Ruslan Provodnikov vs. Chris Algieri Scorecard by glassjoe


scorecard by GLASSJOE
Round
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Total
RUSLAN PROVODNIKOV
10
9
9
10
9
10
9
9
9
9
9
10
112
CHRIS ALGIERI
7
10
10
9
10
9
10
10
10
10
10
9
114

Fight:



More:

Ruslan Provodnikov

Chris Algieri



We do need help growing, please share:

Comments

Neither fighters are really that great to be honest, but they did manage to have a good fight. You could either have a dominant performance for Provodnikov based off his landing of the much harder shots, or you could give it to Algieri for landing at a much higher percentage. On the all time list Algieri will hopefully make the top 300 while Provodnikov will make the top 350 even though I doubt anyone would make a list that long. Anyways though I was impressed by Algieri's heart, I don't think he'll do much to upset Pacquiao, but you got to respect him for showing his heart and fighting like a champion.

Champion97's picture

What a fight this was, I thought Algeri boxed his head off 9-3. I must say I think that both these fighters are better than you said although I agree that they aren't the best in the world. One thing I noticed about Algeria was that the hit to the body plenty as well as the head and he switched brilliantly. I think Algeri may give Pacquiao some problems. That 117-109 for Provodnikov is outrageous. What I don't get is how you lose a round when you throw more, land more, land a higher connect percentage and are not buzzed even once. I suppose Provodnikov landed with the harder shots but no way should he get the round based on that because he wasn't hurting Algieri.

Don't get me wrong, these are good boxers; I just don't think that you realize the extremely long list of all time greats that make up the history of boxing. Names like Galaxy and Gonzalez are better fighters than these guys and I'm pretty sure you never heard of them. These guys still have a lot to prove Algieri needs to beat a bigger name than Prodnikov to be on the list and Prodnikov needs to throw more body shots and beat more boxers and be more consistent. Believe me these guys are good there's just such a long list of great fighters and they still have so much to prove. But I did think Algieri won, and don't quite see the controversy here.

Champion97's picture

To be fair you are right, I just think that you can't really compare fighter who were around decades ago to fighters that are boxing now. I believe that Algieri will not only good but great throughout the rest of his career after what I think will be his first loss when he fights Pacquiao. How do you know these 2 couldn't beat Galaxy and Gonzales? You are right about that other thing, no idea who Galaxy I and Gonzalez is a very common name in boxing. You could live your whole life and not see a fight as good as Bradley vs Provodmikov. Provodnikov is a very dangerous fighter who has proved many times to be a world class brutaliser. BTW what is your opinion on Leonard Bundu? he is a very good fighter but he makes so many mistakes, he needs a new trainer, I think if he gets a good trainer like say Robert Garcia, learns how to use his jab and defence, and Al Haymon sets up some really big fights for him then he could become a truly great fighter. I think that Frankie Gavin will lose to Skeete.

Pacquiao really does have a tough task in front of him against Algieri, I think Algieri can win rounds for sure by using his speedy combinations. I think that Pacquiao will make the same mistake as he did against Marquez an throw loads of punches at once, leaving himself wide open for counter punches at this is why this fight won't be a walkover. I think Pacquiao might win by RTD, if Algieri is blind in both eyes from swelling then he won't be allowed t continue. 50 years ago Algieri would defo lose on a UD though.

I see what you mean but I disagree with you when you said that you can't compare fighters of past to fighters of today. When you think about it though that's really how they stay relevant. If we didn't compare fighters of past we wouldn't be able to argue over issues such as haggler vs Hopkins, pacquiao vs Pryor, amir khan vs monzon, wldadamir vs ali, and many other matches. Plus I get the feeling that you think that I think that most of today's fighters would lose in these situations, that really isn't true. In the list I just listed I think Hopkins has the tools to beat Haggler and Pacquiao has the speed to outclass Pryor.

The reason why I listed guys like Algieri and Prodnikov fairly low is for one they don't do anything that a past fighter couldn't and two they haven't done anything to put them up with the all time greats. Guys like Jack Johnson who was the first black heavyweight champion ever in the year 1910! makes him an all time great. Sugar Ray Robinson being unbeatable for almost 15 years makes him a great. Henry Armstrong being the first to hold titles in multiple weight classes makes him a great. Bernard Hopkins being one of the slickest fighters ever and being countless big names makes him a great. Roy Jones Jr. being by far the best fighter of the 90's and being so good that he makes his opponents look bad makes him a great.

