Amir Khan

by azania Wed Dec 07, 2011 3:53 pm

First topic message reminder :

Why are so many hating on him? He wants to fight Floyd. Good for him. Yet some criticise him for that. He beat Maidana. Many criticise him for not standing toe to toe. He says he wants to fight the best. He's called arrogant.

When Hatton said the sme thing he became a british institution and hero or the masses.

Why the double standards? Has Khan got a point when he claims its his ethnicity that many of his detractors have issues with?

by **ShahenshahG** Fri Dec 09, 2011 8:07 pm

Headbutts

by lovely_london Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:29 am

you still want to argue that Khan is a good fighter hahahaha

by Waingro Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:46 am

lovely_london wrote:you still want to argue that Khan is a good fighter hahahaha

Think you are right mate the guy is very overrated I said this from the start. Imo Brook would beat him and forget about Mayweather he would absolutely destroy Khan. All Khan says is that people are ducking him him why would they duck him?? Maidana had him in big trouble and Peterson beat him I think Bradley would destroy him too.

by manos de piedra Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:22 am

The manner of the way Khan and his team handled this defeat is a kind of typical example of Khan and the sort of thing I believe leads to him losing popularity.

I can understand his disappointment but it was a close fight and his post fight comments and actions are a bit disappointing.

by fearlessBamber Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:26 am

Waingro wrote:
lovely_london wrote:you still want to argue that Khan is a good fighter hahahaha

Think you are right mate the guy is very overrated I said this from the start. Imo Brook would beat him and forget about Mayweather he would absolutely destroy Khan. All Khan says is that people are ducking him him why would they duck him?? Maidana had him in big trouble and Peterson beat him I think Bradley would destroy him too.

Can someone check if these guys have the same IP address ? I cannot believe there are 2 of them.

by lovely_london Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:28 am

fearlessBamber wrote:
Waingro wrote:
lovely_london wrote:you still want to argue that Khan is a good fighter hahahaha

Think you are right mate the guy is very overrated I said this from the start. Imo Brook would beat him and forget about Mayweather he would absolutely destroy Khan. All Khan says is that people are ducking him him why would they duck him?? Maidana had him in big trouble and Peterson beat him I think Bradley would destroy him too.

Can someone check if these guys have the same IP address ? I cannot believe there are 2 of them.

No doubt you probably believe in the conspiracy theory that 9/11 was planned by the US government and that Osama Bin Laden is not actually dead.

by **ShahenshahG** Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:32 am

fearlessBamber wrote:
Waingro wrote:
lovely_london wrote:you still want to argue that Khan is a good fighter hahahaha

Think you are right mate the guy is very overrated I said this from the start. Imo Brook would beat him and forget about Mayweather he would absolutely destroy Khan. All Khan says is that people are ducking him him why would they duck him?? Maidana had him in big trouble and Peterson beat him I think Bradley would destroy him too.

Can someone check if these guys have the same IP address ? I cannot believe there are 2 of them.

Of course there are two of em - one brain cell each

Yeah Manos - He should have kept his bloody mouth shut.

by Imperial Ghosty Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:35 am

A very costly lesson was learned, take things one step at a time and don't get too ahead of yourself. Seemed to be thinking more about a potential Mayweather fight than the fight against Peterson which he should have been able to win easily.

by **ShahenshahG** Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:37 am

Anyone reckon - that not having Manny chasing him down in sparring has made him a little less mobile? Spent too much time on the ropes/in front of Peterson

by milkyboy Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:02 pm

his mouth doesn't endear him to people certainly, fine for people not to like him but to write him off as not a good fighter says more about the poster than about khan.

Khan is a terrific boxer and always gives good value in the ring. He lost a close decision because he had 2 points deducted. Were they fair deductions? in one sense yes, as the ref had warned him several times, however peterson was burrowing his head into khan's chest so ican understand his frustration.

Maidana showed how to beat khan.... hustle him, hunt him down, he's not physically strong and can't fight on the inside. He was sparring with manny then i believe shah... i just reckon he hasn't learnt.

So because khan struggles with head down charging fighters, he'll get crushed by a crude slugger like mayweather. And Kell Brook who's beaten erm, erm. yeh he'll murder khan obviously.

Khan needs to spend a lot of time learning to deal with guys who rush him and trap him on the ropes... freddie should have been working on that since maidana... i imagine he has made it a priority so its most likely that khan just can't do it or doesn't have it between the ears to do it at fight time. Maybe he'll never learn, he still looks like a boy in the ring.... but he'll give anyone who tries to box him a really hard time.

besides shah... given manny's recent performances, not sure he can give him the pressure sparring anymore!!

by The genius of PBF Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:18 pm

Imperial Ghosty wrote:A very costly lesson was learned, take things one step at a time and don't get too ahead of yourself. Seemed to be thinking more about a potential Mayweather fight than the fight against Peterson which he should have been able to win easily.

No one beats Peterson easy...Potential wise he should be in the top 10 pound for pound...Unlike most fighters out there he is not one dimensional and can adapt very well.

by **ShahenshahG** Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:21 pm

Hahaha - thats quite true - they might have stopped Manny sparring with him so that him slowing down doesnt look so obvious and doesn't scupper the Mayweather fight.

I reckon they should put him in with Sakio Bika - in sparring - not a fight or someone like that - rough and ready to get him used to that. Also needs to keep moving his feet when there is no opportunity to attack. Was disappointed by his daft retreat to the ropes - even though I knew the result before I watched it.

by WHU_Champo_League_in_7Yrs Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:26 pm

The genius of PBF wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:A very costly lesson was learned, take things one step at a time and don't get too ahead of yourself. Seemed to be thinking more about a potential Mayweather fight than the fight against Peterson which he should have been able to win easily.

No one beats Peterson easy...Potential wise he should be in the top 10 pound for pound...Unlike most fighters out there he is not one dimensional and can adapt very well.

Tbh, bradley beat him rather comfortably and ortiz was dominating him before he stopped coming forward. If Khan doesn't work on his inside game i will never be confident on him winning when he moves up in weight. Ortiz is a slugger, he is bigger, faster, stronger and more relentless than peterson on the inside. Khan needs to work on getting off the ropes using movement as he always gets trapped. The speed and power is there for him to be a real force though and his chin is alot better but i can't see him dominating peterson in a rematch

by The genius of PBF Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:34 pm

WHU_Champo_League_in_7Yrs wrote:
The genius of PBF wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:A very costly lesson was learned, take things one step at a time and don't get too ahead of yourself. Seemed to be thinking more about a potential Mayweather fight than the fight against Peterson which he should have been able to win easily.

No one beats Peterson easy...Potential wise he should be in the top 10 pound for pound...Unlike most fighters out there he is not one dimensional and can adapt very well.

Tbh, bradley beat him rather comfortably and ortiz was dominating him before he stopped coming forward. If Khan doesn't work on his inside game i will never be confident on him winning when he moves up in weight. Ortiz is a slugger, he is bigger, faster, stronger and more relentless than peterson on the inside. Khan needs to work on getting off the ropes using movement as he always gets trapped. The speed and power is there for him to be a real force though and his chin is alot better but i can't see him dominating peterson in a rematch

That is why I said potential wise...He adapted to Ortiz and worked him out as well that is why it was scored a draw.

I knew Khan would get a early knockdown but Peterson would come back...Interesting to see if Khan can change things in the rematch.

by **oxring** Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:48 pm

You always "know" pbf. I just wish you'd publish your picks on fridays first Wink

Frankly - Bradley beat Peterson comfortably - but styles make fights. Bradley has a better inside game than Peterson and can box pretty well too.

Khan's inside game still isn't top level yet.

by The genius of PBF Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:53 pm

oxring wrote:You always "know" pbf. I just wish you'd publish your picks on fridays first

Frankly - Bradley beat Peterson comfortably - but styles make fights. Bradley has a better inside game than Peterson and can box pretty well too.

Khan's inside game still isn't top level yet.

Doubt he will ever be good inside let alone top level.

by OasisBFC Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:55 pm

oxring wrote:You always "know" pbf. I just wish you'd publish your picks on fridays first

haha, very true.
he'd put the bookies out of business....if he could plase bets AFTER the fight has finished.

by The genius of PBF Sun Dec 11, 2011 12:58 pm

OasisBFC wrote:
oxring wrote:You always "know" pbf. I just wish you'd publish your picks on fridays first

haha, very true.
he'd put the bookies out of business....if he could plase bets AFTER the fight has finished.

