Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Why do people think Fury is a great boxer?

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by HeadBodyBodyBody View Post
    Man, everyday I see a new even suckier thread from you
    Man, fu..ck off. We don’t have to agree.

    I think Fury is an overrated bum. If you don’t agree, jog on and don’t look back.

    Comment


      #32
      Wouldn't say he's a great boxer, he has a better skill set than AJ or Wilder but doesn't carry the knockout power that those 2. I think it's fair to say he is very good but certainly not great

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by Socialtwinkie View Post
        Someone's resume is no indication of how good they are or not.

        Some of the best fighters in the world just happen to fight cans and some fight better opposition. You never know who the better fighter is until you get them in a ring.

        Take Canelo/GGG for example. I know you suck Canelo nuts but come on. Someone with Canelos resume doesnt barely sc**** by someone with GGGs resume.

        Robbing the man in the first fight then winning by margins of 115-113 twice and 114-114 is not dominant.

        The expectation based on your logic Canelo would have won a WIDE UD easy. That didnt happen.
        In your own little world, perhaps boxers aren’t judged based on their resume.

        But in my world, you’re as good as your resume. Anyone can look great fighting tomato cans. Until you fight decent boxers, you’re just a bum like the bums you’re beating in my world.

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by BangEM View Post
          LMAO. Stop denying being Polish. On the Kownacki thread, you said "as someone who's Polish, Kownacki is....". LMAO.

          So why are you denying it now? You know those who call Josh "Femi" in that context are racist cu.nts. And you know what you're doing. Then again most of you Eastern Europeans are racist cu.nts, hence you get beat up by everyone.

          What millions is he earning? LMAO. Josh is making everything is slaving up on ESPN for and everything Fury has made in his career combined in one fight, lol. Fury will forever be remembered as the 3rd best greatest British HWs ever and below AJ. For him to get on Josh's level - he'd have turn back the hands of time and beat David Price at amateur level and go win an Olympic gold medal and silver medal at the world championships. Then unify twice and have at least 5 defences. Something he'll never do.

          Polish muppet, embrace who you're. With all the steroids you Poles take from childhood, is there even any half-decent Polish boxer? LMAO.
          Yeah but I'm not Polish, my wife is though, Polish women are far hotter than the London slags you pay for.

          Fury will soon be the undisputed HW champion of the world. He's already ranked #1 by Ring, nobody rates Femi as #1 after getting knocked out by a joke Mexican!

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by BangEM View Post
            In your own little world, perhaps boxers aren’t judged based on their resume.

            But in my world, you’re as good as your resume. Anyone can look great fighting tomato cans. Until you fight decent boxers, you’re just a bum like the bums you’re beating in my world.
            AJ looked good against tomato cans and pensioners. 1st time he stepped in against a live opponent in his prime he got knocked about like an empty tracksuit

            Comment


              #36
              He’s just an excellent boxer, the things he can do for his size are not normal and things you only see with smaller guys . It might not look as good or fluid, but it’s because he’s huge

              There was a point in his last fight where he backed into the corner, baited the opponent and caught him with a hook while turning him backed into a corner, you wouldn’t see many lightweights that could do it.

              Not to mention he’s s good switch hitter, great jab and shot selection, movement, ring IQ, a lot of heart, great recovery. Also 20KO wins in 27 wins suggests he hits harder then people think.

              Whether he’s a great boxer in the context of history, who knows, but he’s levels above any heavyweight today in terms of skill set

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by BangEM View Post
                In your own little world, perhaps boxers aren’t judged based on their resume.

                But in my world, you’re as good as your resume. Anyone can look great fighting tomato cans. Until you fight decent boxers, you’re just a bum like the bums you’re beating in my world.
                Let's get something straight. We both live in this world. When you say "my world" you are clearly delusional and based on your post history I wouldnt put it past you.

                Delusional.

                In the real world boxers should be judged by what they do in the ring. It's the same reason why triangle theories dont work.

                Take your precious AJ. Apply your logic. AJ should have won easy. But clearly his loss should have told you that your logic is flawed yet somehow you refuse to believe that.

                Somehow lmfao.

                Comment


                  #38
                  Originally posted by BangEM View Post
                  I've watched all Fury's fights and the only two decent fights he was "great" in were two shi..tty fights with one being half-decent for 2-3 rds.

                  The guy isn't even a defensive juggernaut like Mayweather and Sweetpea. And he's below average on the front foot. He's just a bore that knows how fight on the backfoot with decent upperbody movement for his size. I think the allure with Fury's style has to do with the fact that he's a tall awkward kangaroo, standing 6'9 tall - with decent upperbody movement for his size. Apart from that, he's a more aggressive Hughie Fury with a jab.

                  Just watch the Wlad fight and the guy only threw 84 punches in 12 rds and he won because the unmotivated Wlad couldn't deal with his awkwardness - not because he was better on the night. And against Wilder, any half-decent boxer would look like Ali against Wilder. Molina, Duhuapas, and Szpilka looked like Ali against Wilder before they got knocked out. Heck, he got outboxed by a NFL player in Washington. Wilder is a predictable one-trick pony and a bum with a big right hand. Once you have decent awareness - you'll see his telegraphed punches from a mile away.

                  Fury knows his hype is a ruse hence he fought tomato cans throughout his career, apart from being an opportunist twice. I'd like to see Fury against the new Dillian Whyte and AJ. If he can beat both of them - then he'll get my praise.
                  I bet Fury cant wait to receive your praise.

                  Comment


                    #39
                    Originally posted by BangEM View Post
                    Man, fu..ck off. We don’t have to agree.

                    I think Fury is an overrated bum. If you don’t agree, jog on and don’t look back.
                    We don't have to agree, but if I don't agree I should f*ck off? That makes no sense. That means you're only interested in hearing the opinions of people who agree with you. Anyway, it's not your opinions that make for sucky threads, it's the way you are so dogmatic and dismissive with it

                    From a purely relative point of view, Fury is the best of the current crop. He's taken two great fights, and he performed well in both. If the fight with AJ happens, maybe finally Fury will get your praise, I guess. But here's the thing, everyone had written him off before the Wilder fight, and the odds were something like 3-1 for Fury to beat Klitschko aswell. He's clearly a special fighter. You may not like his style, but it gets the job done. I think Fury would dance circles around AJ, it's a bad style for AJ

                    To continue with your point, your remaining options seem to be:
                    - Fury is the best of a bad era
                    - There is someone better than Fury

                    So, which is it?

                    I've said it before, I think Fury is an awkward purist, that's the best way to describe him. So, yeah, he's not much fun for the casuals, luckily he's quite entertaining outside of the ring

                    Comment


                      #40
                      Originally posted by cupocity303
                      You answered your question nitwit.

                      He is a GREAT boxer relative to his size. You can never ignore the size and pretend that it's fair to compare his skill to athleticism ratio to 5'7 tiny fighters who have less weight and shorter legs/arms to move around with.

                      You work with what you got and for a 6'9 fighter, he is great skill wise. It could be a lot worse. Wladimir Klitschko is equally great for a 6'6 fighter, but he was one-dimensional tho that one-dimension was GREAT and gave him over 60 wins with only a few losses, and one of the best runs in heavyweight history.

                      In comparison, Fury is a switch hitter (tho he is sloppy as a southpaw but it works because of his size) and expends a lot more energy with his movement.


                      But in the end he is GREAT because of who he beat and because he is still undefeated. His story still isn't written because he has yet to retire.

                      It's easy to judge a long-retired fighters career in hindsight.
                      Who's this this idiot? Suck ya mum with a straw and piss off.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP