By Scott Gilfoid: I don’t know what the big fuss is all about with the Wladimir Klitschko vs. David Haye bout. I see Haye as the UK’s version of the smallish Eddie Chambers, only without Chamber’s excellent boxing skills.

Haye and Chambers are both 6’2”, and bot weigh around 210. Wladimir toyed with Chambers before knocking him out in the 12th round. I see the same thing happening with Haye. Wladimir was right when he said Haye is a “Wannabe,” a “flashy flash” type fighter that is all about image with his bold talk, but has still yet to really back it up against a what I would consider a quality heavyweight.

Why is it that Haye has fought the 39-yer-old Audley Harrison, 38-year-old Monte Barrett, 38-year-old John Ruiz and the 36-year-old Nikolay Valuev? Why didn’t Haye fight better heavyweights than this? I think Haye is just a good talker and has been matched incredibly well against aging heavyweights.

I would favor Chambers over Haye if they were to ever fight. They won’t, of course, because Haye is retiring in October rather than stick it out and try to pick up the pieces of his career after Wladimir knocks him out.

I know what I’m talking about when I say that Haye is going to be one of Wladimir’s easiest fights in many years. It may seem like the Haye-Klitschko bout will be a competitive one because of how confident that Haye comes across in interviews, but that’s all bluster.

Haye is just another fighter that has overestimated his own ability because he hasn’t faced anyone yet. Beating a bunch of cruiserweights in a weak division and then bailing without facing the few quality fighters that the division had in Marco Huck, Steve Cunningham and Tomasz Adamek. And then moving up to the heavyweight division and facing nothing but older guys nearing 40. It’s all smoke and mirrors, folks.

You put Chambers in with the same guys that Haye has fought and you’d have Chambers holding the WBA belt instead of Haye.