Peterson is a slow starter and has been knocked down early against Bradley and Ortiz...Plus I won the prediction league for a reason.

by Strongback Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:03 pm

The fact Peterson is generally a technical counter puncher and not an aggressive walk forward volume puncher tells a lot about what his team saw as Khan's weakness.

With Peterson saying in the post fight interview that when their Plan A to out box Khan was not working in the early rounds they went to Plan B demonstrated Peterson's adaptability and in turn Khan's lack of ability to deal with pressing aggression. In the first half of the fight I thought Khan was very controlled and wasn't jumping in or wasting energy by throwing too many unnecessary punches. When he started to get tagged he lost his cool and wanted O brawl which just isn't his game. He started to make fundamental mistakes that his opponent capitalised on.

Khan took a lot of body punches and is lucky Peterson doesn't have more power considering the number of clean head shots he landed.

It was a very close fight that can be argued either way but if I put my scorecard to one side I believe Peterson was the better man on the night. He wanted it more in the final rounds when it is all about heart and the will to win. Peterson is a tough guy and gave a humble interview after the fight which reflects that he has learned a lot from the tough lessons life has thought him. Khan by comparison behaved like a spoilt brat in his interview, maybe he needed to lose and will come back mentally tougher.

Peterson showed the genuine heart of a champion and I wish him well, he just about deserved this one.

by Strongback Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:09 pm

Strongback wrote:The fact Peterson is generally a technical counter puncher and not an aggressive walk forward volume puncher tells a lot about what his team saw as Khan's weakness.

With Peterson saying in the post fight interview that when their Plan A to out box Khan was not working in the early rounds they went to Plan B demonstrated Peterson's adaptability and in turn Khan's lack of ability to deal with pressing aggression. In the first half of the fight I thought Khan was very controlled and wasn't jumping in or wasting energy by throwing too many unnecessary punches. When he started to get tagged he lost his cool and wanted O brawl which just isn't his game. He started to make fundamental mistakes that his opponent capitalised on.

Khan took a lot of body punches and is lucky Peterson doesn't have more power considering the number of clean head shots he landed.

It was a very close fight that can be argued either way but if I put my scorecard to one side I believe Peterson was the better man on the night. He wanted it more in the final rounds when it is all about heart and the will to win. Peterson is a tough guy and gave a humble interview after the fight which reflects that he has learned a lot from the tough lessons life has taught him. Khan by comparison behaved like a spoilt brat in his interview, maybe he needed to lose and will come back mentally tougher.

Peterson showed the genuine heart of a champion and I wish him well, he just about deserved this one.

by milkyboy Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:13 pm

a fair assessment strongback... and well worth making twice Wink

by Captain Lucas Sun Dec 11, 2011 1:14 pm

There's many people out there who dislike Khan for being Muslim but they're too afraid to admit it on forums like this one unless it's anonymous on somewhere like a stream. I'll tell you straight - I find it hard to like the guy when he's so cocky. He literally thinks he's a king and it's cringeworthy. Khan will come back but his PR people need to teach him some class.

by supremeskills Sun Dec 11, 2011 2:09 pm

no ppl simply dont like khan because he thinks hes alot better than he is.

by Boxtthis Sun Dec 11, 2011 3:09 pm

milky boy wrote: Maidana showed how to beat khan.... hustle him, hunt him down, he's not physically strong and can't fight on the inside.

I think this is a good point. If Khan gets to fight within his own style he's unstoppable. But, he doesn't react well to pressure fighters. He doesn't have a naturally cool head when put in trouble. I thought he won this fight and I think he'll win a rematch, but it's his inability to handle pressure that will keep him from being top p4p. To be honest, I see a fight with Bradley being broadly similar to last nights fight with Peterson. Khan would outbox him from the outside, but Bradley would apply intelligent pressure. It would be another close one. It's one of the reasons why Khan is actually becoming a really exciting fighter - because he's explosive on the attack, but fragile when defending. It can be edge of the seat stuff sometimes. I mean, the Peterson fight might be in the mix for FOTY. He's already won one FOTY with Maidana. He's still right in the mix with Bradley, Peterson, Maidana, Alexander, Matthyse - it'll be really exciting if there's more match ups made between these guys.

by Super D Boon Sun Dec 11, 2011 9:57 pm

Ridiculous dross article designed to cause argument and controversey.

Khan is disliked by many because of his arrogant and charmless attitude on occassions. He lost last night to the slightly better man and shouts robbery and disses the entire city of Washington DC in the process. He's a sensible guy for the most part but behaviour like this does him no favours in the populaity stakes.

Now Hatton was always humble, and a man of the people and someone the "masses" could relate to. Most cannot relate as well to a cocky and arrogant so and so who says things that cause offence.

Given that Hatton only lost to the creme de la creme of boxing, Khan has now lost a similar number of fights to Hatton but to boxers who are slightly above average at best. Given this truth, he's doing himself no favours in establishing himself as a great boxer like Hatton was and certainly not winning any new fans.

by JDandfries Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:24 pm

Fairly old article I know and I think I replied accordingly, but just as if he needed to back it up for me, Khan showed in his embarrassing and ungracious interview why people 'hate' him!

.... That why DC aint had a big fight for 20 years ... Etc

So he has alienated half of Britain, now the US aswell!

Good fighter , but god is he thick?

by Rowley Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:28 pm

JDandfries wrote:Fairly old article I know and I think I replied accordingly, but just as if he needed to back it up for me, Khan showed in his embarrassing and ungracious interview why people 'hate' him!

.... That why DC aint had a big fight for 20 years ... Etc

So he has alienated half of Britain, now the US aswell!

Good fighter , but god is he thick?

Have often thought with some of his comments and stuff he writes on Twitter he would do well to think before typing or speaking and have to say post fight last night was definitely an occasion someone needed to have a word and reign him in a bit because whatever you think of the refs performance or the decision, both of which IMO were not horrific by any means, he did come across as graceless and a poor loser, neither of which are endearing qualities.

by JDandfries Sun Dec 11, 2011 10:40 pm

I think in the heat of the moment sometimes the 'real you' comes out, this is how I have always though khan to be, overly arrogant and basically a cry baby when things go wrong!

by Nico the gman Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:03 pm

Freddie Roach takes all the praise when Khan wins but couldn't understand why the Khan camp didn't change tactics,Peterson fought the perfect fight cut the ring down and drew Khan into the type of fight he wanted,Khan should have ben trying to jab and move instead of sitting on the ropes shipping punches.
Enjoyed the fight but the saving grace for Khan is that Peterson isn't a big puncher,Khan is a hurtful puncher but not a power puncher,why he feels he needs to go to war I have no idea when you look at the boxing skills he has.
We are going to have to see if the transition up to welterweight suits him,it certainly didn't suit Hatton.

by milkyboy Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:30 pm

Super D Boon wrote:Ridiculous dross article designed to cause argument and controversey.

Khan is disliked by many because of his arrogant and charmless attitude on occassions. He lost last night to the slightly better man and shouts robbery and disses the entire city of Washington DC in the process. He's a sensible guy for the most part but behaviour like this does him no favours in the populaity stakes.

Now Hatton was always humble, and a man of the people and someone the "masses" could relate to. Most cannot relate as well to a cocky and arrogant so and so who says things that cause offence.

Given that Hatton only lost to the creme de la creme of boxing, Khan has now lost a similar number of fights to Hatton but to boxers who are slightly above average at best. Given this truth, he's doing himself no favours in establishing himself as a great boxer like Hatton was and certainly not winning any new fans.

i'd agree with the first 2 paragraphs boon, but not the last 2. I don't remember hatton being gracious in defeat when he blamed the referee, the weight etc when he lost to mayweather. A stack of football fans who knew diddly about boxing related to hatton's beer swilling pie eating chirpy chappy demeanour and some of them think he was a great. I and plenty of others think he was just a good champion and exceptionally well managed.

Had hatton actually fought somebody at the top of his game prior to the creme de la creme, i might agree with you. As it was, he cherry-picked the old or the lucky. I don't blame him for that it was good career management, but he's no yardstick to beat khan with imo. Khan has at least fought some live guys in their prime, amongst otherwise well selected opponents.

by manos de piedra Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:38 pm

milkyboy wrote:
Super D Boon wrote:Ridiculous dross article designed to cause argument and controversey.

