London shit all over tonight’s fight card.
The fact Whyte had to wait so long for his title shot despite being mandatory is also a disgrace. Too often once a fighter wins a world title they join the gravy train which holds up a division. Wilder/Fury 3, Joshua/Ruiz 2 and Joshua/Usyk 2 should never have happened/happen IMO as the rematch’s were totally undeserved.
If champions who lose their belt had to earn rematches then there would be better fights available for undercards.
Be honest now did you think that Joshua would beat up usyk ? Let’s just hope it happens and we will see .And at what point do you think Usyk would be able to hit Fury?
I’ll say the same to you . Did you think that Joshua would beat usyk and be honest ? I’m giving fury credit and he is a great boxer but he just knocked out dillian whyte who the last time I checked got chinned by a veteran Russian and also got smashed by Antony Joshua . Let’s just see what happens if they fight as our opinions are different .Seems so, he says everyone beats fury (:
give the man his dues, a class champion and best of his era hands down!
You could be right then mateFrom the side yes, but from head on it was completely different. The punch caused his head to spring to the right and must have sent shockwaves through his skull. He could barely stand when he rose from the canvas.
Dirty Harry
Well-Known Member
No doubt a chip off the old block, his Dad was some man, an absolute credit to boxing and humanity.Was great to see Steve Egan in Furys corner he must have been so proud.
Tbh mate I’m not a big fan of Joshua but he resume is good and he has beaten some good fighters . I do believe if vlad had fought 6 months - 1 year before he would have finished Joshua but he didn’t . I do think Joshua has been on the decline even before he went to New York and his boxing style is too cautious now to really trouble any elite fighter as we saw we usyk I mean you don’t try to outbox the best boxer out there you try and drag him into a war but I don’t think he can any more . I also thought Joshua took 3 rounds at best in that fight . As for fury - usyk if they fight and it’s a big if I do believe usyk wins as fury will not be able to use the he same tactics against a master boxer and he would get beat but seen as they haven’t fought nobody knows .Oh that's what you meant. I thought you were implying I quoted someone else first.
I was explaining why this was dragging on for the people who suggested we call it a night and agree to disagree. I'd just said I was going to leave it and you come out with lies, claiming I said things which I have not. I thought that was pretty obvious what I was doing there.
That is still in the original quote, so no I didn't edit that part. So that leaves the question... why did you mention I edited the post, other than to mislead and discredit me? Same as you did with the deactivated profile meaning anything at all in this debate, since it's been that way for years.