Flanagan Gets His Shot

I mentioned last week now Flanagan was getting a world title against the winner of Beltran vs Ao, but then Beltran went and missed weight.

So now he'll face Jose Zepeda, unbeaten 25 year old from American, 23 wins 20 KOs.

C'mon Terry, ignore the naysayers and people (person ) that'll poop on it, get that world title round your waist.

Who are these naysayers?

Anyone that starts giving it out about him deserving the shot etc (bit like what happened with Paul Smith).

Also Truss

Grasp the opportunity with both hands.

I'm surprised Truss hasn't been in here to call this lad a bum, but then he is American

Derbymanc wrote:Anyone that starts giving it out about him deserving the shot etc (bit like what happened with Paul Smith).

Also Truss

Grasp the opportunity with both hands.

Paul Smith DIDNT deserve his shot.

But Flanagan beat Ormond for his WBO European Belt, which provided him with his good ranking, which is why posters should not begrude him getting a shot. Did have an element of luck with Beltran missing weigh but whose fault is that..........

This kid can bang but can he fight ??

Hope he wins.............Too many Brit world champs aren't good for Boxing.....

Cheapen the title of "World champion" for when you do get a fighter worthy of it...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:This kid can bang but can he fight ??

Hope he wins.............Too many Brit world champs aren't good for Boxing.....

Cheapen the title of "World champion" for when you do get a fighter worthy of it...

Why does nationality matter, why is having another American world champion a thing but another British champion a bad thing?

Deontay Wilder is doing a good job of that on his own Truss, I am hearing he's going to be fighting Eric Molina next.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:This kid can bang but can he fight ??

Hope he wins.............Too many Brit world champs aren't good for Boxing.....

Cheapen the title of "World champion" for when you do get a fighter worthy of it...

Why does nationality matter, why is having another American world champion a thing but another British champion a bad thing?

Because when a Country renowned for being s**t at a sport has a lot of paper champions.....

Then it makes World titles look even more dirt cheap............

PaulHv2 wrote:Deontay Wilder is doing a good job of that on his own Truss, I am hearing he's going to be fighting Eric Molina next.

I heard that.

Apprantly Tony Thompson is going ape calling him a 'chinny bum'. I would actually like to see Wilder v 'The Tiger'

Basic level xenophobia.

The British are renowned for being pretty crap at boxing you're right, not like we're the third most successful country in history at it or anything.

Looking forward to 2022 when Fielding gets a shot.....To p**s all over that !!

And like I would even acknowledge you

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Basic level xenophobia.

The British are renowned for being pretty crap at boxing you're right, not like we're the third most successful country in history at it or anything.

Well If Jo Brand lined up in a race with Usain Bolt and Carl Lewis..............

She'd be the third best.............

You ain't got much competition for third...

But good spin..

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Basic level xenophobia.

The British are renowned for being pretty crap at boxing you're right, not like we're the third most successful country in history at it or anything.

Well If Jo Brand lined up in a race with Usain Bolt and Carl Lewis..............

She'd be the third best.............

You ain't got much competition for third...

But good spin..

TRUSS you don't 'alf love a good metaphor.......

Think your life revolves around them.

Sorry SOF I phrased that all wrong, I meant the crap he was getting for taking the fight (as if it was his fault)


For Truss, Not our fault your countries incapable of producing any decent challengers anymore.

Haven't got a downer on British Boxing..........

Love for Degale, Yafai, Selby, Groves, Joshua types to bag a title..........

Just not any old s**t like Derry Matthews etc.............

It's a stain on the careers of Graham, Sibson and Watson types...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Haven't got a downer on British Boxing..........

Love for Degale, Yafai, Selby, Groves, Joshua types to bag a title..........

Just not any old s**t like Derry Matthews etc.............

It's a stain on the careers of Graham, Sibson and Watson types...

Like you are a stain to these boards.