Khan is disliked by many because of his arrogant and charmless attitude on occassions. He lost last night to the slightly better man and shouts robbery and disses the entire city of Washington DC in the process. He's a sensible guy for the most part but behaviour like this does him no favours in the populaity stakes.

Now Hatton was always humble, and a man of the people and someone the "masses" could relate to. Most cannot relate as well to a cocky and arrogant so and so who says things that cause offence.

Given that Hatton only lost to the creme de la creme of boxing, Khan has now lost a similar number of fights to Hatton but to boxers who are slightly above average at best. Given this truth, he's doing himself no favours in establishing himself as a great boxer like Hatton was and certainly not winning any new fans.

i'd agree with the first 2 paragraphs boon, but not the last 2. I don't remember hatton being gracious in defeat when he blamed the referee, the weight etc when he lost to mayweather. A stack of football fans who knew diddly about boxing related to hatton's beer swilling pie eating chirpy chappy demeanour and some of them think he was a great. I and plenty of others think he was just a good champion and exceptionally well managed.

Had hatton actually fought somebody at the top of his game prior to the creme de la creme, i might agree with you. As it was, he cherry-picked the old or the lucky. I don't blame him for that it was good career management, but he's no yardstick to beat khan with imo. Khan has at least fought some live guys in their prime, amongst otherwise well selected opponents.

Id have to disagree with you on the opposition, and the yadstick comment. I think Khan and Hattons opposition has been comparable and that Hattons win over an albeit fading Tszyu would still be better than any of Khans.

If you were to judge right both guys as it stands now I would have to say Hatton ranks as the better 140 fighter by a reasonably clear margin.

by Super D Boon Sun Dec 11, 2011 11:48 pm

Milky

Not sure you can blame Hatton for his trashy fans or not but my point was, is that he came across as a down to earth bloke "you could have a pint with", although probably not true in reality, his image was certainly fashioned that way. Khan on the other hand, puts himself on a pedestal and believes himself to be a lot more than he is. This is why he's not so popular so just objecting to a wum article written with the sole purpose of causing a row. Also, I though Cortez was too much on Hatton's case in that fight but ironically he seemed to let Hopkins get away with similar style spoiling tactics in the Calzaghe fight.

Khan's attitude in wanting the best is laudable and better than Hatton's well managed career of fighting many bums for the WBU belt for what must have been a decade or so, nevertheless I can't see Hatton slipping up over the likes of Prescott and Petersen though.

by azania Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:20 am

Khan gave praise to Lamont. He credited him for fighting a good fight. Yes he was angry and emotional. He said what he felt. I dont see what he said as being disrespectful. He felt it was a hometown decision (as did many also) and he said that. The ref didn;t do him any favours either. Remember Hatton blaming the ref for his loss to Floyd. Very humble and many suckers bought that story.

The problem with Khan is damned if he does and if he doesn't.

Regarding this loss. Anyone recall Callazo vs Hatton? By all accounts that was robbery and Cal should have won and had it been scored correctly for Cal, would the Hatton fanbots be saying Hatton was carp?

Give the kid a break.

by Imperial Ghosty Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:21 am

Don't think anyone has ever called the Collazo and Hatton fight a robbery but rather pointed out that in a 15 round fight he may well have been stopped as he was out on his feet.

by milkyboy Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:24 am

Super D Boon wrote:Milky

Not sure you can blame Hatton for his trashy fans or not but my point was, is that he came across as a down to earth bloke "you could have a pint with", although probably not true in reality, his image was certainly fashioned that way. Khan on the other hand, puts himself on a pedestal and believes himself to be a lot more than he is. This is why he's not so popular so just objecting to a wum article written with the sole purpose of causing a row. Also, I though Cortez was too much on Hatton's case in that fight but ironically he seemed to let Hopkins get away with similar style spoiling tactics in the Calzaghe fight.

