Khan - Does a Petersen defeat count anymore????

Has Khan got his reputation back without having to avenge his loss????....Even though he lost his p4p spot ..should he get it back???

Has his future legacy been affected or do we put his defeat down to cheating???

Or does petersen's defeat still count as Khan being exposed and his star being diminished and p4p status out of the window???

What does the Petersen saga do for Khan???

Do we just forget it happened and it's as you were????

Does a Petersen defeat count anymore??? I'm not sure it does!!!!!!!!!

Well partially. It doesnt absolve him of his major inside fighting issues because he was still winning handily when he fought o the outside so the defeat is still partially the fault of his own inablity to sustain a winning formula but seeing as how tight it was and the deductions etc yes because everything was in petersons favour even before the drugs issue. I do think though that it should be struck off the record and his belts returned

It is in question. If Peterson admits (which i believe his lawyer has already) that he took them in the first fight, it is a NC and I don't judge Khan for losing it. In my eyes he didn't lose it anyway, so this would confirm that.

Well, I'm one of the few who actually thought that Khan was dreadfully unlucky to lose his titles on that decision in the first place, so from that point of view it would be easy to write off the loss in light of Peterson's failed test.

But I can't.

Additional testosterone or no, the fight still highlighted a few notable weaknesses in Khan's make up - and what's more, they aren't the kind of weaknesses which can only be exposed via an opponent with an illegal advantage. Khan has the positive test excuse this time, but might not be so lucky next time out.

I'd liken it to the Cotto-Margarito situation, in some ways. The loss is perhaps questionable, but it would be a little foolish by both Khan and us to totally ignore it. Cotto learned his lesson, and I expect Khan to do the same. He may suffer from chronic foot in mouth syndrome, but the lad does have a tremendous work ethic.

Has Khan got his reputation back without having to avenge his loss????....Even though he lost his p4p spot ..should he get it back???

-----------

Hell no! Khan has passed on the opportunity to put the Prescott loss to sleep and now he's likely to never get back his loss to a game but avergae slugger in Petersen. Whether it's his fault or not, Petersen being caught on drugs is bad news for Khan. I think as Chris has said, drugs or not, Petersen, whether you think he won or not exposed some flaws in Khan's game - those being an inability to fight on the inside or clinch effectively to neutralise your opponents inside game. Khan had he been able to tie up rather than grab hold of the back or push would not have lost those points and would have gained the victory.

Officially it should be off his record. However drugs or no drugs Khan showed a truly amateurish level of inside fighting which seriously needs to be improved. Also he needs to pace himself better as he seems to carry real top level power early on in fights but by the end guys seem to be able to walk through his punches a bit. If he perhaps threw less early on then he would carry more bite in the later rounds which would deter people from getting inside so easily.

The fight would have always had an asterix against it anyway due to all the previous incidents which occurred so I don't think it ever had a huge bearing on his career.

Personally even with the 2 points deductions I had Khan winning by 1 point so I think he was done over as he should have won by more than 1 point IMO.

Saying that Khan allowed the fight to be so close, which was never meant to be be and I think he grossly underestimated Peterson's ability.

Peterson cheated his team said the substance he tested positive for was used before the first fight as well so the decision should be overturned and Khan should get his belts back. As for Khan making mistakes in the first fight Peterson was juiced up making him bigger, stronger and maybe even quicker so considering all that Khan put on a very good performance given the fact it was the 2 point deductions that cost him the fight.

If Khan had tested positive there would be people on here wanting him banned for life.

It wasn't a defeat in the first place.

Had Khan tested positive many here would want him lynched at best.

It was a defeat in the first place......He lost the fight and his titles...

Not really in to the Khan martyr angle either......

However will say that he's gone from having a legacy defining defeat stain........to probably having it extinguished........

and I haven't a problem with it...

Should it be wiped off his record? If Peterson tests positive for the first fight then yes, but should it be forgotten? No.

Peterson was walking in straight lines, not really cutting of the ring, and khan still found himself on the ropes time after time. He showed great skill on the outside BUT was bloody awful on the inside. He reverted to holding and running.

Whether he though it was alright or not, if the red gives a warning, STOP. He didn't NEED to hold, a smarter fighter would have danced around Peterson as he was flat footed as he walked in.

Like someone said, it's a bit like cotto-margarito. Cotto was always too easy to hit and stamina was a question and after the fight we/he learnt that in order to further his career he had to box as well as brawl.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:It was a defeat in the first place......He lost the fight and his titles...

Not really in to the Khan martyr angle either......

However will say that he's gone from having a legacy defining defeat stain........to probably having it extinguished........

and I haven't a problem with it...