I still don't understand how you can state the likes of Flanagan et al, don't deserve their shot and therefore should be derided but then actively push for Joshua to face Wlad right now.

Derbymanc wrote:I still don't understand how you can state the likes of Flanagan et al, don't deserve their shot and therefore should be derided but then actively push for Joshua to face Wlad right now.

Because Joshua is the 2nd best fighter in his division..............because it's full of crap....

Is Flanagan's division full of crap ??

Glad I could clear it up for you..

And what's Joshua done to prove that, in your words he's just beaten a bunch of stiffs and tomato cans.

Double standards Truss, one rule for one, a different for the other. Pretty sure there was an article on it the other day;)

To be fair Derby things work slightly differently when you're an Olympic gold medallist, you do get fast tracked to world title shots and rightly so.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:I still don't understand how you can state the likes of Flanagan et al, don't deserve their shot and therefore should be derided but then actively push for Joshua to face Wlad right now.

Because Joshua is the 2nd best fighter in his division..............because it's full of crap....

Is Flanagan's division full of crap ??

Glad I could clear it up for you..

Where does Wilder sit?

Is he the 2nd best or third (or first?)

I wouldn't mind Hammer if AJ steps up his opponents early etc but Truss has been complaining for a while now about Brits getting title shots which they don't deserve yet inists AJ to get a champion shot now (not a step up, the actual shot)

Considering he wrote the article on double standards, I find it funny

Adam D wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:I still don't understand how you can state the likes of Flanagan et al, don't deserve their shot and therefore should be derided but then actively push for Joshua to face Wlad right now.

Because Joshua is the 2nd best fighter in his division..............because it's full of crap....

Is Flanagan's division full of crap ??

Glad I could clear it up for you..

Where does Wilder sit?

Is he the 2nd best or third (or first?)

I think Joshua beats him...................Look Wilder is a champ..................Wlad is a champ.............and Fury who'd have a chance against Josh is pretty much committed to fighting Wlad..........

So what is the point of hanging around................He beats every other Heavy with ease........All lardbutts or useless muppets........

Hard to not deserve a shot at the title when you're steak in a division full of cheeseburger and fries..

Because he hasn't fought anyone close to that level and i'd rather not have another David Price. See how he does for the rest of this year but if his opponents aren't a marked improvements, i'll be on the sidelines shouting with you

You're looking at it as if Joshua and Flanagan are comparable they're not, one of them is seen as the potential heir apparent to Wlad whilst the other is a decent domestic level boxer. You can earn a shot two ways; you either work your way up the rankings or you show you have the ability to win at the highest level which many think Joshua has shown.

Flanagan for instance has bypassed a lot of more talented and deserving fighters for his title shot, he's barely fought at domestic level in what is a strong division. The moment someone like Tyson Fury is in line for a mandatory shot then we can't really complain that some want to see Joshua fast tracked, whether he's fought nobody or not he's still more deserving.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:You're looking at it as if Joshua and Flanagan are comparable they're not, one of them is seen as the potential heir apparent to Wlad whilst the other is a decent domestic level boxer. You can earn a shot two ways; you either work your way up the rankings or you show you have the ability to win at the highest level which many think Joshua has shown.

Flanagan for instance has bypassed a lot of more talented and deserving fighters for his title shot, he's barely fought at domestic level in what is a strong division. The moment someone like Tyson Fury is in line for a mandatory shot then we can't really complain that some want to see Joshua fast tracked, whether he's fought nobody or not he's still more deserving.

The highlighted part comes from your dislike of Tyson and nothing more.

Why on earth is he more deserving?

Tyson has fought Chisora (and beat) before and after Haye/ Klit.
He has signed to fight Haye twice but Haye ducked
He has earned his mandatory

Joshua has done none of those things. Its just hate on your part with no basis in truth

Read what i've actually written before letting your bizarre love for Fury get in the way, Joshua as a far more talented boxer as well as being an Olympic gold medallist is more deserving than anyone who is less talented than him.

