Taylorslade

I had a good look about to see if this has been posted on here before, I couldn't find it, but if it indeed has, then please accept my most in-sincere apologies....

I enjoyed them....

What did Haye actually say or do that was that bad? I dont recall comments about the Klitschko's old dear or anything sinister like that.

He never said anything out of line, it's simply the fact that he spent two fucking years talking about how he was going to knock Wladimir & Vitali out, and how he was much better than both of them, that they were both frauds and so on.

 

Now, that's all well & good. So long as you can at least come close to backing up what you say.

 

If Haye had went in there, and managed to rock Wladimir a few times, maybe knocked him down or something but lost the fight then I'm sure there would have been a lot of interest in a rematch.

 

As it was he went in and did fuck all, exept continually throw himself to the ground to try and get points taken away from Wladimir. Did the Sky Box Office commentary team mention the fact that Adam Booth (Haye's trainer) had spent most of the fighter information seminar the previous day going over & over the idea of Klitschko holding and pushing opponents around illegally with the referee? As one US commentator put it, when Klitschko got a point taken away it was a point won for Haye by Booth the previous day.

 

Top all of that off by him immediately taking his boot off after the decision was announced to show everyone his broken toe, and you have a pretty cringeworthy performance all round by Haye.

 

When you compare him to the last great heavyweight from these shores it really is sad. Lewis was a classy guy and a superb fighter. Haye's a moron.

 

Every boxer in history has said before a fight that hes the better man and he will win. Is Audley Harrison a moron for saying he would knock Haye out? Well maybe actually.

 

Booth didnt win Haye a point, Wladimir kept putting his arms over the top of Haye and pushed him down and even threw him on one occasion, he was rightly penalised.

 

It really annoys me that the British public automatically see anyone that loses in Sport as a failure, everytime an England team returns home trophyless its a 'debacle', everytime a boxers loses a fight hes a 'fraud' and every time any British team loses in Football, Rugby, Cricket etc they are seen as hopeless, despite them usually getting to finals and achieving more than most other teams.

 

Sport has to have a winner and a loser in most cases, David Haye hasnt got to where he is because hes a 'moron', hes beaten alot of guys and boxed very well in the process. He was beaten on Saturday by a very good boxer who by most peoples books boxed one of his best fights to date. Haye landed some good blows and so did Wlad and in the end Wladimir was the better fighter. No more, no less.

If Adam Booth hadn't of spent most of the week leading up to the fight kicking up a fuss about Wladimir's tactics of leaning on a guy, then that point deduction would not of taken place. This is just one of many tricks which trainers, managers etc always do, especially when their man is boxing away from home.

Listen, as I said before the weekend, I've been following David ever since the World Amatuer championships, I was there and saw him lose to Odlanier Solis to come home with a Silver medal, but I knew he was a bit special just by seeing certain moves which he made, so I kept my eye on him ever since. I've seen him fight at the York Hall also, and was there in France when beat Jean-Marc Mormeck and the Macarinelli fight, so it's fair to say that I can give a fair comment here. I've been in Boxing all of my life, my dad and all of his five brothers boxed, three of them turned professional, and my great-grandfather was one of the "House Seconds" for the historic National Sporting Club, and during his time there he worked the corners of such fighters as Ted Kid Lewis, Bombardier Wells, Jimmy Wilde, Micky Walker...you get the point. The reason I'm including this in my post, is just to show that I'm not the sort who gets carried away with current fighters when they have a few victories and jump on their bandwagon without knowing any better. I attend quite a lot of top level amateur shows and have done for years, competing in some of them during the years of 1996-2004, so I've seen a few guys who have become stars, and I almost always remain impartial when it comes to watching these fighters who I have kept an eye on for a few years, but with David Haye, I'll be honest, I always thought he was very special and would fulfill his goals, one of the main things he had going for him (but no control over) was the timing of his career. He came along at just the right time and I felt that he had a brilliant opportunity to grab what he wanted.

While it is true that all fighters do indeed say they are going to win, that they will do this and do that but unfortunatley for David, he himself left very little room for failure with some of the things he said before the fight.

The worst thing, I believe, is that David spent years telling anyone who would listen that he would not be another one of those guys who would just give up after the first few rounds and just let Wladimir pepper him with the jab and hypnotize him with it.

The tactics were ALL WRONG. When you are fighting a guy who's whole game is about controlling the pace, commanding the centre of the ring, and always needing to be "on top"....then why on earth would you allow him to do those things, Haye needed to jab with Wlad (and if you think that is nonsense, then re-watch rounds 3-5, where Haye was out-jabbing Wlad) use more foot-feignts and throw more body punches to move Wlad back. Whenever Haye advanced, Wladimir done what he always does and cannot change...he got scared and begins to panic.

Wladimir is a very good technician, but he wasn't doing anything special that forced Haye to perform in the way he did. If Klitschko was, for instance, throwing that solid straight right hand through the middle whenever David advanced or came forward, then that would be fine and it would explain such a non-effort from Haye, similar to Hatton Vs Mayweather, Ricky couldnt get going and get inside properly because Floyd was shaking him right down to his boots with right hand leads whenever he moved forward, a few rounds went by and Ricky more or less gave up because he couldnt implement his plans because Floyd was killing them before they could even get going. He got careless and we know what happened there. If that was the case for Haye against Wladimir, then fair enough and we would be able to say Haye tried his best but he was up against a better fighter who had the superior physical, mental and technical ability to execute his game plan.

You can not go into the ring with a man of Wladimir's size, proportions and ability, without the correct tactics and the physical and mental toughness to execute them. I like Adam Booth and I think he has a very good boxing brain, but the tactics that David was using were basic, to say the very least....crude and rudimentary....downright STUPID is more accurate. Having said that, I would be shocked if those were indeed the tactics which the Hayemaker team came up with. David blames his toe for not being able to execute the plans he had, well....Ive had the same injury and it's no fun at all, but I also know what the adrenaline rush from boxing infront of a crowd feels like....not to mention the syringe full of Lidocaine that the Doctor apparently whacked into it 5 minutes before the fight, so that excuse doesn't fly for me. His toe did look in bad shape, but it didn't seem to bother him during the public workout a couple days before, and like I say, adrenaline and the Lidocaine would surely of been enough.

I posted in this boxing thread last week that I was concerned about Wladimir's speed. There was lots of talk and rightly so, about Haye's speed, but I think that Wladimir's speed is massivley underrated, both hand speed and foot speed. He turns that right hand over like a bolt of lightning. So I think David was shocked himself with the speed of Wlad, and it knocked his confidence all over the place because David was supposed to be the fast one and it was one of the only ways for him to win.

Winning and losing aside, though, if you asked people before the fight what they felt would be the worst outcome, for the sport of boxing....then I'm fairly sure that almost all of them would say something like "We really do not need another farcical fight, not with the state the division is in right now, and definatley not with such a massive worldwide audience watching....we need this fight to shine and show that Heavyweight boxing is still something special."