Khan's attitude in wanting the best is laudable and better than Hatton's well managed career of fighting many bums for the WBU belt for what must have been a decade or so, nevertheless I can't see Hatton slipping up over the likes of Prescott and Petersen though.

fair points boon, no quibble with that.

manos, if khan retired today hatton's record is better. I'll reserve judgement of their careers though until khan's is over.

My beef was the great tag attached to hatton... he talked legacy but only made the big fights for mega bucks at the end of his career. Prior to that the selectively was remarkable... harris loses in a bizarre performance to maussa who i genuinely think i could beat. So ricky takes maussas belt. Hang on a no mark has just won a welterweight title... ok lets take collazo (gets a lucky decision against a guy inferior to lamont peterson imo) drops back to light welter blaming the few extra pounds for his poor performance. Urango gets a gift (truly shocking imo) decision against ben rabah (nothing special himself)... looks rubbish... ok we'll take the ibf now, hang on a minute castillo's getting on a bit, just moved up a weight and got a dubious decision against a barely fringe contender in ngoudjo... he'll look good on the cv. etc

Never did he fight a quality fighter in his prime before mayweather. Had he been the one to beat harris, had he called out cotto even if he'd fought witter his record would have more credibility to me... but no he was trying to get gatti.

by azania Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:26 am

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Don't think anyone has ever called the Collazo and Hatton fight a robbery but rather pointed out that in a 15 round fight he may well have been stopped as he was out on his feet.

I've read that some did and had Cal ahead at the end. But it's irrelevant. When you leave things to the judges it sometimes doesn't reflect what happened in the fight. If Khan had got the nod, people wouldn't have been talking about the glaring flaws in his game.

by Scottrf Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:29 am

azania wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:Don't think anyone has ever called the Collazo and Hatton fight a robbery but rather pointed out that in a 15 round fight he may well have been stopped as he was out on his feet.

I've read that some did and had Cal ahead at the end. But it's irrelevant. When you leave things to the judges it sometimes doesn't reflect what happened in the fight. If Khan had got the nod, people wouldn't have been talking about the glaring flaws in his game.

I would have, same as I did after the Maidana fight he won.

by Imperial Ghosty Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:29 am

Some having Collazo ahead is hardly what I would call a robbery is it you?

He got the wins against Maidana and McCloskey yet people still picked up on his flaws so fail to see what real relevance the result had in that respect.

by azania Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:33 am

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Some having Collazo ahead is hardly what I would call a robbery is it you?

He got the wins against Maidana and McCloskey yet people still picked up on his flaws so fail to see what real relevance the result had in that respect.

Well initially you claimed no-one had Cal winning. Make your mind up.

Much of his flaws were brushed aside and I believe brushed aside by his camp more importantly. Ali was a terrible infighter, so he focussed on his strengths. I reckon Khan should do just that.

by milkyboy Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:33 am

Imperial Ghosty wrote:Don't think anyone has ever called the Collazo and Hatton fight a robbery but rather pointed out that in a 15 round fight he may well have been stopped as he was out on his feet.

sorry ghosty... plenty of people thought it was a robbery. Personally i thought it could have gone either way, so no robbery but could easily have lost

by Imperial Ghosty Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:36 am

azania wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:Some having Collazo ahead is hardly what I would call a robbery is it you?

He got the wins against Maidana and McCloskey yet people still picked up on his flaws so fail to see what real relevance the result had in that respect.

Well initially you claimed no-one had Cal winning. Make your mind up.

Much of his flaws were brushed aside and I believe brushed aside by his camp more importantly. Ali was a terrible infighter, so he focussed on his strengths. I reckon Khan should do just that.

Where did I ever say that no one had Collazo winning?

His flaws weren't really brushed aside as many pointed out his inability to fight on the inside, how he would try fighting fire with fire rather than box to his strengths and how rarely sat down on his punches. All things pointed out after the Maidana fight we he won.

by manos de piedra Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:36 am

I tend to go a little easier on Hatton because at the end of the day he was genuinely aiming for the top, and he did get the fights in the end. It wasnt like a Calzaghe-esque cash out. He took on the two best pound for pound fighters when they were in red hot form and dithed Warren in order to try crck America. So Im not really cynical about his ambition or intentions in anyway. He could have stayed in the MEN and still made good money at little risk.