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Read what i've actually written before letting your bizarre love for Fury get in the way, Joshua as a far more talented boxer as well as being an Olympic gold medallist is more deserving than anyone who is less talented than him.

So you take talent (which is a subjective thing) over hard work and going through the ranks?

So I should be allowed to cook in top restaurants because I have a flair for cooking?

Its nonsense and you know it. This has nothing to do with my liking of Fury. But I do respect that he has earned his shot by fighting and winning against people on the fringes of the division. Do I think he is a world beater? No but he deserves his shot.

Joshua has so far done nothing in the pro ranks.

Derbymanc wrote:Because he hasn't fought anyone close to that level and i'd rather not have another David Price. See how he does for the rest of this year but if his opponents aren't a marked improvements, i'll be on the sidelines shouting with you

Safe to say he's better than David price..............

If they fought now Josh would be a massive favorite.............

He's another Bruno in an era where Bruno is fifty times more talented than anyone else...........

Now Fury has just beaten that useless wally who was ranked number 5 by someone............Christian Hammer.........

Do you really want Josh wasting his time with a muppet like that !!

It isn't nonsense at all, the extremely talented pair of Lomachenko and Rigondeaux show that god given talent means a lot more than working your way through the ranks or would people have preferred to see them fight 20 times before getting a title shot?

I'd rather see people rise up through the ranks, letting their skills grow with their talents as they face better opposition.

As it is, we don't get that any more and the consensus seems to try and keep a '0' and push some fighters too fast.

Although I will cheer on any Brit in a title fight regardless of if he's earned it (Was gutted when Derry's fight was for the dreaded 'interim' belt)

Fury's done a lot more than AJ to deserve his title shot, well done to AJ for winning gold, but so did Audley

Fury is a more deserving opponent for Wladimir right now than Joshua is. Not even close really, for me. Joshua won gold (still impressive however you slice it, of course) aided by one or two dubious verdicts in an amateur division not considered one of the strongest. Not like Rigondeaux or Lomachenko who are two of the most outstanding amateurs in history.

As a professional he's fought nobody of note yet. No need to start talking about Rigondeaux or Lomachenko having twenty professional contests before challenging the big dogs in their weight class, because they eliminated that need by facing better opponents when they had less fights on their record than Joshua already has. Rigondeaux fought Cordoba in his seventh bout and another titlist between that and the Donaire fight, so he at least actually beat some decent world-level fighters before getting his crack at a division kingpin in Donaire. Lomachenko has already fought Salido and Russell. Joshua has fought nobody above British domestic level on the other hand.

Amateur achievements are all well and good and I have no issue with them giving a new professional a bit of extra gravitas, but for every top amateur who has gone on to great things as a pro, there's been one who never really followed it up in the paid ranks. Gavin was hailed as the best amateur Britain has ever produced in some quarters, hasn't stopped his professional career being a bit of a damp squib so far, though. The professionals is a different kettle of fish and Fury actually beating a couple of world-ranked fighters and showing he can win when the going gets tough means more, in my eyes anyway, than Joshua beating areas masters level guys and hardly having to break a sweat to do so.

Derbymanc wrote:I'd rather see people rise up through the ranks, letting their skills grow with their talents as they face better opposition.

As it is, we don't get that any more and the consensus seems to try and keep a '0' and push some fighters too fast.

Although I will cheer on any Brit in a title fight regardless of if he's earned it (Was gutted when Derry's fight was for the dreaded 'interim' belt)

Fury's done a lot more than AJ to deserve his title shot, well done to AJ for winning gold, but so did Audley

Where is the better opposition you talk about ??

They are all old men looking for last paydays or slobs....

Ideal world all divisions are full of quality..........

When Josh fights for a world title he'll have had no opponent to prepare him..... Whether it's now or in two years time........He is what he is..

Why waste time..

Lomachenko and Rigondeaux had fought nobody of any not before they got their title shots that is the point here not that they have gone on to fight good fighters. There were more supposedly deserving boxers in the pro ranks but rightfully they were bypassed and I see no reason why Joshua should be any different.

I don't need to see Joshua beat Chisora round a ring to know he's better than Fury nor do I need to see him getting decked by Cunningham or that polish cab driver.

Go check the top 10 from any of the organisations and chuck him in with a couple of them first.

Same thing was said about Price when he was knocking out domestic level opponents, 'chuck him in with Wlad now, he's definitely ready' etc etc.

Loma and Rigo should be the exceptions rather than the rule. What has AJ actually done to earn his shot?

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Lomachenko and Rigondeaux had fought nobody of any not before they got their title shots that is the point here not that they have gone on to fight good fighters. There were more supposedly deserving boxers in the pro ranks but rightfully they were bypassed and I see no reason why Joshua should be any different.

I don't need to see Joshua beat Chisora round a ring to know he's better than Fury nor do I need to see him getting decked by Cunningham or that polish cab driver.

At least by doing that Fury has proved heart and guts in the face of adversity. Will still don't know what AJ will be like when he is hit 'bang on the chen' and goes down. Would it not be good to know that AJ wont fold like a deck of card i.e Price v Thompso, before throwing him in with Wlad, Wilder, Stiverne, Fury etc...

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Lomachenko and Rigondeaux had fought nobody of any not before they got their title shots that is the point here not that they have gone on to fight good fighters. There were more supposedly deserving boxers in the pro ranks but rightfully they were bypassed and I see no reason why Joshua should be any different.

I don't need to see Joshua beat Chisora round a ring to know he's better than Fury nor do I need to see him getting decked by Cunningham or that polish cab driver.

At least by doing that Fury has proved heart and guts in the face of adversity. Will still don't know what AJ will be like when he is hit 'bang on the chen' and goes down..

sounds good but you'll need to wait two years to find out..

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Lomachenko and Rigondeaux had fought nobody of any not before they got their title shots that is the point here not that they have gone on to fight good fighters. There were more supposedly deserving boxers in the pro ranks but rightfully they were bypassed and I see no reason why Joshua should be any different.

I don't need to see Joshua beat Chisora round a ring to know he's better than Fury nor do I need to see him getting decked by Cunningham or that polish cab driver.

At least by doing that Fury has proved heart and guts in the face of adversity. Will still don't know what AJ will be like when he is hit 'bang on the chen' and goes down. Would it not be good to know that AJ wont fold like a deck of card i.e Price v Thompso, before throwing him in with Wlad, Wilder, Stiverne, Fury etc...

In fairness we don't know how Fury reacts to gettting hit by someone who can actually punch like Thompson do we, getting dropped by Cunningham is not a good thing no matter how people try to spin it.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Lomachenko and Rigondeaux had fought nobody of any not before they got their title shots that is the point here not that they have gone on to fight good fighters. There were more supposedly deserving boxers in the pro ranks but rightfully they were bypassed and I see no reason why Joshua should be any different.

I don't need to see Joshua beat Chisora round a ring to know he's better than Fury nor do I need to see him getting decked by Cunningham or that polish cab driver.

At least by doing that Fury has proved heart and guts in the face of adversity. Will still don't know what AJ will be like when he is hit 'bang on the chen' and goes down..

sounds good but you'll need to wait two years to find out..

Well thats because Eddie would rather milk him first.

Theres plenty of boxers that would give him a test IMO. Ustinov, Wach, Stiverne and then the next tier Thompson, Arreola. But can't see Hearn throwing him in with any of them anytime soon.

Think you might need to shine your crystal ball up Truss, the end of next year at the latest think we'll see him fight for a title (meaningful one)

Hammersmith harrier wrote:

Soldier_Of_Fortune wrote:

Hammersmith harrier wrote:Lomachenko and Rigondeaux had fought nobody of any not before they got their title shots that is the point here not that they have gone on to fight good fighters. There were more supposedly deserving boxers in the pro ranks but rightfully they were bypassed and I see no reason why Joshua should be any different.