Another interesting observation I had in the Stadium, was the ring-walks. I watched the video of the fight when I got back from Hamburg, and the ring-walks looked as dangerous as they did when I was there....well, David Haye's ring walk, I should say. Haye and Klitschko walked to the ring through two different pathways once they emerged from those makeshift TV sets that provided those elaborate ring entrances. Well, as everyone noticed who watched the fight on TV, it was chaos when Haye made his way through the crowd, the security were seriously unprepared, and because the few security guys were trying so hard to just move forward with eachother, they left Haye un-protected, which is why one of the crowd members wrapped his arms around Haye's waist and lifted him up, it was crazy. I've never seen such a breach in security, and certainly not in a situation like that. They were lucky really, because this could've turned ugly as it only takes one person to start fighting in a crowd and it soon spreads. Anyway, there were no barriers separating Haye as he made his way to the ring, but there were barriers in place on Klitschko's route and much more security, so with this being a K2 promotion, it might've been a little skull-duggery, I'm not saying this effected the fight, but it was very dangerous and someone could've been hurt.

I will post my analysis of the fight later tonight or tomorrow, because for now I'm going to dig into my "Archive", as I call it, which is my spare room that I converted, which houses my fight footage collection, I have a few thousand VHS, about 400 DVD's, but my favourites are my film reel collection, it's not often that I get the projector out and take the reels out of their tins and run them, but I'm going to immerse myself in some of my favourite fights from the pre-war period, and try to remove the sour taste from my mouth that I received in Hamburg.

I still don't get why everyone dislikes Haye and thinks Klitschko is some sort of amazing boxer who could beat anyone, he looks a decidely average fighter who's been put on his arse more then once by average fighters. Even Manny Steward looks like he doesn't wanna be in his corner.

The general impression I get is that pretty much 90% of the people who post in this thread like Haye.

Wladimir, in my opinion, is....well....to use a Michael Gomez line ; "A World-class fighter, with World-class vulnerabilities".

I just want to say to everyone, yes I am 'pro-Haye', but I have been since I attended an amateur show in which he took part in one of his last ever contests with the headguard on, so I definatley am not hopping on the wagon. But in evaluating this fight, I am still remaining impartial when it comes to analysing the contest and making predictions. Speaking of predictions, I will be making mine tomorrow, after the weigh-in. Until then, I will continue to do what I've done for the last few weeks and is something I do for all high-level fights; which is getting out my DVD career sets of the fighters involved, and studying them for the main factors which go into making the most informed predictions possible.

Ebb, here's a link where you can get the Boxing news specials....I highly recommend the 100 years of Boxing news and the Boxing news annual 2011, in particular. Well worth the few extra quid on the price tag. They are made to the highest standards, are very deep in terms of content quantity and they contain some of the best articles possible. The 100 years of Boxing news is the best of the best, it is basically a compilation of the best articles and moments since they began publication in 1910. The best

I bought the Haye V Klit special from Boxing news a couple months back and it's very good. For a fiver it's a great buy and it's a great addition to the recent specials from BN like 100 years of Boxing news and Boxing news 2011 annual. It's made to almost the same high quality standards which they are also. They evaluate from both sides, with opinions and predictions from almost everyone possible, the best part in my opinion, are the retrospective comparisons with key fights from the past.

I'd also like to remind everyone that the new issue of Boxing Monthly is out tomorrow, this is my favourite publication.

I would also like to let everyone know that Skybet are doing a very good promotion which they bill as "Watch the Haye V Klitschko fight for free". Well, almost. First, you must purchase the fight, then register an account with Skybet, then you must place a

I've been listening to the Ric Flair highspots interview (yes, all 4 discs) as an MP3 in the car over the past few weeks, and found it very enjoyable overall.

 

But it really grated me around 3/4 way in, how it was 'Hunter and Shawn' this, and 'Hunter and Shawn' that. I know they're friends and i'm far from being the biggest HBK fan on this board, but it really got on my nerves how he was so far up their arses.

 

Also thought it was funny when he said he would never, ever sign for TNA.

I had the same thoughts, especially regarding TNA, but it was bound to happen and one thing I've always found with these wrestlers, as everyone else has, is that they always go back on their word. No big deal, though, it's the nature of the business, really. I don't want to turn this into a 'Flair should retire' thing, but the one thing that sticks in my mind, is how much WWE pushed the boat out for him regarding his retirement, Wrestlemania with Michaels and everything that went with that, and the roster paying tribute to him as much as they did on Raw. Of course, bullshit retirements seem to be tradition in wrestling, and I don't imagine that will ever change. It isn't something that I have a problem with, but the one thing that sticks in my mind, is that he could of went out on such a good note considering the show of respect that WWE showed him, instead though, he went from that, to getting his arse out in that Streetfight match with Jay Lethal on TNA television.

The Flair-off with Jay Lethal was great and I have watched those segments multiple times now, because I enjoyed them so much and I'm glad he stayed in the game (no pun intended) and done them. But watching him run around in his underwear hanging off, showing his ass while full of blood was for me, very sad to see and quite a fall from grace.

I always hated the old shoot interviews that had matches interupting the interview. The ones with matches at the end were ok I suppose.

I thought the shoot interviews with the matches interrupting now and then were great for providing great perspective on the matches being spoken of, especially for matches with "incidents" in. I thought the Taz shoot interview was great for putting the footage in at just the right time when Taz had just finished explaining them.

I think the best shoot will always be the 2000 Cornette one.

I've got to disagree with you there, mate. The RF Video staff shoot interview being my personal choice. Those lads are hard as fuck.

Aye a will do, just looking through my old Rob Butcher/GWI lists which is what reminded me of the Vader shoot and others which included matches.

 

Not sure if anyone will have these available for sale, well especially in DVD format as I dont have a video player now. I've not come across any so far anyway, been searching all night and just found the re released ones with the matches taken out.

I kept a few of those ; Taz (Which is two tapes), Jake Roberts, HBK and the second New Jack one.

For me, the Taz one is by far the best in terms of what you were speaking of, where the matches are cut into it in certain places, of course they are in chronological order, so when Taz is answering questions about his early career and getting into ECW, he mentions a match with Candido from around 92 that was from one of ECW's early bar shows, well that match cuts in just as he finishes speaking of that. There's also some great Fancam footage on and some from Hardcore TV an stuff that wasn't shown much. So in my opinion, I think that one is the best example, it was shot while Taz was still in ECW though, so that might be a positive or negative, depending on which way you look at it.

The others all have matches on from places like World Class, AWA and a couple from Stampede in Jake's case, but New Jack has only a few fancams of some really wild brawls from some ECW house shows in both 99 and 2000, and then I think there is a couple matches on from Jersey all pro, or something like that.

Victor Ortiz? That's a good fight!

You're joking, right?

Nope, I think it'll be a decent scrap. I've just resigned myself to the fact that Mayweather vs Pacquiao will never happen.

Yeah it is a good fight. At first I was pissed, I still am a little, because I'm in no doubt that Floyd is delaying this fight as long as he can until Pacquiao has started to show real signs of deteriation. I'm definatley not one of those "floid iz scarred" idiots or "manee iz on drugz" fools, i've gave both fighters the benefit of the doubt throughout this whole process, which is now almost 3 years long. Who's telling the truth and who's lying can never really be determined in situations like this in boxing, unfortunatley, but the only thing I'm certain of is something which I've gone over before; everytime Pacquiao is free to negotiate, Floyd seems to disappear from the face of the Earth, however, when he is contractually tied up, Mayweather IMMEDIATELY surfaces and taunts Pacquiao and says he#s ready to fight but Pacquiao wouldn't take the tests etc. it's happened more than once and it leads me to believe that he really doesn't want this fight, not right now anyway. A few weeks ago, a he done an interview which was filmed in his garage, or at least a storage room next to his home where he keeps all of his gloves, shorts, gowns etc that he uses in his fights. Anyway, he showed an orange and black set of fur and leather shorts an gown which he said he had made for the Pacquiao fight. He may very well of had those made for that fight but it is hardly solid evidence that Pacquiao doesn't want to fight. In the same video, Mayweather claimed to have "a contract which I (mayweather) signed that included the testing I wanted, but Manny wouldn't sign at the last minute", that he said he would show to the world. That was about 5 weeks ago, now I don't know about anyone else, but if I had such a contract and was the one who wanted the fight yet was being shown to be otherwise, then I would show that, certainly before showing an outfit that doesn't prove anything. Anyway, I'm leaving that subject alone now because Im sick of going over it, and it's fucking retarded that two of the finest fighters on planet earth can't come together for a fight that would be the biggest of the modern-era and the biggest money maker of all time and a whole other load of acolades.

-----

Changing subjects, it seems that the heat between Amir Khan and Sky Sports seems to be turning into a bigger issue than what most thought it would be. Sky and Khan have been going back and forth since the Malignaggi fight (which ended up on ITV) over problems that primarily revolve around Team Khan's infamous greed. For anyone unaware of that, Khan's purse is not the only problem, if it were then Sky would oblige without quarrel, but Team Khan (excluding training team of Roach and Ariza and Golden Boy) is made up of more than a few of Khan's family members who ask for large sums of money and in a situation like that, fights no matter how big or small, have to be Pay-per-view ventures to ensure that everyone gets the money they want. Because of that, the undercard of Khan's shows are very poor indeed, it wasn't so bad for his last two fights with Frank Warren, but the Mcloskey undercard was especially poor, and got worse after a number of pull-outs. Sky were absolutley right to pull it from PPV to one of their other channels, but that wasn't good enough for team Khan who used the excuse that Sky sports 3 and 4 werent big enough for Khan and they took their fight to PrimeTime, unsurprisingly a PPV outlet....after Sky had promoted the hell out of the fight through Ringside, Between the ropes, Sky sports news and their vast TV advertising capabilities. Khan-Mcloskey done well on Primetime and Team Khan felt advocated, yet anyone can see that it was Sky's promotional qualities that pushed the fight that switched at the very last minute to the other channel. Strangley, when it was announced that the Mcloskey fight would be on Primetime, Khan stated that Sky did not want a future Khan V Timothy Bradley fight either, even though the network had built the potential fight through many of it's programmes, and even bought fights they normally would not, with the sole purpose of building the Khan-Bradley fight, it seemed Khan had an agender.

Another row has broken out between Team Khan and Sky, after the TV giant, rather bravely said no to Khan Vs Judah. This time, Khan's US backers Golden Boy, have made strong threats which ulitmatley amount to blackmail, promising that if Sky refuse Khan's fights then no more Golden Boy Promotions fights will be offered to Sky. I commend Sky for taking such a position against Team Khan, as these are tough times for the general public and I'm glad they have put their foot down. The truth is, that yes, Sky do make a lot of money from boxing, but they also put massive effort into their coverage of the sport, which is improving rapidly. The amount of boxing programming on Sky has dramatically improved since 1 year ago, even more so 2-3 years ago, and it's unfortunate that Team Khan think they can come in and ask for any price they like from a broadcaster which puts a vast amount into the British boxing scene from David Haye, all the way down to the excellent British title fight which we saw on Saturday night from Liverpool. It is an even bigger shame, when you compare the effort that Sky put in, and compare it to the fact that BBC will not even show the sport. Certain channels will no doubt pick up the pieces of the Sky-Khan-GBP fallout, yet none of those such channels will put in the kind of effort which Sky have and continue to do. Sky have some great fighters signed and big fights on the horizon. I feel that even if it takes a while, that Khan and GBP will at some point come cap in hand and realise their mistakes.

I would also like to remind everyone, that Amir Khan - the same fighter who has stated that "Sky has gave me no backing whatsoever and have shown me no loyalty or belief at any stage"....

That is the same Amir Khan which Sky ultimatley said "No" to the David Haye Vs Wladimir Klitschko fight that was proposed for April this year, and had to be scrapped. Why? because Sky Sports had kept that date for Amir Khan and wouldn't budge on the matter, subsequently recieving the wrath of the boxing world for a few weeks. They done that, even though Khan hadn't even announced an opponent yet and wouldn't for another month. I'd say that qualifies as "belief" and "loyalty". Certainly when no one outside of Bolton would of battered an eyelid over Khan being left without a TV date, it would of been a minor sacrifice in the eyes of many.

Khan and GBP Vs Sky

There is no way Floyd can be inactive for a year, come back and fight Pacquiao from the offset. If the Ortiz who beat Berto shows up, it will be a tough fight for Mayweather and he needs to be careful. Whether if both he and Pac win means they get it on, well who knows. The main sticking point is the drug testing and right now it doesnt seem like that will change.

Floyd spars weekly at least, without fail. And why has he been inactive for so long? It's his own fault, he should of been doing this months ago. Oh and the legal issues which were supposed to be keeping him out of the ring have vanished all of a sudden. Mayweather is normally inactive but this is especially long even for him.

There is no issue with Drug testing, don't believe it. Pacquiao agreed to Mayweather's demands in the negotiations that were held around this time last year, when everything went quiet and Mayweather's best friend Leonard Ellerbie came out and sai that there were no negotiations happening to start with, which was one of the most ridiculous things I've heard in 20 years of boxing. These negotiations which "never happened", are the same ones swhich Mayweather now claims he has a contract from.

I have a massive amount of respect for Frank Warren, I really do. He has promoted so many great nights of boxing and he's brilliant at building a fighter during the early years of their pro career, even if you don't agree with how he does it (too many fights against blown up ex-contenders who's only decent success happened in weight divisions much lighter to the one in which Frank wants them to fight his prospects in)....despite these things, Warren is great at what he does and he's a hall of famer. In my opinion, the best example of his talent for promoting, was the brilliant show that he and his company put on at Upton Park that was headlined by Kevin Mitchell Vs. Michael Katsidis fight. At that time, Mitchell was fairly popular and coming off a fine win over Breidis Prescott that turned a few heads due to the fact that the general public knew him a the guy that chinned Amir Khan, but outside of that, the only known name on Mitchell's resume was former British super-featherweight boss Carl Johansen, but it wasn't very likely that Mitchell could be the Hatton-Esque ticket seller which he would need to be in order to fill a venue such as West Ham's headquarters. Despite all of this, Warren (with the noted help of some recognisable faces on the undercard), managed to get a near enough full-house, with such a great setup that gave the event a wonderful feel to go along with the electric atmosphere.