Yes on paper it was a defeat. So was 10-1-1. Not saying it was a martyr either. Just that he was the victim of some bias refereeing and decision which he should have won despite the refereeing. If the fight is declared a NC which it should, it wont harm his legacy. Bu Holly Wilaboobie would be his performance that will be scrutinised for the next few years untl he retires and history will be re-written again.

10-1-1 will count as one of two wins and a draw for Manny over a fellow great........

which no doubt will be used to ensure top 20 status for him.....

It was also more clear cut than Khan v Petersen 1.........

which was close..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:10-1-1 will count as one of two wins and a draw for Manny over a fellow great........

which no doubt will be used to ensure top 20 status for him.....

It was also more clear cut than Khan v Petersen 1.........

which was close..

Its all very subjective though. The majority of pundits stated that the ref was weird at least and many still had Khan winning.

Why should it be called a no contest? First it was the ref, then it was the hat man, then it was crying for the rematch, now its about overturning the result of the 1st fight! What next? get over the whole farce, and respect the decisions.

I do however feel sorry for Khan with what has happened recently but the defeat does in fact count as he lost, say whatever you want but he lost end of.

PPVxHOTTY wrote:Why should it be called a no contest? First it was the ref, then it was the hat man, then it was crying for the rematch, now its about overturning the result of the 1st fight! What next? get over the whole farce, and respect the decisions.

I do however feel sorry for Khan with what has happened recently but the defeat does in fact count as he lost, say whatever you want but he lost end of.

Apparently he was juiced in their first fight.

PPVxHOTTY wrote:Why should it be called a no contest? First it was the ref, then it was the hat man, then it was crying for the rematch, now its about overturning the result of the 1st fight! What next? get over the whole farce, and respect the decisions.

I do however feel sorry for Khan with what has happened recently but the defeat does in fact count as he lost, say whatever you want but he lost end of.

The Peterson camp have said that they used the PED in November, so it's far from end of.

I never said he wasn't juiced, all i'm saying is accept the decision and move on, if the job was done correctly we wouldn't be talking about close rounds or controversial decisions. Khan didn't lose that fight because Peterson juiced now did he? Not every fighter who juices 'is guaranteed a win' the argument works both ways, I fully accept its gaining a advantage of some kind but it wasn't the reason why Khan lost.

PPVxHOTTY wrote:I never said he wasn't juiced, all i'm saying is accept the decision and move on, if the job was done correctly we wouldn't be talking about close rounds or controversial decisions. Khan didn't lose that fight because Peterson juiced now did he? Not every fighter who juices 'is guaranteed a win' the argument works both ways, I fully accept its gaining a advantage of some kind but it wasn't the reason why Khan lost.

What's the point in banning PEDs if we're not going to strike off the results of one person using it. Do you know what PEDs are designed for? The clue is in the P.E.

You say he gained an advantage via drugs then say it wasn't because of the drugs he won. Whatever you're on, dont share it please.

I like weed. And what the Flip is holly wilaboobie?

Should we accept Ben Johnson as olympic champ?

azania wrote:

PPVxHOTTY wrote:I never said he wasn't juiced, all i'm saying is accept the decision and move on, if the job was done correctly we wouldn't be talking about close rounds or controversial decisions. Khan didn't lose that fight because Peterson juiced now did he? Not every fighter who juices 'is guaranteed a win' the argument works both ways, I fully accept its gaining a advantage of some kind but it wasn't the reason why Khan lost.

What's the point in banning PEDs if we're not going to strike off the results of one person using it. Do you know what PEDs are designed for? The clue is in the P.E.

You say he gained an advantage via drugs then say it wasn't because of the drugs he won. Whatever you're on, dont share it please.

Did Oscar De La Hoya get the decision overturned against Mosley? was that given a no contest? Going back to the original point tell me why this fight should be called a no contest lol?

Two wrongs don't make a right. If Peterson was juiced prior to the first fight then he would have been able to train harder and for longer, increasing his stamina allowing him to fight the way he did. He has never fought that way at a pace like that before, at the time it was "he fought the fight of his life" well now we know that's not true.

PPVxHOTTY wrote:

azania wrote:

PPVxHOTTY wrote:I never said he wasn't juiced, all i'm saying is accept the decision and move on, if the job was done correctly we wouldn't be talking about close rounds or controversial decisions. Khan didn't lose that fight because Peterson juiced now did he? Not every fighter who juices 'is guaranteed a win' the argument works both ways, I fully accept its gaining a advantage of some kind but it wasn't the reason why Khan lost.

What's the point in banning PEDs if we're not going to strike off the results of one person using it. Do you know what PEDs are designed for? The clue is in the P.E.

You say he gained an advantage via drugs then say it wasn't because of the drugs he won. Whatever you're on, dont share it please.

Did Oscar De La Hoya get the decision overturned against Mosley? was that given a no contest? Going back to the original point tell me why this fight should be called a no contest lol?

Mosely should have been stripped imo. What's the point in having a ban on steroids when we just accept the results of a juiced fighter winning?

Yes but was he stripped?? NO and should we rewrite every boxing match which was controversial as Khan was cheated, this is the only time in the history of the sport this has happened so Khan should get a NC! Peterson is 100% in the wrong, but to say the fight should be a NC to make Khans record/legacy look better is just farcical to say the least. I may be going off topic but didn't Khan headbutt Barrera causing a cut which later gained him a TD, shouldn't that have been called off? in hindsight yes it should but cos its King Khan he deserved it.

To compare a clash of heads and using steriods is daft.

hampo171 wrote:To compare a clash of heads and using steriods is daft.

'Two wrongs don't make right'

One is an accident and one is deliberate. If the truth comes out LP was juiced before the fight why should he keep the win?

[quote="PPVxHOTTY"]Yes but was he stripped?? NO and should we rewrite every boxing match which was controversial as Khan was cheated, this is the only time in the history of the sport this has happened so Khan should get a NC! Peterson is 100% in the wrong, but to say the fight should be a NC to make Khans record/legacy look better is just farcical to say the least. I may be going off topic but didn't Khan headbutt Barrera causing a cut which later gained him a TD, shouldn't that have been called off? in hindsight yes it should but cos its King Khan he deserved it. [/quote

What on earth are you talking about? A decision has not been reached or made by the IBF and WBA. If one is made I hope its to declare the fight a NC. We cant have drug cheats benefitting one bit. It sends out the wrong message. You say Peterson is 100% in the wrong, but your dislike of Khan seems to make you want a drug cheat to benefit from his cheating. I dont get that.

Its not about re-writing history. It's about justice. It's nothing to do with Khan's legacy/record but correcting an obvious wrong.

Re MAB, its once again the stupidity of british officials that allowed that farce to continue to a point where a decision could be reached. That fight should have been stopped as soon as the cut appeared.

Why do you want a cheat to prosper?

hampo171 wrote:One is an accident and one is deliberate. If the truth comes out LP was juiced before the fight why should he keep the win?

Why did Mosley keep the win then?

That's up to the boards, what I'm asking you is why you think Peterson should keep a win he cheated to get on his record? Surely you must have an opinion that doesn't go back to "well Mosley didn't get overturned so this shouldn't" frankly it's a stupid argument.

hampo171 wrote:That's up to the boards, what I'm asking you is why you think Peterson should keep a win he cheated to get on his record? Surely you must have an opinion that doesn't go back to "well Mosley didn't get overturned so this shouldn't" frankly it's a stupid argument.

The probable truth is "I hate Khan".

[quote="azania"]

PPVxHOTTY wrote:Yes but was he stripped?? NO and should we rewrite every boxing match which was controversial as Khan was cheated, this is the only time in the history of the sport this has happened so Khan should get a NC! Peterson is 100% in the wrong, but to say the fight should be a NC to make Khans record/legacy look better is just farcical to say the least. I may be going off topic but didn't Khan headbutt Barrera causing a cut which later gained him a TD, shouldn't that have been called off? in hindsight yes it should but cos its King Khan he deserved it. [/quote

What on earth are you talking about? A decision has not been reached or made by the IBF and WBA. If one is made I hope its to declare the fight a NC. We cant have drug cheats benefitting one bit. It sends out the wrong message. You say Peterson is 100% in the wrong, but your dislike of Khan seems to make you want a drug cheat to benefit from his cheating. I dont get that.

Its not about re-writing history. It's about justice. It's nothing to do with Khan's legacy/record but correcting an obvious wrong.

Re MAB, its once again the stupidity of british officials that allowed that farce to continue to a point where a decision could be reached. That fight should have been stopped as soon as the cut appeared.

Why do you want a cheat to prosper?

You clown where have I said I want a cheat to prosper? What i'm saying is this isn't the first time this as happened, surely they must put a stop to cheating in boxing and if it means calling it a NC then fair enough, but how is calling a fight a NC gonna clamp down on future boxers cheating?

Steady on with the insults. You say that you do not want Peterson to have his fight declared a NC (your opinion). Ergo you do not want a drug cheat to be punished. Ergo you want him to prosper from his tainted win.

James Toney had his win against John Ruiz declared a NC after they found steroids in his system.

Declaring it a NC means they don't have the W on their record and when asked why it was declared a NC, the truth will be told.

Anyway Hotty, can you answer Hampo's question?

hampo171 wrote:That's up to the boards, what I'm asking you is why you think Peterson should keep a win he cheated to get on his record? Surely you must have an opinion that doesn't go back to "well Mosley didn't get overturned so this shouldn't" frankly it's a stupid argument.

As a boxing fan no boxer should keep a win if they cheat, all i'm saying is its a lost cause moaning and raveling on about this issue, tell me in every fight someone cheats are they guaranteed success? drugs will not always help you, they could have side effects as well.