I don't need to see Joshua beat Chisora round a ring to know he's better than Fury nor do I need to see him getting decked by Cunningham or that polish cab driver.

At least by doing that Fury has proved heart and guts in the face of adversity. Will still don't know what AJ will be like when he is hit 'bang on the chen' and goes down. Would it not be good to know that AJ wont fold like a deck of card i.e Price v Thompso, before throwing him in with Wlad, Wilder, Stiverne, Fury etc...

In fairness we don't know how Fury reacts to gettting hit by someone who can actually punch like Thompson do we, getting dropped by Cunningham is not a good thing no matter how people try to spin it.

Here's a spin, the lunatic ran straight at Cunningham and was caught square with a huge right hand. Fury was reckless but it was a peach of a punch. Froch 'iron chin' was went dont like a sack of in similar circumstances against Groves

And if I remember correctly he was also caught square in his other knock down, could be more of a question of poor footwork.

Well a lot of people thought they knew that Price was better than Fury for the same reasons as well going in to 2013, Hammersmith, despite Fury having fought the better names. Turned out most were wrong.

Sport is competition, at the end of the day. Fury's done more as a pro than Joshua and has ticked the boxes which earns you the right to contest a title - and in this case, THE title. A fighter that does that, regardless of what we think of the mandatory system, deserves to be rewarded more than a guy who hasn't done those things, for me. Price is just one example but there have been a host of other Olympic champions / medal winners who have ended up falling well short of what's been expected of them and haven't become a top pro. Joshua may well not be one of them, but so far I don't see anything to totally rule out the possibility of him falling in to that group, either.

The issue isn't so much about who is or will be better, anyhow. It's more about who is more deserving. That's clearly Fury right now.

Fury hasn't proved he is better than Price, had he not ducked the fight he may have but beating Chisora doesn't prove that.q

I suspect everyone's guilty of this now and then because it's human nature, so this isn't a dig, but I reckon this is probably what Adam was talking about when he referred to you moving the goal posts based on your disike of Fury, Hammersmith.

You say that Fury had to fight and beat Price for us to say that he's better than him, but evidently in your view Joshua wouldn't have to fight and beat Fury (or any of the other ranked contenders of a similar ilk) to prove that he's better than him / them, because you're already sure that he is. Why does Fury need to get the result in that scenario but Joshua doesn't?

Moreover, after saying that Fury was going to lose to Chisora last year and that he had no chance, you gave him zero credit when he did win in any case and still couldn't acknowledge that he's just a better fighter than Chisora is. Doesn't really suggest that you're willing to give Fury a fair shake, fella.

I'm not moving any goalposts at all, my stance on the matter is really quite simply; in my personal opinion AJ is a more talented heavyweight than Fury.

That Fury has beaten Chisora which is the only difference between their records is immaterial, it doesn't make him anything more than he is, a slow lumbering unco-ordinated boxer who can't throw a legal jab. I don't need to see Joshua beat up on people like Hammer, Cunningham or Nascimento to change my opinion on that. It is somewhat different to being proved right or wrong which can only be done inside the ring hence why I disagree anyone is wrong in their assertion that Fury is better than Price.

As for Fury being more deserving of a shot, he simply isn't; the moment he beats someone like Pulev, Chagaev, Povetkin, Jennings, Stiverne or any other ranked Heavyweight that may change. As already highlighted a pair of wins over Chisora are not enough for me to think one is more deserving than the other.

Who was more deserving of a featherweight title shot Lomachenko or Selby?

Joshua wouldnt go near a title shot with Klitschko. Fury will have a go though.

Bet Joshua could get a shot if he wanted one.

Its how good you are, not how many fights you have had.