As you can see, I have great respect for Frank Warren. However, the column which 'he' writes in the Sun every saturday, is one of the things in the boxing community which I hate. Every week, it is packed with so much negativity from beginning to end that in my opinion, does a lot of damage to boxing in this country.

The Sun, is probably the biggest of all the tabloid papers, and I believe that a lot of the men who buy the paper are possibly either casual fans who turn in only for the mega-fights, or blokes who were fans in the past that began to lose interest when the sport declined for a period about 5-6 years ago. Either of those two groups could be lured back into the sport and be willing to pay their money or tune in to watch regularly, with a little encouragment.

My point is, how the hell will people be compelled to watch after reading FW's column every week (which I believe most of them do), as it is jam packed with him basically saying that every fight is shit and all of the fighters are shit....unless he is talking about his fighters and shows, of course. I realise that he is in business and will of course say only good things about his guys, but he contradicts himself all the time when talking about what certain fighters do, even when he has praised his own fighters for doing the same.

In yesterday's column, he gives Carl Froch a little bit of praise for his accomplishments in recent years, yet he seemed to be having a heart attack over the fact that Eddie Hearn hailed Froch as one of Britain's best ever fighters or even the best. I don't agree with Hearn on the latter, but Froch has been on a great run that is quite un-paralleld in British boxing history. For me, Froch is definatley nowhere near the likes of Ted Kid Lewis and Jimmy Wilde etc, but he is further up the chart than Calzaghe, who was and is massively overrated, in my opinion. If Froch was signed to FW promotions, then you can bet your ass that he would be saying all of these things. I know that he needs to push his fighters,rather than others, but if you are going to write a full page about a guy who can do with every bit of positive press to make up for lost time, then you don't spend the majority of the ink on saying negative shit about him.

Froch is on a roll right now that should be celebrated, and should not have potential fans just looking the other way because Warren practically told them not to bother watching.

David Haye is another example that highlights Warren's hypocracy. After slaughtering Enzo Macarrinelli (please retire, by the way), Frank Warren went on like a man possessed in trying to land Haye's signature on a contract, even going as far as offering an incredible signing on fee in the dressing room after the fight. The next week in Warren's column, of course Haye was the next great fighter etc etc, couldn't praise him enough. Haye, though, hilariously declined stating ;

"We thank Frank for sacrificing Maccarinelli, but we'd feel immense guilt if we took any more free money from Sports Network. I have a hard enough time sleeping at night as it is."

Of course, in the next column, Haye was chinny, too small, crap skills, overrated etc, and he claimed that the only plans he had in mind for him were to get him the easiest possible fights no matter how bad, but make a ton of money off the back of Haye's infamous PR antics. Yeah.

It doesn't sound like much, a column in a newspaper. But when the average person on the street, week in and week out read stuff like ; "the standard in boxing is awful now", "my old mum could flatten the Heavyweights right now" etc etc, it has a lasting effect. If the man on the street constantly hears that the HW division is fucking shocking, then they will believe it, and when a great fight does come up in that division, they wont bother, because FW told them it's all wank.

Let's say a young American heavyweight comes around, looks fucking amazing in the ring and basically has everything, and builds a record up towards a fight with our own David Haye (who for the sake of argument, beat both Klits in spectacular fashion and is undisputed champ), and everyone in the boxing trade is going absolutley gaga over it because it's such a good fight historically and artiscly. Now imagine FW writes column after column and one on the morning of the fight about how shit they are compared to Ali, Frazier, Johnson, Louis, Holmes an Tyson, and that they wouldnt last 1 round with any of the legends of the past, and declares the division still dead and rotting, even though we have this all-time cracking fight in our hands. It takes the shine off it.

I'm not saying that the division is great by any means, the majority of it is wank, but that old attitude of "Aint what it used to be", is suffocating the sport. Everybody needs to wake up and realise that the heavyweights in previous era's were special, and especially the 1968-1977 era was a period that wont be repeated. The HW division was a mess when Clay/Ali won the title for the first time, the second Liston fight was a shambles. Joe Louis had the famous "Bum of the month club" and the initial group of contenders that Tyson inherited for a short while were shit aswell, but because they just enjoyed Tyson doing what he was doing, they let him run with it and it wasn't long before good contenders started coming about for him. If all the reporters done what they do now and just badgered him with shit like "how come you aint as good on your feet as Ali?", "How come you've never had to dig deep and endure a full-distance war like Ali/Frazier 3? " etc etc.

They need to drop all of the negativity and just enjoy what we have, Haye Vs any Klit is a monster fight. Just enjoy those fights and let it work itself out, and within 5 years, some new, quality contenders will eventually flow in and make the numbers up so there wont be just 3 good fighters in the division and the rest being shit.

That was a rant, but I get fucking pissed off , man!

The link to Frank Warren's annoying article. Tip of the iceberg.

But it's another example of Floyd doing a disapearring act while Pacquiao isn't locked in a fight, and when he is, Mayweather pops up almost immedatley.

 

Yeah this is how it looks to me too. I actually would pick Floyd to beat Manny but it does appear he's making a tactical choice to make his comebacks when Pacquiao is locked into another fight. It's become the expected pattern now where Floyd is silent for months then as soon as Pacqiuao signs to fight someone else an announcement is made Mayweather's next fight soon after.

 

This reminds me of the build up to Leonard/Hagler where Leonard kept putting the fight off and even retired saying it would never happen. Then when he saw Hagler fight John Mugabi and have a tough war he thought Hagler was slipping and changed his tune and the fight was made.

 

I think this could be a similar situation and Floyd's waiting until he sees a fight where Pac looks beatable/diminished/older/slower. Then he'll suddenly want the fight made. It's risky though because who's to say Pac will slow down first? I imagine if the fight happens it will be like you say, when one of them has lost a lot of steam and the fight won't be what it could have been.

 

I can honestly see this fight never happening.

Exactly. What makes this Mayweather/Ortiz situation even more sad, is that a lot of people -many who should know better - , have fell into the trap of making the assumption that Mayweather is prepping for Pacquiao by first choosing to fight another soutpaw in Ortiz. Mayweather knew, that if he was to sign the Ortiz fight, that he could use that excuse (well, others have already done it for him now), make another purse for the taxman and then slide out of the Pacquiao situation at a later date.

Pacquiao is right when he says that Mayweather needs him more than vice versa. Pacquiao as already cemented an All-time-great resume even without having to go anywhere near Floyd. If doing what Manny has from 2000-2011 is not an ATG career then I don't know what is. In a fight, I would favour Floyd slightly, but historically, Pacquiao is a lot further up the chart than Mayweather.

Oh, and as far Marquez's tune up fight before Pacquiao....I think JMM is too much of a quality professional to get caught out, but I strongly disagree with tune up fights in any form, but especially in a situation like this.

anyone see Prizefighter this evening?

 

it was kind of a dull event until the main event which was probably one of the weirdest boxing matches ive ever seen.

 

Junior Witter looked great through the first two rounds, the commentary shit all over him but i thougt he fought perfectly for the format. It doens't help that Witter is one of the most unlikable fighters ever, i think people find it hard to say a good word about him.

 

On the other side of the tournament a Prince Naseem wannabe, Yassine El Maachi scrapped his way to final by being completely unorthodox and at times dirty as fuck. The commentary had Colin Lynes winning their semi-final bout which was super close but i was hoping for the Witter/Maachie final, which we got.

