Kevin Mitchell Or Ricky Burns Would Beat Rios!

First topic message reminder :

Genuinely believe this...

For me Burns has come on massively and in my opinion genuinely has the tools to beat Rios, good enough movement, Rios is too slow, Acosta started to feel confident against Rios and was backing him up a few times, would have beaten him if he didn't over commit and start to tire.

Mitchell will beat him also, lots of you will scream at me, well if he can't beat Katsidis he can't beat Rios. My opinion, Rios doesn't attack anywhere near as fast as Katsidis, and Mitchell is massively under rated due to being so heavily disliked. I can imagine a similar kind of performance he put out against Prescott, where he was clever picked his punches and used his extra speed.

Disagree with me?

I agree, Burns isn't anything special, he's a solid fighter. But he had a decent chin, and I feel hits a bit harder than his record suggests. He can box a bit and he's tall at the weight.

I also agree that there isn't one part of his game that stands out, but he's well rounded. Personally, I wouldn't say there is any one part of Carl Froch's repertoire that stands out, but he's developed into a world class Super Middle. I'm not saying Burns is at the same level as Froch, before anyone lambasts me.

Froch is better in almost every way, he's good power, decent speed, a very good jab and an awesome chin, his chin is what has got him where he is.

Froch knows he can attempt to walk through hell to get the win, I doubt Burns would be able to against a higher calibre of fighter.

Burns can block punches something that is alien to Froch. But Froch does have a better all round game but he's properly World class Burns isn't

I wouldn't back Burns to beat a high calibre of opponent but I don't consider Rios to be that.

As I said, Burns isn't on the same level as Froch, but I see him as a bit of a diluted version. Burns has decent speed and jab. With regards punch resistance, I'd say Burns has a good chin, it's comparable to Froch's in my opinion. Whilst I'm not convinced that Froch hits that hard, I'd say that is the attribute that separates him and Burns.

The major difference between the two for me is that Froch is good at a lot of things while Burns is decent at a lot.

No doubt that's what separates the world class from the guys on the fringes of World class.

Have to disagree - burns may well use the jab and move but Rios gets him and each time he does he takes a bit out of him. 5th round ko. Mitchell maybe a little better but still gets sparked out - maybe round 7.

Sorry, I didn't word that last post very well. What I meant was besides punching power, Burns and Froch are very comparable in terms of attributes, just that Froch does everything a bit better.

Froch beats Burns as a fighter in most departments but Burns has a better jab in my opinion

In regards to Burns v Rios. I dont blame people for backing Rios he would certainly be favourite but people are totally overhyping the Mexican on here

He's american.

Ok hes Mexican-American on Wiki but il agree with you for now as im in a good mood

Slightly off topic:

WEMBLEY...WEMBLEY...WE'RE THE FAMOUS CARDIFF CITY AND WE'RE OFF TO WEMBLEY (AGAIN)!!!

BLUEBIRDS

Rios beats both by stoppage. Mitchell has more of a chance imo because of his better defence (imo) but given his chin I think that when rios connects he will pump up the pressure and take him out.

Burns hasn't got enough to keep rios off him. Katsidis is a fast starter so get through 4 rounds and he looks like the powers gone. Rios is the opposite, he gets stronger as the fight goes on. Burns looked like he was flagging at the end of the katsidis fight. Rios would pour on the pressure. Katsidis was a spent fighter when burns fought him, and rios has fought good fighters like Acosta, Peterson and antillon. Acosta is a better pure boxer than burns but isnt as durable but hits harder, antillon hits harder than burns and is tougher but isn't as skilled and Peterson is very similar to burns but with faster hands