Blues for My Baby
“But baby, why won’t you get it on with me? You know I’ve loved you forever.”
“I told you before, get lost, creep. You’re just not my type.”
“But I’ve worshipped you for years, gone all over the world to see you, and not given up on you when everyone else said you were no good.”
“Maybe I am no good, or just no good for you.”
“I can’t believe that, I don’t believe that, I won’t believe that!”
“Believe what you want, sucker, but you ain’t right for me, and vice versa.”
“Please don’t talk like that, baby.”
“I’ll talk any way I damn please. And stop with the baby stuff. I told you, I ain’t your damn baby.”
That was our conversation yesterday. I hope it is not our last, but you never know. I just don’t know what to do or where to go next.
My baby’s name: The Heavyweight Division. Have any of you seen where she’s gone?
Labels: boxing, Boxing Standard, Eddie Goldman, heavyweight, Tony Thompson, Wladimir Klitschko
posted by Eddie Goldman @ 3:01 PM
20 comments
20 Comments:
The level of fighting in the current heavyweight division alone, will insure that MMA fighting will blossom for the next few years. Klitschko was so beatable yesterday. It's hard to watch him regress in each fight. Thompson, if he had any constitution at all, as bad as he is, still could've beat him yesterday. Just throw back-to-back combinations with bad intent, and he'll stop fighting and just react to what his opponent does.
IF Wladimir Klitscko had the desire and determination as a Frazier or Holyfield, he'd really be a motherfucker. However, like Mike Tyson, despite his physical tools, he's most defined by what he lacks.
As bad as he was yesterday, I still can't think of one active heavyweight who I'd pick to beat him even up.
You could probably have expected this from me (just as you can expect Charles to argue with tongue only partially in cheek that Oliver McCall, even at his ultra-advanced age, could take Klitschko), but, still, if John Ruiz gets busy enough to beat Valuev so clearly that the decision can't be stolen from him, then I like him to do the same to Klitschko. Yes, I know, Klitschko is a lot better (mostly be default) than Valuev and should be wrong for Ruiz because Ruiz has to spend so much time passing through his sweet spot while trying to close the range, but I don't care. Stylistic bets are off when the heart differential is so large. If Ruiz finds it within himself to move aggressively along the late-career stylistic path (really a last-hurrah path) charted for him by Manny Siaca, he should make Klitschko give up. Much as I like and admire Ruiz, though, I realize that to say this at all is to agree that the heavyweight division is entirely in the dumps these days. Here's a question: Has it ever been worse? There have been several periods when there wasn't much depth in the division, but has there ever been a time with as little depth _and_ no single impressive man at the top to mask the division's weakness _and_, to top it off (or bottom it out), such a pandemic lack of fighting will?
I've been talking to a number of fight people about last night's monstrous "I don't want it, you take it" "No, please, you" a-thon. Everyone with whom I spoke was convinced that, given the chance, John Ruiz would knock out Wladimir Klitschko, stylistic indicators to the contrary. You don't have to be able to beat Wladimir Klitschko to beat him. You merely have to convince him that you can beat him. He'll then do the rest. He almost lost last night to a talent-free middle-aged clown who almost pathologically feared winning the title. The HBO guys didn't mention it (or maybe legitimately didn't spot it), but Klitschko barely recovered from two crises last night. The cut over his right eye nearly caused him to unravel. And in the middle rounds, his steroid-like (to be kind) physique caused him to go into near oxygen debt. (It was funny hearing Emmanuel Steward desperately buoying him up with promises of "getting your second wind.")
I have never seen the heavyweight division anywhere close to this decrepitude. There are currently no decent heavyweights. Not one. My current favorite is Guillermo Jones--a former welterweight.
Is there any linear champ of the past so weak that he wouldn't be the top heavyweight in the world now? How about Ingemar Johansson? Have we reached that point that it's even possible to say that? How about Braddock? Hard to imagine, but possible. They are probably the two most beatable undisputed champs of all time, heavily flawed and severely limited, and both would give away six inches and 60 pounds to several current top-ten heavyweights, and heavyweight history is full of heavyweight non-champs and non-heavyweights I'd pick to beat them 9 times out of 10, or 10 times out of 10, and there's no reason why a competent guy the size of Klitschko shouldn't be able to beat both of them with no trouble, but...God help us all, I could see either one of these guys ruling the division in our time by default. And Primo Carnera. He was basically a more athletic Valuev, right? It sounds insane, but if we dropped him into the mix right now, and with the right management, he might actually hold his own at the top in fair, unfaked fights. I can't think of anything worse to say than that about the current moment.
