Would Khan get credit for beating Manny?

First topic message reminder :

It looks like this might happen in the first quarter of 2016(which would annoy me as that would mean Khan being out the ring for close to a year again). Arum has stated he is talking to Khan's team about the fight. I have my doubts it will happen as uncle Al and uncle Bob don't get on but assuming it does happen wil Khan get credit if he beats Manny?

After all Manny is 37(closer to 38 when the fight takes place). He has not looked that great lately and is coming off a one sided loss against Floyd(no shame there). He is also coming off a shoulder operation.

So if Khan beats Manny does he get any credit?

Rios and Algieri beat top fighters to get Manny did they ??

Provo better than Alexander is he ???

No he is not

A large part of the dislike directed towards Khan may well be race related but he does himself no favours at all with the complete turd he spews everytime  a microphone is put in front of him.

A large part of the reason he is disliked may have something to do with his delusions of grandeur, his self proclaimed superiority over other fighters...fighters he is unwilling to step into the ring with and yes, talking about himself in the third person!

I have no issue with his race, it is refreshing to see a British Asian boxer become a household name as he has, however it is obvious his career has been carefully managed since his defeats to Garcia, Peterson to a lesser degree, Prescott.

Boxing fans don't like to be made fools off.

Khan may be able to kid joe public that he's on the same level as Mayweather/Manny and the obvious choice to fill Floyd's shoes as the next PPV star but the truth is his opponents are carefully picked and fit a certain mould, good boxers they may be but typically they can't punch for sh!t.

Since getting chinned by Prescott, Khan has only fought three fighters who could bang, Maidana, Garcia and to a lesser extent, Peterson. He lost to two of them and was extremely lucky he didn't get stopped by the other.

Khan would get more respect and fans if he actually backed up some of his outlandish claims and fought the likes of Brook, Thurman or Porter, Garcia, Matthyse, Provodnikov etc

He seems to be determined to chase big money fights that offer no negative drawbacks should he lose, for example Floyd & Manny. In other words, his team are acutely aware that should he lose to any other fighter, barring the above, his career is effectively over.

All boxers are protected to a certain extent but at some point he is going to have to be put in with a genuine puncher at welterweight and i don't believe he has any confidence in his ability to take the power of the top guys in the division.

Going back to the issue of race, it is interesting to note the kind of respect and adulation Naz gets on forums in comparison to Khan.

Hamed remains one of my favourite british fighters, yes he was arrogant but he backed it up was fearless in the ring and a natural character outside of it.

The level of confidence he had in his own ability was awe inspiring and i don't believe he would have ducked any other fighter.

I don't believe the same can be said of Khan.

The reason Hamed gets respect is because he was a real fighter.

I don't think people on THIS forum hate Khan because of race.

What does that even mean, Hamed was a real fighter?

Naz has took his share on here for being a bully that quit when someone gave him a slap...

Khan will be more respected when he retires...

Time heals all wounds..

Naz has a better record.....But boom boom and Kelly aside he didn't beat that much..

I mean he really was world class.

Khan is good, but nowhere near the level portrayed by some.

Hamed was exciting inside the ring outside he was a complete a$$ehole, as junior Whitter remarked, there was a great friendly atmosphere in the gym but as soon as Hamed walked in the atmosphere went down hill.

Hamed as a boxer is respected as a person absolutely not, but the best fighter he ever fought beat him and he quit.

"The reason Hamed gets respect is because he was a real fighter.

I don't think people on THIS forum hate Khan because of race"


Neither do i but some of the abuse he gets on other sites is without justification.

It's a shame because he is a supremely gifted boxer and from what i can gather a very down to earth lad outside of the ring, who does a lot for charity.

Khan is world class....

I don't think anyone has ever suggested Khan was near Hamed's level, you pay too much attention to the idiotic minority and subsequently seem to get offended by it.

I'm a racist. There, I said it. Funny though as it only developed a few years ago, coinciding with when he started acting like a monumental d*ck!

It's gotten worse though, Prince Patel has made me a racist with tourettes syndrome.

Also, I find the racism strangely selective based upon personality?

Once upon a time Khan did more than waffle.

Im not really too sure whether the dislike of Khan is race related. I guess some of it is. Theres denying he talks an awful lot of bollox which can make him look like a real muppet.

If you compare him to say David Haye for example, he does seem to get a rough ride. Haye was a total conman next to Khan but seems to be much more popular with much less questoning of his credentials despite Khan delivering far more value for money and possessing a record that makes Hayes look like a piece of p1ss.

I've never hated Amir Khan, just think he's as good as he thinks he is.

Watched him on unrelated boxing shows and comes over as a decent fella, never comes over as  nasty or obnoxious.

All Khan threads like this are always popular....Unfortunately Brook's aren't....

You either like Khan or you don't which is good for his marketability..

How many people like or dislike Brook ???...I know I'm ambivalent. .

I like Brook i just wish the IBF would sort their rankings out so he fought someone decent for his next mandatory

Nico the gman wrote:Hamed was exciting inside the ring outside he was a complete a$$ehole, as junior Whitter remarked, there was a great friendly atmosphere in the gym but as soon as Hamed walked in the atmosphere went down hill.

Hamed as a boxer is respected as a person absolutely not, but the best fighter he ever fought beat him and he quit.

The point is that fighters are judged on what they do in the ring and Hamed may have been a bell end in the real world but his showmanship and achievements inside the ring ensure he will be remembered as a British great.

On the other side of the coin, the British public doesn't appear to accord Khan any respect for his achievements and he is a divisive figure that i would suggest, is generally regarded as being a chinless ducker.

Whatever Hamed was outside of the ring, he was undoubtedly a character and a natural showman who gave some of the most entertaining post fight interviews i've seen.

To some extent Khan reminds me of Wayne Rooney, another polarising sportsman, who sparks heated discussion when attempting to evaluate his achievements. Some say they are rubbish, others argue they are world beaters, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle

Far from offended Hammer. This is my way of debating. I come across aggressive but trust me, I'm laughing the whole time.

You guys don't even realize I'm winding you up in half the threads. Sometimes im serious, others I disagree for the craic and exaggerate.

wheelchair1991 wrote:I like Brook i just wish the IBF would sort their rankings out so he fought someone decent for his next mandatory

Yep I like Brook but he's fighting dross unfortunately, mind that seems the way of the boxing world at the moment, and unification is a dirty word.

He has a great win over Porter, but that is it.

Still would pick him to beat Khan.

B.A. BARACUS wrote:

Nico the gman wrote:Hamed was exciting inside the ring outside he was a complete a$$ehole, as junior Whitter remarked, there was a great friendly atmosphere in the gym but as soon as Hamed walked in the atmosphere went down hill.

Hamed as a boxer is respected as a person absolutely not, but the best fighter he ever fought beat him and he quit.

The point is that fighters are judged on what they do in the ring and Hamed may have been a bell end in the real world but his showmanship and achievements inside the ring ensure he will be remembered as a British great.

On the other side of the coin, the British public doesn't appear to accord Khan any respect for his achievements and he is a divisive figure that i would suggest, is generally regarded as being a chinless ducker.

Whatever Hamed was outside of the ring, he was undoubtedly a character and a natural showman who gave some of the most entertaining post fight interviews i've seen.

To some extent Khan reminds me of Wayne Rooney, another polarising sportsman, who sparks heated discussion when attempting to evaluate his achievements. Some say they are rubbish, others argue they are world beaters, the truth is probably somewhere in the middle

I believe that's what I said with regards to Hamed being exciting in the ring.

Brook v Khan is one of the very few times i cannot decide who i favour to win
I doubt it happen in 2016 though if Khan figh Pacman in the first half of the year. I hope Brook fight Bradley next year if he beats Chaves and Bradley beat Rios

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:All Khan threads like this are always popular....Unfortunately Brook's aren't....

You either like Khan or you don't which is good for his marketability..

How many people like or dislike Brook ???...I know I'm ambivalent. .

Audley Harrison was another fighter who triggered a lot of debate, particularly in the early part of his professional career, when he was being lauded as the next great Brit Heavyweight and successor to Lennox lewis.

Unfortunately his flaws were only too obvious to see and it was clear, even from his BBC days, that he wasn't cut out for the top flight and was likely to get sparked the first time he stepped up in class.

Reminds me a lot of Khan and not just the olympic achievements etc. Audley talked a lot of bollox and was nowhere near as good as he was portrayed.

His marketability also went down the toilet when he took on a decent fighter who could bang and got his backside handed to him. As soon as his myth was shattered, he became a side show.

The same will happen to Khan, another defeat or two at the hands of a top welter and his re-emergence as a 'world class' fighter under the tutelage of Virgil Hunter will be exposed as just another scam to con the public.

Ok from now on I'm being serious. No p1ss taking or looming to argue for the sake of it.

It's the boxing thread...We shouldn't be reporting posts..

Leave that for the girly sports..

I agree. Watched 3 Tubbs fights earlier.

He was fast.

Khan is Britain's most famous boxer. Pretty successful too. That brings more hatred than race. How much more hatred did Froch and Haye get as they got bigger?

B.A. BARACUS wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:All Khan threads like this are always popular....Unfortunately Brook's aren't....

You either like Khan or you don't which is good for his marketability..

How many people like or dislike Brook ???...I know I'm ambivalent. .

Audley Harrison was another fighter who triggered a lot of debate, particularly in the early part of his professional career, when he was being lauded as the next great Brit Heavyweight and successor to Lennox lewis.

Unfortunately his flaws were only too obvious to see and it was clear, even from his BBC days, that he wasn't cut out for the top flight and was likely to get sparked the first time he stepped up in class.

Reminds me a lot of Khan and not just the olympic achievements etc. Audley talked a lot of bollox and was nowhere near as good as he was portrayed.

His marketability also went down the toilet when he took on a decent fighter who could bang and got his backside handed to him. As soon as his myth was shattered, he became a side show.

The same will happen to Khan, another defeat or two at the hands of a top welter and his re-emergence as a 'world class' fighter under the tutelage of Virgil Hunter will be exposed as just another scam to con the public.