 

The actual final was bonkers, two unorhodox southpaws trying to throw single shots at each other. The 2nd round was probably the most action packed round in which a clean punch never landed ever, just a messy/scrappy affair. Round 3 came with Maachi side-stepping a Witter attack who went on to tumble out of the ring, takedown a camera man and bounce straight back in to act like nothing happened, wild wild stuff. I had Maachie winning on the strength of landing the cleaner punches, he rightfully got the nod.

 

Weirdly entertaining night of fights

It was a good show, I like Prizefighter and I think it has gave the British boxing scene a new element which it needed. I've always said that the British domestic scene is the best in the world, past and present. So many great fights and always cracking atmosphere at almost every show and Prizefighter has gave it a good shot in the arm, so to speak. I like what Hearn Jr. has done so far, hopefully he keeps it up. For me, Kell Brook is the next big star for British Boxing, I really like his style and he gets the job done in good fashion, but he's been quite inactive over the last 3 years so hopefully he can look good against Lovemore N'dou and make a statement as he pushes his career forward, and I'm sure he would like to do a better job with the Australian-Ghanain hardman than Saul Alvarez did, to start drawing a comparison as I'm sure Kell fancies his chances against Canelo.

Ebb, what's your take on the Rhodes Vs Alvarez fight? I'll post my in-depth evaluation for the fight in the morning after I've had some sleep, but I'll say this, Rhodes was my favourite fighter as a kid in the mid-late 90's when Naz was hitting his peak both commercially and artisticly, I loved watching Ryan's fights and I was disapointed that he hasn't pushed further than he has, but I think he has more than a good chance against Alvarez even though most may not agree, I'll give my reasons in the morning. I'd like to hear what others thought.

Victor Ortiz? That's a good fight!

You're joking, right? I really like Ortiz, I saw him fight live a couple of times when he was an amateur and I knew he would be a key name in and around the 140lb and 147lb divisions a good few years later when the time was right, and I still rate him now and enjoy watching his fights.

However, this fight should not be happening and all it appears to be, is Floyd having a walk to the nearest cash point. Victor - the debit card and Vegas - the local Spar garage. Unfortunatley, this is an all too familiar occurance with Floyd. I fully support any fighter trying to make as much money as possible in a profession where careers are relativley short lived, but this is taking the piss.

And of course, the Manny Pacquiao saga (that seems as though it has gone on forever) speaks for itself.

There has been so much written, maybe too much, about Mayweather Vs Pacquiao, so I'm not going to go in-depth there, but I will try and summarise my main concerns in a few sentances, as briefly and to the point as possible.....

Fights like this are EXTREMELY rare. Pound-for-Pound number 1 and number 1.a, are around the same weight division, and are almost the same age, aswell as both being at arguably the pinnacle of their dominance. Since their career pathways distanced themselves from previous rivals, and eventually got closer to eachother, they have both turned in brilliant performances which transformed the prospect of a fight between the two from an intriguing firefight pitting the classic offence Vs defence that fell in our lap as a result of the scrapped De La Hoya Vs Mayweather return....to a fight which would surely shatter all previous records, and one that would be historically signifcant both commercially and artisicly. One that would probably turn out to be one of, if not, THE biggest of the modern-era, post 1981 and the juggernaught of fistiana that was Leonard Vs Hearns. It isn't very often where you have two guys so clearly ahead of the rest of the field, and where they would also match up evenly against eachother.

And they look like pissing it down the drain....this fight should of been made after Pacquiao's mutilation of Antonio Margarito in November last year. It simply could not be any bigger than it was around that time, unfortunatley, some of the shine has been taken off it just a little bit, mainly where it matters ; the casual/mainstream audience. They were incredibly hot for the fight to be made, and it's them who take a great fight and lift it off into the stratusphere.

A year ago, or even 6 months ago, I was quite confident that this fight would get made, as the issues would be worked out and the almighty dollar would prevail once again. Now, I'm nowhere near as confident. Infact, looking closley at how everything has unfolded, the only scenario that I envisage this fight happening is at the wrong time, when one or both of them have very little left and receiving a standing count from age, dulled reflexes and wear and tear.

Imagining a fight under those circumstances, then I would rather the fight not get made.

Let's hope the right thing gets done.

EDIT---My brain is frazzled tonight after doing so much work all throughout the day, so much so that while posting this fairly hefty post that Pacquiao had all but signed for the 3rd Marquez fight. Sleep for me soon. But it's another example of Floyd doing a disapearring act while Pacquiao isn't locked in a fight, and when he is, Mayweather pops up almost immedatley. Nite guys, if there's any shite in this post then take it easy on me, I normally talk at least some sense on the subject of Boxing especially, but I'm fooking nackered.

Agreed on Frazier. I can deffo understand why he'd be bitter about it. Especially with the Uncle Tom/Gorilla comments and the death threats on his family. Ali certainly crossed the line there imo.

 

I remember I first saw the first Ali/Frazier fight not long before I saw the Thrilla in Manila doc and I was surprised that Ali/Dundee were acting like they got robbed. I know this goes on a lot in combat sports but I thought Frazier won that fight so convincingly that it was a ridiculous claim to make.

 

I'll need to dig out the DVD of the fight and watch again, but I thought the fight was pretty much still in the balance until the last round, Frazier slightly ahead, but Ali still in with a fighting chance. It's been a good few years since I watched it though, so as I say would have to dig it out again for another look.

 

Certainly think Frazier won the fight, and no way Ali was robbed as he and Dundee claimed. But similarly, Frazier moaned after the second fight (the 12 round eliminator which Ali clearly won by some distance).

 

I enjoyed the documentary but some of the claims that Frazier was level going into round 15 in Manila were pretty far fetched.

Ali was a good few rounds ahead after the 14th, and Frazier had nothing left. If he even had a remote chance of winning the fight then there's no way his corner would have pulled him out.

I agree that Ali was ahead going into the 15th of their third fight, but I have to disagree with you when you say that even if Frazier had a chance of winning then his corner would never of pulled him out. I believe that Eddie Futch really was highly concerned for Frazier's physical well-being in the future. Although I do think that the prospect of Frazier dying were a little far fetched, but not entirely ridiculous or unfounded.

I really do think that no matter what scenario was played out going into the 15th round, (both men level, Frazier slightly behind, even if Frazier was slightly ahead and just needed a strong finish), I still think Eddie Futch would've still pulled Joe out. I'm well aware that sometimes, stoppages such as this can be the product of a trainer wanting to save a fighter's credibility for another day or making their fighter look valiant in defeat, but I really feel that the great trainer saw enough risk to Frazier's health that he was willing to make such a potentially controversial decision. All of the ingredients that come together to leave a fighter permanently damaged or worse, were all there; sustained punishment to the head, exhaustion, dehydration and let's not forget the EXTREME heat. That's a bad combination, especially when Frazier was quite some time past his best aswell, and he was in all liklehood going to take some more punishment in the 15th. I don't think he would of took a shot and then hit the floor heavily and then get stretchered out, but I think he would of collapsed at some point after the last bell, or in the dressing room afterwards and who knows what would of happened then. It's worth remembering that as with practically all of Ali's fights back then, there was always a ridiculous ring invasion and chaos. If Frazier was to of taken a turn for the worst afterwards in the ring then he wouldn't of been getting an oxygen mask anytime soon, and that is the most critical element in such a situation as we know now certainly after the Michael Watson incident and subsequent law suit against the BBBofC. It's often claimed that Ali himself "collapsed", he didn't, he did hit the floor immediatley following the fight, but he was concious, just extremely tired and relieved as he himself took a lot of damage.