You have said over and over again it shouldn't be changed meaning that Peterson can say he was a world champion, that in a way is letting a cheat prosper.

You have no real objection to it being changed other than its happened before, I'd say a hefty suspension and a tainted win being changed would deter a lot of people, throw in the need for 100% random testing in every fight at an Olympic level and people would soon stop cheating.

Just because it is not a guaranteed win shouldn't make a difference, Khan has mentioned getting it changed once to my knowledge and rightly so.

PPVxHOTTY wrote:

hampo171 wrote:That's up to the boards, what I'm asking you is why you think Peterson should keep a win he cheated to get on his record? Surely you must have an opinion that doesn't go back to "well Mosley didn't get overturned so this shouldn't" frankly it's a stupid argument.

As a boxing fan no boxer should keep a win if they cheat, all i'm saying is its a lost cause moaning and raveling on about this issue, tell me in every fight someone cheats are they guaranteed success? drugs will not always help you, they could have side effects as well.

You seem to be saying that Peterson should keep his win because Mosely kept his. It also seemed to be a lost cause in athletics and cycling also. So in your opinion records from confirmed cheats should remain.

Once again, why do you want cheats to prosper?

hampo171 wrote:You have said over and over again it shouldn't be changed meaning that Peterson can say he was a world champion, that in a way is letting a cheat prosper.

You have no real objection to it being changed other than its happened before, I'd say a hefty suspension and a tainted win being changed would deter a lot of people, throw in the need for 100% random testing in every fight at an Olympic level and people would soon stop cheating.

Agree with the 2nd paragraph 100%, but then again was random testing done for 1st fight?

PPVxHOTTY wrote:

hampo171 wrote:You have said over and over again it shouldn't be changed meaning that Peterson can say he was a world champion, that in a way is letting a cheat prosper.

You have no real objection to it being changed other than its happened before, I'd say a hefty suspension and a tainted win being changed would deter a lot of people, throw in the need for 100% random testing in every fight at an Olympic level and people would soon stop cheating.

Agree with the 2nd paragraph 100%, but then again was random testing done for 1st fight?

Do you agree with the first paragraph also?

Have to agree with it as it defies common sense , its all opinions and I am not changing mine even though I understand what you people are saying.

Of course its all opinions. It is my opinion that drug cheats should not have the W after they have been caught. That includes Mosely.

You obviously have a different opinion.

Mosley never actually failed a drugs test so the situation is slightly different. He just came clean about it after he had been found in theBALCO files.

There have been examples of boxers failing tests and the decision being overturned - Tyson/Golota, Toney/Ruiz or Salido/Guerrero for example.

If the can show from the tests that Peterson was juiced for the first fight then theres a good chance the result could be changed to a NC. However it seems to have only been caught by the VADA style testing after so Im not sure whether they can prove for certain he was on something for the first fight although it seems almost pretty clear he has.

Didn't they admit that he was on it? And shouldn't that have a bearing? Regardless of whether or not the fight is declared a NC, by virtue that they did admit he was juiced last year will always have an asterix next to the win.

Yeah but whats to stop one boxer paying off another boxer to admit they were juiced for a loss or something similar? A bit like Jack Johnson claiming he dived in some of his losses. I think you need actual proof.

If they can link the failed test to the treatment prior to the first fight then I think it should be ruled a NC but if Peterson passed the tests for the first fight it could make things awkward.

Manos he would hve passed that test second time round too because it only tested testosterone level which was under 4:1 or 6:1. this test by vada tests for non natural hormones etc etc. The fact that they have admitted it is the major factor...along with the fact that with this testosterone treatment was controlled in such a way that it would be giving maximum effect but not breaching the 4:1 rato. Which I suspect was why he demanded testing as he knew he'd pass it.

not counting on the carbon tests

Petersen claiming he's still the champ

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/boxing/18082715

I don't like Khan very much, but I dislike drug cheats more. It should be changed to a NC and the belts either handed back or made vacant.

I believe the boxing world will uncover a lot more of this sort of behaviour going on if random drug tests were brought in like athletics. Gaining a training & stamina advantage through PEDs is unfair and should not be tolerated. Strip the man!

Tricky one, I thought that Khan should not be in the position of having to plead that he was the "real" winner in a closely fought bout- it's never good to see especially as it's so objective to score.I do agree with above posters who say that the Peterson fight illuminated major flaws in his style.That aside however I think that nullifying the result and returning his belts is the only fair option.For example when Ben Johnson lost his Olympic gold medal, his time was taken off the record books and Carl Lewis was upgraded from silver.I don't want to come over all Barry McGuigan(double meaning intended)but for boxing to achieve any credibilty in the wider world it should be attempting parity with other sports when drug-cheating is proven.