I don't think it's a reach to see Ruiz beating Wladimir Klitschko at this point. Ruiz, is right there for Klitschko to tag him, but he'd probably be smothering WK so much that he couldn't get off good. If Ruiz is able to keep pressing Klitschko after enduring a couple big right hands, he'll begin to panic. And if Ruiz really goes after him, it will be the beginning of the end for Klitschko.
"Stylistic bets are off when the heart differential is so large."
I think this is the key, favoring Ruiz. I'd love to see him get the chance. However, he has a lot of things working against him before a fight versus Wladimir Klitschko can even be speculated.
You know it's one thing to question whether a 240 llb John Ruiz has the physical strength and awkwardness to beat Klitchko, but it's another thing to wonder if Tommy Burns at 5-7, 175 could beat him. That is a joke.
Yes, Vlad's got flaws, who doesn't ? But he'd give a lot of "Great" heavyweights problems. He's 6-7, 245, has a piston for a jab, can hook of his jab, throws a powerful, accurate, straight right hand that is especially deadly if a fighter is coming forward. You guys don't think that the other fighter's don't know about Vlad's chin ? Of course they do, but getting to it, isn't as easy as some of you make it out to be. And if 6-5, 230+ fighters have problems with Klitchko's reach and power, why do some of you think that these 6-0, 185 llbers would either walk right through Klitchko or counter him from 5 feet away ?
There hasn't been a heavyweight champion (or even contender) under 195 since Sonny Liston- that's almost 50 years. WHY NOT ? Must be coincidence.
Have the heavyweight champions EVER been any good ? Look at the old Ring Magazines, in the 1940's Jack Johnson said that Joe Louis basically sucked and that not only could him, Jeffries and Fitz beat him but so could Choyinski (all 165 llbs of him) Tom Sharkey, and Tommy Ryan.
In the 1950's Gene Tunny wrote that the heavyweights were so pathetic that Jack Dempsey would have KO'ed Marciano, Charles, Walcott, LaStarza, and Rex Lane- ALL ON THE SAME NIGHT.
The "Golden Era" of the 1970's ? All they bitched about was that an old, shot, Ali (who they were never high on) was champion. 1980's? -all they bitched about was Holmes' comp. 1990's- they bitched because there was a 45 year old heavyweight champion of the world- with another contender in his mid 40's (Larry Holmes).
I guess Klitchko's height, reach, piston like jab, and accurate right hand only presents problems for todays fighters. Which must mean that the laws of physics only apply to today's heavies.
Actually, you're wrong. Wladimir Klitschko's height, reach, piston like jab, and accurate right hand didn't present Ross Purity, a live Lamon Brewster, and Corrie Sanders many problems.
I grant you, historians never have a true sense of how good/deep an era of any division is until the next one is upon us. But we're seven years removed from Lennox Lewis's prime, 15 years from Holyfield's and 20 years from Tyson's. I have all three of them among my top-12 all-time greats. I've seen enough from Wladimir Klitschko to know that he'll never be considered for the top-20. He'd be favored over any ranked heavyweight at this time, but there isn't one outstanding among them.
Would Tony Thompson have been able to beat Henry Akinwande? The fact that I have to ask that says it all. Had Thompson been born with John Ruiz's tenacity, he'd be regarded as the top heavyweight in the World as of this writing.
Please tell me about the strength and depth of the current heavyweight division. Wasn't it just a few years ago that most thought the best heavyweights in the world were former middleweights?
PS: I don't think that anyone here thinks a 6'0" 185 pound heavyweight would beat him. He's also bigger than Liston, Ali, Frazier, Foreman, Holmes, Tyson, Holyfield and is about the same size as Lewis. Do you know who he'd beat from that group prime-for-prime?
How about if you tell me.