On a side note, the story about Ali going to Angelo Dundee after the 14th and telling him to "cut the gloves off, I've had enough", is somewhat disputed. Ali biographer Thomas Hauser said Ali did indeed verify the story to him, but it has been argued with quite some decent evidence that Ali did not want to "get in the way of a good story" and went along with it. There's a good article somewhere by Graham Houston on the subject, I'll see if I can find it later.

Something I forgot to mention when posting about documentaries ; there has been a documentary about the Benn Vs Mclellan fight and aftermath in production for quite some time now called "Fallen Soldier", although it's been around 2-3 years now since being announced and there hasn't been a trailer or interview with the maker, or anything else of that nature for quite some time now, so it may of been canned. Hopefully not.

Agree with you on Pac/Marquez 3 too Taylorslade.

 

I've thought about the weight thing and I agree I don't think it's gonna be that much of a factor. When you think about it even when Marquez was fighting at 135 he'd come into the ring at about 142-144 so the only difference here will be he won't have to sweat off that last few pounds for the weigh in.

 

Marquez came in on fight night at 145 vs Katsidis and Pacquiao came in at 148 on fight night vs Margarito. So I don't think it will be a big influence on the outcome.

 

Still got Pacquiao to win though, either by decision or late stoppage. Just think his pace and power now will be too much for a 38 year old Marquez but I think JMM will put in a good showing as always and give Pac a tougher fight than people think.

 

Out of interest who did everyone have winning the first 2 fights?

 

I had Pacquiao winning the first (thought the 3 knockdowns in round 1 and the 10-6 score was too much to overcome) and I thought Marquez won the second but you can't argue the scores. Both were really great, close fights.

Yeah that's my point exactly about the weight mate. That is also the main thing which I get pissed off with when people bring up the whole Pacquiao and PED's bollocks, and one of the things they point to is how can Manny put on as much weight, effortlessly jumping through the weight divisions. They either don't know, understand or completely disregard the fact that Pacquiao was practically a Jr. Welterweight since 2005/2006, weighing in for Featherweight and Super-Featherweight fights under or on the limit, looking quite drawn in the face and pale, however on fight night his weights consistently shot up to roughly the same each time.

Concentrating on Pacquiao/Marquez fights....in their first fight in 2004 at featherweight, they both weighed in right on 125, however, on fight night they were a significant amount more, within 1lb of eachother ; Marquez at 136, Pacquiao at 137.

Fast forward four years to 2008, this time in a Super-Featherweight contest, Marquez came in at 130, Pacquiao 1lb lighter at 129, however on fight night Marquez elevated to 141, Pacquiao going up further at 145. When you look at it like this, then it's easy to see that Manny's been a Jr Welter for a few years now, and the "dramatic, in-human size and weight gain" doesn't seem so super-human at all. I really, really don't want to go into the PED debate, it's old, boring bollocks, but I just needed to get this part in.

And to answer your question, I had the first fight a draw, and the second fight going to Marquez. Watching the footage of the verdict being read out, it's clear to see that Pacquiao felt he lost also.

Good reason to have a third fight and settle it in the ring. I'm really looking forward to this fight and I think that while everyone is entitled to an opinion, I feel that those who are slating this fight as a mis-match are way off the mark and either selling Marquez far short, or just looking for something to complain about. Pacquiao won't be around for much longer, Marquez won't either, so let's just enjoy it.

And let's face it, great fights between great fighters are so scarce and I'm really scratching my head as to why quite a few people are so down on a fight which is reminiscent of the golden age of boxing, and it's also a fight which adds a new chapter on those featherweight glory days which had it's genesis in 2001 when Marco Antonio Barerra ended the prince's domination of the 9st division and took the baton and the grand stage which Hamed practically created for the lower weights, Barrera took the baton and for the better part of the next decade it was shared amongst Pacquiao, Morales, Marquez and Barrera, resulting in a featherweight golden age.

This fight will rekindle that flame, and even if it is only for 12 rounds, I cannot wait.

Also, I'm not sure you would class this next one as an HBO documentary, as it is quite stylistically different to what most people recognise as an "HBO documentary" (things done in the vein of 24/7, Legendary nights etc), but it is listed as HBO and I'm sure they own it also. One of my personal faves, 'The Thrilla in Manila'. I'm sure we've heard all the stories about this legendary contest before, but this is a well-made documentary with plenty of great moments and even uncovers some new, quite incredible tales. In my opinion it is better than the critically acclaimed 'When we were kings' movie/documentary.

 

 

That's just a few but I'll check my collection later and post anything good that I find, as I'm sure I've missed some out.

 

Yeah I really enjoyed the Thrilla in Manila doc too and I agree it was better than When We Were Kings. The only criticism I have of the Thrilla in Manila one was there was a bit too much anti-Ali propaganda. I know Ali did go way over the top in the run up to the fight but it's a very one sided look at the event and nearly all the talking heads are from Frazier's side (except Ferdie Pacheco who was Ali's doctor and comes across as a right grumpy, irritable cretin in the interviews imo). Would've been cool to hear a more balanced view from both sides.

 

I'd highy recommend it though it's a great watch, really interesting.

 

One thing I always remember from this doc is from one of the DVD extras where they talk about Rocky which I'm sure I read was based on Frazier's life story (even right down to the bit where he's punching the meat in the slaughterhouse ). They ask why is there a statue of Rocky in Philadelphia (a fictional fuckin character) when Smokin Joe came from, trained and still lives in Philly to this day and there's no statue of him? It's gotta feel like a slap in the face.

 

I did come out of the doc thinking it would be nice if they could bury the hatchet and put it all in the past before one of them dies. Ali seems to want to but Joe's still (understandably) bitter about it.

Yeah, I think they made it with the idea of giving Frazier the limelight for a change as he seems to be treated as somewhat of an afterthought in most productions surrounding them. Myself, I don't really follow the opinion that Ali should be held up and heavily criticised for his conduct towards Frazier from 1971 onwards, but I do think that Joe was indeed very good to Ali, and Muhammad let smokin' Joe down, going beyond the borderline of promoting the fights between the two men. Looking at it from Frazier's point of view makes it easier to understand how he has became so bitter, I mean can you imagine, the biggest fight in boxing history (1971, MSG), and you won it convincingly, yet you are still treated as the b-side whenever mentioned, so much so that instead of pointing towards what was a masterful display of offensive boxing and a perfect strategy divised by Yancy Durham and Eddie Futch, instead people celebrate Ali's ability to get up from that booming left hook and subsequent knockdown in the 15th round, rather than Frazier's ability to land with that punch countless times during the fight prior to the last round. Ali is held up as some kind of demi-god, whereas Frazier is oft-forgotten. Not Ali's fault, but it's easier to understand when you think that Ali's face is nearly everywhere sometimes. The Rocky subject is another good example, the film has many things in it which were lifted right out of Frazier's life (The punching of the meat, running up the Art museum steps being the best examples), yet Joe gets no credit for it, yet Ali is often cited as the basis for the Apollo Creed character. I can certainly see why Ol' Smoke gets pissed.

