English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

All i can say this is a disgrace, The fight cannot be watched or sky/ Ntl or anything like that.
The other day danny william vs scott grammer Was on sky sports live and then repeated about 3-4 times after that on sky sports.
Danny williams in not even ranked in the top 50 of the heavyweight and scott grammer is probably not even ranked in the top 100.
Fight such as danny williams, matt skeleton, audley harrison has been shown for years non stop on t.v
Wladimir fight against samuel peter was shown but wladimir was suppose get ko in that fight but since he the king of heavyweight he done the whooping also he was suppose to lose by chris byrd which i only can think of the other reason why they were showing that live in britain.
But once wladimir destroy chris byrd, at this time byrd was suppose to be the best HW by a long way and was said by RINGSIDE magazine that Chris byrd would have beaten Muhammad Ali in his prime.

2007-03-09 15:02:33 · 5 answers · asked by NEWS12NEWS 1 in Sports Boxing

How good does this make
Wladimir?
Emanuel Stweward has already claimed that Wladimir is the toughest boxer he ever trained.
Ok so Now Wladimir is no1 by a long way and his fight against Calvin Brock was not shown not even the Highlight and this time Ray Austin against Wladimir will not be shown it no wonder there are soo many Jade in this country.

2007-03-09 15:08:11 · update #1

5 answers

I think it is definately because the British promoters have a strangle hold on what is televised. If the British promoters control who you see, thus, who you are familiar with, they can make TONS of money. And yes, it is a disgrace, I agree. I am sure the EBU or the Commonwealth Heavyweight champions are well known there. Personally, I couldn't name either one. Wait until the replay this weekend if you have HBO. Danny Williams is ACTUALLY #19 in the world rankings, and a one "Scott Grammer" does not exsist according to www.boxrec.com. I never thought Peter or Byrd were going to win against W. Klitschko. Here's what you do, go to www.youtube.com the next day, and type in Wladimire Klitschko vs the opponent you'd like to see him fight.

2007-03-13 11:35:28 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I will start at the end of your question with a simple truth. Chris Byrd was a pretty good middle weight who moved up to heavyweight for the money. Byrd couldn't have carried Muhammad Ali's bags for him in his prime, and the highest accomplishment of Byrd's career was having his name mentioned in the same sentence as Ali's. This is no knock on Byrd, he's a good fighter and a good guy, but at his peak on his best day, he was never the caliber of fighter Ali was. If Ringside magazine said Byrd was ever better than Ali it was a misprint or a deliberate lie.

Klitschko showed some heart coming off the canvass and wobbling to a decsion over Samual Peters. It was much more impressive than beating Chris Byrd.

I can't comment on British TV since I live in Michigan, but I know Emanual Steward's training style well enough to tell you that who ever Emanual is training is "the toughest fighter he ever trained". Emanual knows how important the mental aspect of boxing is at the top levels, sometimes the attitude of a fighter is the difference between winning and losing. Emanual imparts both physical skill and mental toughness in his methods. Confidence is built and honed just as much as physical conditioning is. It is why Steward is just about the best living trainer on the planet right now.

2007-03-09 15:57:57 · answer #2 · answered by blogbaba 6 · 0 1

Get on a flight to Germany
it is on the tele here

2007-03-09 15:20:36 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Get ze flight to germany

itz on ze'ere

2007-03-09 15:39:27 · answer #4 · answered by David The Visionary 4 · 0 1

because he not british

2007-03-13 06:39:24 · answer #5 · answered by kanyestonger 1 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers