Fury v Cunningham: “Street Fighter” Steve poses Tyson test
Published:Tyson Fury (20-0, 14KO) has already told adversary Steve Cunningham (25-5, 12KO) that he’s in “big trouble”.
But casting aside the usual pre-fight boxing platitudes, those might be words the 6’9” Goliath might just rue come April 20th.
The pair’s IBF World Heavyweight title eliminator might be seen as a mere formality for Fury, however for boxing fans and casual punters alike there could be value in taking Cunningham at 4/1.
Their showdown at New York’s Madison Square Garden could be the ideal opportunity for Cunningham to avenge the demons of his December loss to Tomasz Adamek.
Many ringside onlookers had scored the bout in favour of the Philadelphia-based boxer, however the split-decision went against him despite his crisper and more eye-catching punching.
The snappy jab and intelligent counter-punching he utilised to good effect in that contest, combined with superior speed, could prove to be great assets for Cunningham against the unbeaten Fury, who’s available at 1/6.
Also, while Fury’s showed signs of maturity when producing a professional if slightly languid victory against American Kevin Johnson last time out, Cunningham represents another step up in terms of facing experienced opposition.
The former IBF Cruiserweight champion has made reference to his previous training camp with Wladimir Klitschko, Fury’s dream future target.
And the self-proclaimed ‘street fighter’ has also shared the ring with some other classy operators, most notably world title holder Marco Huck whom he inflicted a first defeat upon in 2007.
Having never been stopped before in his career, Steve ‘USS’ Cunningham is not likely to go quietly. While Fury will have a significant height (6”) and slight reach (3”) advantages, the pressure will be on him as the much vaunted heavyweight hope to perform.
Against a seasoned campaigner who has shown in his career that he’s capable of pulling off upsets, this will be the Manchester pugilist’s biggest test so far.
All Odds and Markets are correct as of the date of publishing