Chris Algieri beating Prodnikov? That makes him a living legend? No it doesn't and it isn't nearly enough. He still has a lot to prove and I personally think he would be so much better if he had power. Prodnikov having a great match with Bradley isn't enough to put him on the list either.

As to Gonzalez and Galaxy I know them by basically looking into the history. How I did that was type in the 100 greatest fighters ever and researched them. I would look into the fighters and who they beat and why the people they beat was important. That's really the only way to do it and I find it very interesting.

The reason why I think Algieri won't be able to do much is that I highly doubt that he has fought anyone of the level of the PacMan and I think the Pacman's ability to go in and out and throwing fast combinations is where the difference will be. However like I said before if Manny doesn't take the fight seriously then I'll like Chris's chances much better; but I can't remember the last time Manny overlooked an opponent. No matter if he was fighting an ancient Shane Mosely or an old De La Hoya, Manny always comes prepared.

Leonard Bundu's pretty good. He'll never be a knock out artist but he is a good fighter that needs to consider possibly a new trainer after his close call against Gavin. So I agree with you on that one.

Champion97's picture

Did I say you can't compare current fighters to fighters that were around the previous century? You can definitely compare them but you can never be very confident in a would be prediction. What I mean by that is that you can compare fighters like Mayweather and Pacquiao to easch other because they are of the same era and they have some opponents in common. I say Pacquiao beats Mayweather because he crushed Hatton inside of 2 rounds and Mayweather vs Hatton was competitive until Hatton unfairly lost a point in round 6 and Pacquiao took De La Hoys to pieces and Mayweather just beat by a whisker on a split decision but you could argue with me and say Mayweather took
Marquez to school and Pacquiao has had 3 closed fights with him and been knocked out by him. I won't use the word evidence but this is the sort of convincing reasoning for a theory of an outcome in a fight. For all you or I know Deontay Wilder could be far better than Ali ever was but it is equally possible that is the other way round and there is no really convincing reasoning to back up either theory. If you have a sport like long distance running then you can tell who the best of all time was and rank them in order of how good they were by starting with the lowest time but in a sport like boxing it isn't the same because they have only fought there opponents and you can only measure their capability by looking at how well they compare to each other in terms of how they have done against previous opponents. Of course styles do make fights and you could definitely come to the conclusion that a current fighter beats or get beat by a fighter from previous decades based on styles. There are many reasons why I'm almost certain Khan beats Mayweather and Khan beating Maidana and Judah better than Mayweather did plays a part but Khan's style is the main reason.

You're right about Algieri and Provodmikov being legitimately lower than the likes of the sugar rays and Jack Johnson but they are still young and they haven't displayed 15 years of disappointment despite not displaying 15 years of being unbeatable. I know that Algieri schooling Provodnikov after taking that beating and fighting with one eye of so long doesn't make him a living legend but it makes him a warrior who has already proved to have a great boxing heart and I can only predict but I do genuinely believe he will be not just good but great in the future. I do believe that Algieri is a very good champion even now but I just think that Pacquiao is a class above, also Provodnikov is strong but he doesn't actually throw that much whereas Pacquiao is much harder to out work and also is so much more skilled, he goes to the body a lot too which is something Algieri didn't have to deal with against Provodnikov, it will be interesting to see how Algieri copes with these tools of Pacquiao. I think Provodnikov having that classic against Bradley will not make him one to be forgotten.

As for Bundu, well I'm not convinced by him at all for a few reasons and the main reason is that if you look at Devon Alexander you can see he got schooled by Porter and Bradley and he took Lee Purdy apart and schooled him for 7 rounds with a bad hand and Purdy had a lot of success against Bundu before getting stopped in the last round. When I say not convinced I mean I don't think he is a class A fighter. Frankie Gavin did himself no favours by saying he could beat Porter and Maidana because everybody else knows these guys would murder him, I just explained about comparing Bundu to these top guys and look how closely contested they are. I think Bradley Skeete will beat Gavin predominantly because of the fast pace he would set.

The fans over here are going crazy about Saunders vs Eubank. I hope Saunders wins because Eubank is showing Saunders a real lack of respect and I think he has some nerve seeing as he fights only bums and Saunders has been fighting European level fighters and has also come out on top. I keep changing my mind about the outcome. I will decide in the next couple of weeks and if I actually predict that Billy Joe wins then we should bet, assuming you think Eubank. What I mean by bet is that if Eubank loses then that is 1-0 to me but if he wins then it is 1-0 to you and we should do that every time we disagree on a big fight. Do you think Molina will beat Bundridge tonight?