Joe Frazier and Muhammad Ali are permanently hyphenated with eachother, arguably the greatest sporting rivalry of all time. They elevated eachother to a level of greatness, the likes of which that were never seen before, and may not be seen again. Muhammad Ali meant many different things to many different people. The most famous and most instantly-recognisable man in the world, revered for his personality, charm, kindness and many other things. But to boxing fans he is beloved and enormously famous for his speed, of both hand and foot, bravery, punch-resistance, his fiercley competitive nature and in my opinion, often overlooked punching power. It was Frazier who brought all of this out of him. Frazier was a great fighter, one of the best heavyweights of all time and a man to be heavily respected for many things other than just being Ali's toughest opponent (with all respect to Ken Norton).

But the best tribute that I can pay to Frazier ; Muhammad Ali told the world that he is, was, and always will be "The greatest"....but Joe Frazier made him prove it.

 

anyone know of any other HBO fight related docs? ive seen all the Legendary Nights series, and i highly recommend them. Then there's the Ringside series and Ring Life series. But are they other standalone ones like the Assault in the Ring one?

HBO - Joe Louis, America's Hero....Betrayed.

I can't find the whole thing on youtube, but I'm fairly certain that it's on Megavideo or something like that.

It's a great documentary focusing on how poorly treat the brown bomber was during his later years and the poverty he experienced in his old age.

There's also a good dramatization of the events surrounding what was possibly (and arguably still is) the most shrewd, lucrative and historically significant business deal in boxing history, going into the 1937 world heavyweight title fight between Champion James J. Braddock and challenger Joe Louis. It's called 'Ten Percent'.

Also, I'm not sure you would class this next one as an HBO documentary, as it is quite stylistically different to what most people recognise as an "HBO documentary" (things done in the vein of 24/7, Legendary nights etc), but it is listed as HBO and I'm sure they own it also. One of my personal faves, 'The Thrilla in Manila'. I'm sure we've heard all the stories about this legendary contest before, but this is a well-made documentary with plenty of great moments and even uncovers some new, quite incredible tales. In my opinion it is better than the critically acclaimed 'When we were kings' movie/documentary.

That's just a few but I'll check my collection later and post anything good that I find, as I'm sure I've missed some out.

------------------

Just a quick thought on the Pacquiao Vs Marquez fight, I'll go into detail tomorrow as I'm so fucking tired right now, but, I really do not think the weight will be an issue in this fight and people are making too much out of it. Marquez gave Manny two of the toughest fights of his career and all the trouble he could handle because of a few reasons. The main one and by far the most important was that Juan Manuel knows exactly how to set Pacquiao up, get him on the end of the hook and drag him into deep water. The 2011 version of Manny is without a shadow of a doubt a much, much different fighter than the one that Marquez met in 2004 and 2008, his footwork is incredible and more versatile than back then, his technique has drastically improved and of course, he has a formidible right hand now and can take you out from both sides now....He also seems to hit harder. However, he still makes the same mistakes as he did back then and Marquez can certainly take advantage of them and as he did in the first two fights...he can force Manny into making them. JMM has one of the best boxing brains in the history of the sport and if someone was to draw up a list of qualities to include in making a dream fighter to defeat the current version of Manny, then I'm certain that would be high on anybody's list. I am not entirely convinced that Marquez will beat Manny in this rubber match, nor am I certain of Juan Manuel's defeat. I am, however, quite certain that this will be a close fight and will somewhat resemble the Marquez/Katsidis fight in terms of tactics. I know people might laugh at that and say that Marquez will not be able to box on the back foot like he did with Katsidis and they will probably say that if Marquez does indeed use those tactics then he will take a severe beating and/or KO. Of course Pacquiao has much more power, speed and sophistication of offense than Katsidis, but I think Marquez will use his great ability to ride the big punches and ride the ropes whilst round by round chipping away at Pacquiao's body, this will take its toll and by the last 4 rounds Marquez will smell blood and sense opportunity and he will begin to turn up the heat, which will lead the two fighters into some seriously heavy exchanges. My intstinct tells me that Marquez won't win....but my head KNOWS that he will certainly get his chance to. Ultimatley, I think it will be during one of those heavy exchanges that Pacquiao's extra power, greater variety and that inate "alley-cat-instinct" which he has in abundance, will all come together and result in a couple of heavy knockdowns on Marquez, this time, though, Pacquiao won't let him off the hook.

See, guys....Kept it short and sweet haha. Ah so what? I enjoy playing out fight scenarios in my head.

excellent news about Ward/Abraham and Pascal/Hopkins i wouldn't have stayed up for either so 11am is good for me.

 

I honestly think James DeGale is going to smash Groves...George Groves hasn't showed me much as a professioanl outside of having decent skills and some serious heart, which likely means he's going to get a bit of a beating. In Boxing Monthly they interviewed like 30 boxing insiders for a prediction and i think it came out 28-2 to DeGale, i think that tells you everything you need to know.

I think that from the period which they turned professional right up until Degale manhandled Paul Smith, I think up to that point Groves really believed he would beat Degale. Different story now. Groves does not appear to be anywhere near as confident as he once was and I think he has been effected by the star build-up much more out of the two fighters.

Personally, I think Groves will build up an early lead and look to be cruising to a shut out masterclass, when Degale will start to take control around the 6/7th and stop Groves in the 9/10th. The reasons that I think this fight will play out in such a way ; Degale has a bad habit of thinking he is the Stylistic lovechild of Floyd Mayweather and Pernell Whitaker, as he boxes out of a crouch and doing the shoulder-roll etc, when he should be making best use of his usual height and reach advantages. I think this will allow Groves to put on a good display and establish a lead, when at some point in the 6th, Degale will begin to take advantage of Groves' slack defense and start scoring with the kind of offensive firepower which saw him lay waste to Paul Smith last year, stopping Groves by the 10th round.

A very good friend of mine who I won't name, I will just say he is himself a young prospect at light-heavy, has sparred extensivley with both Groves and Degale and told me this week that they both have about the same level of punch power, yet Degale is by far the more elusive of the two. Even though sparring is not a fight, it does however offer a fair preview.

I found it interesting that my friend said they are even on terms of power, as Degale has a tendancy to "cuff" his punches and does not turn his punches over fully, which tells me that Degale is likeley to develop his power as his career goes on if he stops "cuffing" or "slapping" as it is also called, it diminishes the impact of the punch somewhat.