It's true that there's no reason why Klitschko should have any trouble with a very small heavyweight--except for the fact that if the little guy wants to fight then Klitschko's advantage disappears. Iconoclast is right to point out that people always complain that the heavyweights are bad--and that's because, with the exception of the 70s golden age, they always are bad in comparison to the other divisions--and it's also true that there's a lot of wishful nostalgia in such complaints. Tunney, for instance, was just talking nonsense when he put Marciano in a group of heavies who Dempsey would beat on the same night. Dempsey-Marciano is a good matchup, in fact. But there's a difference between the usual relative thinness of the division and what's wrong with it now. Guys like Klitschko _should_ have no trouble with little heavies, and outlining his style makes it seem like that should be so. He should just keep the belt and suspenders on, jab, stay away, and let nature take its course. But, as Frank argued better than I did, it's a mistake to take Klitschko's style as a given when other things about him are not given: like wind, staying power, the willingness to best a determined opponent, and, for want of a better word, heart. Once those things are up in the air, style can cease to matter in a hurry. A little guy with heart can make him quit. Byrd didn't (he made Vitali quit, but not Wlad), but Byrd didn't go after him. Once a guy goes after him, it's no longer possible to talk about Klitschko's style as a given. I'm not the world's biggest Lennox Lewis fan, but in his case you at least can count on his seeing the fight through. That puts him a cut above Klitschko. I can't believe I'm actually saying that things were better when Lewis was around, but I guess I am.
Iconoclast, you bring up some very good points. I'm willing to debate whether Wladimir Klitschko has a "piston for a jab," the effectiveness of his hook, or whether the right (admittedly a hard punch) works if the opponent isn't moving forward with his head held stationary.
But I agree that there's always been some rhapsodizing done, generation to generation, about the declining state of heavyweight boxing. Jack Johnson's dismissal of Joe Louis was certainly partially a result of bitterness. And Tunney, never quite as brilliant out of the ring as in it, was clearly being self-serving in his assessment of Dempsey (since he was the guy who beat him two for two.)
When you rhetorically ask about whether other fighters know about Klitschko's chin, you, first, fail to acknowledge (as Frank points out) that it's failed the test a couple of times (and squeaked by with a "D" a couple of others), and that he has also faced a group of total beginners for most of his title defenses. They don't fail to hit him because he's so good; they fail to hit him because they can't fight.
And the laws of physics apply throughout the ages, I'm sure; that doesn't necessarily mean that the smaller, more mobile, more technically proficient, and vastly more predatory heavyweights from previous eras are going to stand around waiting to test out this particular theory.
By the way, thanks for posting, Iconoclast. It really helps the site to have provocative comments from people who aren't on the roster. Much obliged.
The biggest drama in the heavyweight division as of this moment is, will Vitali Klitschko make it through training camp and fight Samuel Peter in October.
IF he does, he will have been inactive between fights longer than Muhammad Ali was between his fights versus Zora Folley and Jerry Quarry.
I mentioned on my SecondsOut Radio show that Ruiz is the one to beat Klitschko. But to get into a position to do so, in their upcoming WBA title fight, he must first dispatch of Valuev, and in Germany.
Ruiz has to be busier against Valuev than he was in their first fight. He has to leave no margin for error or robbery, as has been said. Can he do this at age 36?
At heart, Valuev is not much of a fighter or showman. He seemed upset at the freak show aspect of his promotion, especially the way Don King pushed him over here, equating him to the Empire State Building, the Sears Tower, etc. That also raises the question of how much he really believes in himself.
Klitschko says he wants to unify the belts. Assuming he gets by Povetkin in the fall, who is likely too green to beat him, the big push is for his next opponent to be the colorful David Haye, the cruiserweight champ who has just moved up to heavyweight. Haye was recently signed by Setanta Sports, the UK subscription TV service which also shows Klitschko's fights. But to get a fight with Klitschko, Haye will first have to beat some top ten heavyweight, possibly Rahman if he beats Toney this Wednesday. That fight will likely be in the fall, and almost definitely in London. That could set up a Klitschko-Haye showdown in the first half of next year, probably somewhere in Europe.
Then there is WBC champ Samuel Peter. Assuming the fight with Vitali actually takes place, a long shot at best, and Peter beats him, that sets up a huge unification fight with Wladimir, and a rematch to boot.
So even if Ruiz beats Valuev, he has a long list in front of him to face Klitschko. Plus, we already heard Lampley repeat the HBO corporate line dismissing Ruiz during the Klitschko-Thompson mess.
As far as the history goes, the culture in boxing has always been too infused with a hater's attitude. Everyone hates everyone else, and every fighter is a bum but me. That has contributed mightily to boxing's decline, another factor rarely discussed.
test
test
Eddie,
I have two questions:
1-IF you had to bet one way or the other, would you put your money on Peter-Klitschko happening in October, or would you bet Klitschko has to pull out?
2-IF it does happen, and you had to bet, who would you put your money on, Peter or V. Klitschko?
EDDIE'S REPLY:
I don't bet, but Charles raised the point that if there is enough money, Vitali will fight even if, as we suspect, he is a total wreck. Right now that money ain't American, as it appears only Showtime is interested in that fight, and I'm not sure the Germans and Eastern Europeans can come up with the mega millions. So it still is doubtful. Plus, Dino and King will scream bloody murder as soon as it is postponed again, and will force the WBC to let Peter fight someone else. I would say another fight would be a walkover for Peter, but we also saw McCline almost stop him.
If they do fight, I favor Peter. Vitali hasn't fought in four years, and turns 37 this Saturday. Enough said.
I'm flabbergasted. All these John Ruiz fans, clustered in one place. We should do some blood tests to see what sort of bug has slithered into all these folks who have proven themselves to be reasoned, even wizened vets, of the fightwrite game. Y'all really think Jawny has a chance, a good chance to beat Wlad, huh? Folks, Wlad has refashioned himself--and I use the word himself provisionally, as I still have not figured out how much Manny has to do with how he fights--in the only manner he could have if he still wanted to be a prizefighter. He is so risk averse, I expect him to come into the ring with those flotation devices you wrap around your kid's arm. He is mortally afraid to take a punch for a damn good reason...because he knows full well his chin is tin. Thin tin. My guy Borges raked Wlad over the coals the other day, but I guess I'm more sanguine in evaluating him. He does what he has to do to win. His ring generalship is good, his jab is usually good, his right hand is pretty heavy, his attention to defense is good...add it all up, it's a lot of "goods" and the rest of todays heavys get grades of "poor" and "mediocre" in these same categories. I wrap up with two points: I think we're hating on the player (Wlad) so much, because we hate the game (the heavyweight division) so much. He is the best of a bad bunch, and he fights in a style that many of us who revere old school styling abhore. Second point: y'all really do think Jawny could take Wlad? Book it, Cardinale! I want to see how this plays out, because I think that would be Jawny's last stand aka Stoney's Revenge Special.
I'd be willing to bet that a W. Klitschko-Ruiz fight never happens. One of them will be defeated in the interim. That said, I wouldn't bet on Klitschko, something I would've been more than willing to do two years ago.
And I'll go a step farther, if Ruiz isn't shook by the first few meaningful right hands that Klitschko lands, it's over. At this stage, Klitschko has the shaky psyche that Ruiz will feed off of.
After getting KO’d by David Tua in 19 seconds in 1996, in a fight still talked about, John Ruiz was generally written off. He came back to beat a more or less prime Evander Holyfield, Hasim Rahman, Kirk Johnson, Fres Oquendo, Andrew Golota, and now Jameel McCline. He can be outboxed, especially by smaller men, as the Roy Jones and James Toney fights demonstrated, but does well against big men. The losses to Nikolai Valuev and Ruslan Chagaev were suspect, although he could have been more active in both fights to make his case stronger.
Wladimir Klitschko’s biggest weaknesses are his chin and his confidence. He may have a big right hand, but Ruiz is fearless.
I also doubt this fight will happen any time soon, since a potential Wladimir Klitschko-Samuel Peter title unification fight could make the WBA title irrelevant to discussions about who is the heavyweight champion of the world. If Vitali Klitschko manages to fight Peter in October and actually win the WBC belt, a Klitschko duopoly would also end that discussion for now.
But I don’t think Klitschko wants any part of Ruiz, especially if he dominates Valuev.
I don't think Ruiz fought a nearly close to prime Holyfield. No, not in 2000. After stopping Michael Moorer in their rematch (1997), Holyfield has been on a continuing decline.
As far as Ruiz dominating Valuev, I say no way. He'll be lucky to get the decision if he deserves it. Then again, I haven't seen either of their most recent fights. I'm just going by how I picture them matching up from their first fight.
Frank, you’re missing the point, since this is an analysis of Ruiz and not Holyfield. I said “more or less prime.” That’s to distinguish a general period from what he is today. Right before Holyfield’s three fights with Ruiz, he fought his two fights with Lewis, and was competitive, especially in the second fight. Any heavyweight ratings at that time would have had Holyfield very near the top. So Ruiz’s performance against Holyfield was unexpected by most and impressive enough to make his career.
That's a fair point, Eddie.
That said, Holyfield was never close to being the fighter he was vs Douglas, Foreman and Bowe I & II after 1997, at least in my opinion. He didn't even show up for the first Lewis fight, mentally or physically. In the rematch he was in the fight. I had him losing 7-5. However, he was still only capable of fighting in spurts and not even a complete round.
Post a Comment
<< Home