The criticisms of his opposition you make are valid, but I view it as a carefully planned campaign to manouver Hatton into postion to make the big fights happen and introduce him in the U.S, which he did and in the end he delivered the fights.

Khan has yet to do that. Hes promised the big fights but as yet not delivered, and has now slipped up twice on route which Hatton didnt do against similar opposition. However, his career is far from over so theres no point shutting the book on him yet but I do feel Hattons acheivements as it stands now are ahead and opposition wise theres not really much to choose between them. Tszyu was old and possibly ipe for the taking but he was still the number 1 guy - something which I dont think Khan has established himself as yet.

by azania Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:39 am

Imperial Ghosty wrote:
azania wrote:
Imperial Ghosty wrote:Some having Collazo ahead is hardly what I would call a robbery is it you?

He got the wins against Maidana and McCloskey yet people still picked up on his flaws so fail to see what real relevance the result had in that respect.

Well initially you claimed no-one had Cal winning. Make your mind up.

Much of his flaws were brushed aside and I believe brushed aside by his camp more importantly. Ali was a terrible infighter, so he focussed on his strengths. I reckon Khan should do just that.

Where did I ever say that no one had Collazo winning?

His flaws weren't really brushed aside as many pointed out his inability to fight on the inside, how he would try fighting fire with fire rather than box to his strengths and how rarely sat down on his punches. All things pointed out after the Maidana fight we he won.

Here

Don't think anyone has ever called the Collazo and Hatton fight a robbery

by Imperial Ghosty Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:40 am

I'm still wondering where i've said no one called it to Collazo?

by PPVxHOTTY Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:40 am

Funny how most people on here 'no names mentioned' PRE KHAN V PETERSON were justifying how Khan would beat Bradley and how he is a credible opponent for Mayweather hahaha...Why are these same people POST KHAN V PETERSON now criticising the poor lad? Shocked

by Scottrf Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:41 am

PPVxHOTTY wrote:Funny how most people on here 'no names mentioned' PRE KHAN V PETERSON were justifying how Khan would beat Bradley and how he is a credible opponent for Mayweather hahaha...Why are these same people POST KHAN V PETERSON now criticising the poor lad?

Because he lost maybe?

Spoiler:

by PPVxHOTTY Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:43 am

monzon wrote:
PPVxHOTTY wrote:...can you please break down why you fancy him against Bradley, id love to see why he beats Bradley.

Quite simply, Khan's a bigger puncher, has quicker hands, and his supposed 'glass chin' has survived against more concussive hitters than Bradley.

Bradley would have a resonable chance, sure, but i'd be quite confident Khan could evade his biggest shots, or survive them if not, whilst Bradley would struggle with Khan's movement, offensively, and defensively should Roach decide they're going to fight on the backfoot, which i doubt.

70/30 Khan, or thereabouts.

You also have to ask why Bradley's not kean on the fight. Khan would fight him tomorrow, home or away. Bradley just doesn't fancy it. I'm sure Khan and Roach are sniffing blood already.

hahahahaha I think you may want to edit your judgement and 70/30 in favor of Khan? On that note Jean Marc Mormeck would be 60/40 over Wlad!!

by azania Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:44 am

PPVxHOTTY wrote:Funny how most people on here 'no names mentioned' PRE KHAN V PETERSON were justifying how Khan would beat Bradley and how he is a credible opponent for Mayweather hahaha...Why are these same people POST KHAN V PETERSON now criticising the poor lad?

I have to confess I was one of them. I thought Khan would learn from the Maidana fight. But its obvious he hasn't. He lacks the required infighting skills and more importantly the ability too keep swarmers at range. He needs to impose his jab more and add more snap to it.

by azania Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:44 am

Imperial Ghosty wrote:I'm still wondering where i've said no one called it to Collazo?

Semantics.

by PPVxHOTTY Mon Dec 12, 2011 12:45 am

Scottrf wrote:
PPVxHOTTY wrote:Funny how most people on here 'no names mentioned' PRE KHAN V PETERSON were justifying how Khan would beat Bradley and how he is a credible opponent for Mayweather hahaha...Why are these same people POST KHAN V PETERSON now criticising the poor lad?
Because he lost maybe?

Spoiler:

Just saying the criticism contradicts everything which was said before hand!

by Sponsored content