Whoever wins though, I do hope the loser properly re-builds and goes on as a loss isn't the end for a fighter and can even be a positive somewhat. However, in a fight like this with such bad blood, there is a danger of the loser suffering psychologically without ever re-building. Best case scenario for me, would be for the loser to re-build and come back for a possible rematch somewhere down the line....I would love to see the loser follow the example of Nigel Benn when he lost to Michael Watson. He went away, got his head down whilst achieving some great wins and by the time the 1st Eubank fight came around he was an even better fighter. When he lost again in that 1st Eubank fight what did he do? Got his head down, had some decent wins which lead him to that win or bust fight in Italy where he captured his 2nd 'world' championship which he defended a bunch of times, had a 2nd massive fight with arch-rival Eubank which ultimatley lead him to his career-defining win against the very much feared, monster-punching Gerald Mclellan.

Of course, Degale and Groves may or may not be made of the same stuff that Benn was, probably not, but I hope the loser is at least given the chance to show that they can rebound from a defeat, and a high profile one at that, and not write them off which has become customary in the modern era that is seemingly obsessed with the unbeaten record.

Floyd mayweather jr and Shane mosley have signed to fight on May 1st. It should be noted that Mosley has agreed to all the drug testing demands that Mayweather asked of Manny. Mayweather will also take the same tests.

Just heard that the proposed Mayweather/Mosley fight is in the works for May 1, and not March 13. Leaving HBO to breathe a big sigh of relief that they do not have to choose between Pacquiao and Mayweather. Given their ties with GBP, they would have reluctantly chosen Mayweather whoever he fought.

I've also heard that Pacquiao is fighting Josh Clottey next.

The Pacquiao V Clottey match has been set for March 13 at the Dallas Cowboys stadium. With Andre Berto pulling out of his fight with Shane Mosley which was scheduled for Saturday due to him losing family members in the Haiti disaster, Mosley now looks set to fight Mayweather on March 13 as Golden Boy promotions have had that date booked on HBO for a long time now and aren't giving it up, so a Mosley/Mayweather match up seems the most possible scenario now.

Two pay-per-views going head on the same night. Numbers will no doubt take a hit. HBO will probably show their loyalty to GBP which will leave Arum looking for another outlet to show Pacquiao V Clottey. A simulcast from the two sites would be a great thing on HBO, but it will not happen.

Even though it's not quite Pacquiao V Mayweather, a Mosley fight with Floyd is still a very welcomed consolation prize, and quite winnable for Mosley, although it will be interesting to see if Mayweather insists to the same blood testing demands as he has with Manny, seeings as Sugar Shane is a known drug user. If he does then Mosley will agree to anything as he has wanted this fight for a while since his career went on the decline. Yet a few years ago he was the one dodging Floyd. It should be very interesting whatever happens.

I doubt Mayweather was ever talking about Anabolic steroids (Testosterone, Winstrol, Nandrolone Decanate etc), or even Human Growth Hormone. People seem to be under the impression that the suspicion is due to Pac-man's ability to go up in weight and maintain his power. That is not the case, as Pacquiao has more or less been fighting as a Junior Welterweight since as far back as 2007, weighing in on the Super-Feather limit, then going in the ring over 140lbs, sometimes 144-145 like he was in the second Marquez fight in 2008. I think that Floyd geniuneley does have concerns about Paquiao's super-human fitness as he goes up in weight, and believes he may be using the blood-doping drug EPO. This drug is responsible for the production of red-blood cells and thus would make a performer have a massive advantage in stamina. Personally, I think Pacquiao is clean, he just hasn't done himself any favours by offering up the excuses he has for not agreeing to or coming to a comprimise on Floyd's demands. I also refuse to believe that Mayweather is afraid of Pacquiao, I think he geniunley believes it is an easy fight for him. For all of Pac-man's immense talent, he makes far too many technical mistakes and Floyd would exploit these mistakes. More often that not, it is Pacquiao's overwhelming athletisism that wins fights for him, although on the whole, technically he is brilliant, he just makes one massive mistake by over-reaching with his left-cross and coming square-on with his feet immediatley after. Mayweather would time this so he would make Pac walk onto one of his brilliant lead right hands, and the problem would be compounded with the fact that a southpaw is a sucker for that punch anyway. However, looking at Floyd's past exploits with southpaws, Zab Judah, Demarcus Corley, Sharmba Mitchell etc. He generally does have trouble, especially so against Zab Judah who , while not on the same level as Pacquiao, was also a speed-demon, and buzzed Mayweather in the early rounds until Mayweather was able to adapt his shoulder-roll defense to the Left-handed stance. I feel Manny would have some sucess early on, but Floyd would of chased Pac's early lead and had Manny off his feet late on, en-route to a late stoppage.

I'm more a Paquiao fan than a Mayweather fan, yet I feel Floyd is the party who is 'more in the right'. Yes, he was probably using all this blood test controversy to unsettle Pac-man, but I also believe he really believes that Manny could possibly be hiding something, and as a potential opponent in a FIGHT, he has the right to protest that his opponent undergo any tests within reason. And I'm very sorry, but Manny has offered up some lame excuses on this one. He himself says his reputation is the most important thing to him, above any fight, any win, any title, any amount of money. And that some point you "Have to draw the line", one of his reasons for pulling the plug indefinatley on the fight. If that's true, then why not agree to Floyd's demands, take the tests, even if it means "Weakening" your body, and subsequently losing the fight, but your reputation would be intact because you would have tested clean. Pacquiao himself has stated he feels (and rightly so), that his boxing legacy is safe in history with or without Mayweather. So a loss to Floyd wouldnt be heartbreaking, but if he agreed to the tests, cleared his name, and in doing so beat Floyd, then that would be the icing on the cake as they say.

I don't think Manny is a drug user. I think he is an immense Athlete who through his impoverished background has an incredible hunger inside him which drives him to be the primed performer he has became. Couple that with his alliance with the great Freddie Roach taking him from a one-armed bandit to a complete fighter with Roach's great strategies at disposal, all that comes together to make a special fighter.

I just think that sometimes, he does not make the correct decisions, whether it be due to his (sometimes Archaic) beliefs, or his hangers-on ill-advising him. Also, Bob Arum was looking to pull the plug on this fight at the soonest oppurtunity. When Manny was going to pull the plug on a fight with Hatton, Arum flew to the Phillipines and talked him round. Not this time, Arum has went on holiday, he's made not much effort to save it as he could and should have, probably due to the fact he HATES Mayweather and never wanted to deal with him for at least 2 months.

Boxing fans lose in the end, again. As this fight may never happen if they cannot agree to blood tests. So while a Pacquiao fight with Joshua Clottey will be entertaining, and a Floyd fight with Shane mosley (should Shane defeat Andre Berto this month, which is no gimme) touted for May 1 being a long-awaited match-up, none of the fights on the horizon are anything like Pacquiao Vs Mayweather.

We also have to look forward to Hopkins Vs Jones II after all. I bet Dana White is shitting himself now.....

Whilst remebering the wrestling hour on QVCUK, I recall with even more fondness, the comic collectables on that same channel. Hosted by DF's Nick barruci, they had some good items, some crap. I remember completing my Dark Victory and Long Haloween collections with signed editions of the #1 issues of each series. They used to do a lot of bumper packages in which you would get a couple of signed issues or alternate cover issues , with about 40 random comics on top. Good for gifts for younger brothers etc. I don't think they are doing anymore shows though.

Praying that someone cottons on...

yes, birchillsbuddy. but why work for something when it is free.

What was once a great thread, has turned into absolute shite. .

somebody ban this retard