Can't compare Audley to Khan....Audley attracted ridicule.

Calzaghe got more popular the more he achieved

Calzaghe gets more respect now than he used to...Rightly so.

He was a cherry picker back in the day..

You can get more popular and more hated at the same time. It's called getting more famous. I know plenty of Calzaghe haters.

Manny will batter Khan, its an easy fight for him

If he won and won in style, he would get massive credit.

Needs to stop talking about Manny as a stepping stone though.

Khan will own him with his speed and jab..

Depends whether Manny can catch him..

Do you not think Pacquiao catch Khan with timing. Pacquiao is much better boxer than being credited.

Also Roach will know how to get to Khan.

Pac will need to be considerably shot for me to pick Khan.

Depends what really happens in sparring. One of them might go in lacking confidence. I think Manny is still intimidating to most

Taller.....Quicker....with a top jab....

Nobody outboxed Hearns...

I agree about hearns, but Khan ain't that good.

Tommy could of been the greatest ever Welter. In a h2h he is right up there.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:

B.A. BARACUS wrote:

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:All Khan threads like this are always popular....Unfortunately Brook's aren't....

You either like Khan or you don't which is good for his marketability..

How many people like or dislike Brook ???...I know I'm ambivalent. .

Audley Harrison was another fighter who triggered a lot of debate, particularly in the early part of his professional career, when he was being lauded as the next great Brit Heavyweight and successor to Lennox lewis.

Unfortunately his flaws were only too obvious to see and it was clear, even from his BBC days, that he wasn't cut out for the top flight and was likely to get sparked the first time he stepped up in class.

Reminds me a lot of Khan and not just the olympic achievements etc. Audley talked a lot of bollox and was nowhere near as good as he was portrayed.

His marketability also went down the toilet when he took on a decent fighter who could bang and got his backside handed to him. As soon as his myth was shattered, he became a side show.

The same will happen to Khan, another defeat or two at the hands of a top welter and his re-emergence as a 'world class' fighter under the tutelage of Virgil Hunter will be exposed as just another scam to con the public.

Can't compare Audley to Khan....Audley attracted ridicule.

Not in the early part of his career.

He was earmarked as a future world champion after his gold medal and turned professional with much fanfare.

The fact the BBC gave him a million pound contract to televise his first ten fights, demonstrates just how much was expected of him.

Lennox lewis himself, championed Audley as his successor. It's worth remembering that he was undefeated for the first 4 years of his pro career and it was only after losses to Danny Williams and Sprott that his career hit the skids and he became a subject of ridicule.

Like Khan, Audley also bypassed his domestic rivals and relocated to the states, deeming his British rivals unworthy of sharing a ring with him.

The BBC's Ben Dirs admitted the BBC were clueless when it came to Audley..

Khan is a good boxer. Was a great amateur.

I do think he has conned some. He has some decent tools and is hard to outbox.

However he has struggled loads and has two heavy losses (never avenged)

Lewis fought the guys that beat him, as have other great champions. khan could of had a rematch anytime he wanted with Prescott or Garcia. His team didn't want to know.

They were two heavy losses. I could be wrong, but I would genuinely be surprised if Manny doesn't smash Khan.

In my opinion he has been poorly managed.

Everytime Khan has been beaten his team have blamed the trainer and sacked him. Jorge Rubio, Roach, both have been made scapegoats for Khan's defeats.

I believe his decision not to rematch Prescott was a major mistake. It has cast a shadow on his subsequent career and has left a question mark, that lasts to this day, about his hunger, bottle and punch resistance.

Yes be should of rematched Briedis.

Unless he had an immediate rematch the fight didn't make sense. It wasn't too long after that he moved up to fight Kotelnik and outgrew the Prescott rematch. He's beaten a lot of quality fighters since that defeat and all are far better than Prescott. Time to leave that one go.

Garcia on the other hand he should have rematched. He did have to adjust to a new trainer though and rebuild. Garcia was busy with Matthysse so there might have been an ideal timing issue for both. Sure I've read on the past that Garcia turned the fight down.

With regards Manny, I think he stops Khan. Easy fight for Manny.

B.A. BARACUS wrote:Going back to the issue of race, it is interesting to note the kind of respect and adulation Naz gets on forums in comparison to Khan.

What made you compare the two? Naz is of Yemeni descent while Khan is of Pakistani descent, two different countries separated by over 2000 miles.

I'm the opposite of the people you mention on the forums. I never cared for Naz that much, but I like Khan.

Khan said yesterday he will use Manny as "bait" to get his dream fight withMayweather, he needs to let go now he's like a jealous ex

He is a joker. I can't wait to see him doing the chicken dance again.

I think I jumped to conclusions, he does say WHEN I beat Manny, but every fighter does that, wasn't as disrespectful when I saw the interview clip

However Manny will smash him into next week

Yes but you are biased....I mean you wrote the Manny slapped May in slow motion thread...

Manny has a punchers chance.

I think Manny slaps him silly. Even if he is slightly passed it. He will find Khans jaw and he will break it.