Surely he's not that bad? :(Exoddus wrote:Wait a minute guys. Prescott is ranked #14 by the WBA!
It was over in the first. After a one-sided beating, Hatton was disqualified for headbutting Calzaghe in the balls. Later, Hatton described the event as 'A moment of madness'. He continued: 'It's the cardinal sin of boxing to 'butt another man in the spuds.'kevo wrote:Must've missed that one.
chesh wrote:Some interesting facts about Prescott's record:
12 of his 19 opponents had losing records;
5 of his last 9 opponents had losing records;
9 of his opponents had never won a fight;
one opponent, stopped in 3 by Prescott, has been stopped as quickly - or more quickly - on 11 other occasions.
Puts his record into perspective. Any more revealing statistics welcome!
black panther wrote:Khan is just a big a household name as Hatton if not more so
Fella, no disrespect, but what planet are you on? Hatton can take thousands of fans to Vegas and sell out a football stadium. Khan is not even close to being as big a household name as him and almost certainly never will be as he lacks the 'normal working class lad' personna that Hatton's played to perfection.If the PPV does well, what's the incentive to face tougher competition? I can see a long, drawn-out series of PPV fights leading up to that "world title". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't recall any other UK fighter being on PPV before winning - or at least challenging for - a world title. Wasn't Tszyu Hatton's first PPV? Of course, they are saying Khan is not top of the bill, but Arthur-Cook would hardly be PPV on its own. I've bought every PPV over the years, but I won't fork out 15 quid for Khan until it's Pac/Diaz/Campbell/Guzman/Casamayor/Katsidis in the other corner.Asterix wrote:I'm not going to comment on the TV status as I don't really care. I'm interested in the opponent.
It's good to see that he's as tall as, or taller than, Khan. It's also good to see that he can knock people out. He obviously has a very dubious record, so I'm looking forward to seeing how he stacks up. The two positives I've listed are great news. It will answer some more questions about Khan. After this fight, though, Warren really does need to arrange for tougher competition or Khan probably won't be ready when he has to face a World class boxer (if he ever will be - that remains to be seen).
I think Hatton-Oliveira was part of a bigger PPV, Williams-Klitschko.chesh wrote:If the PPV does well, what's the incentive to face tougher competition? I can see a long, drawn-out series of PPV fights leading up to that "world title". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I can't recall any other UK fighter being on PPV before winning - or at least challenging for - a world title. Wasn't Tszyu Hatton's first PPV? Of course, they are saying Khan is not top of the bill, but Arthur-Cook would hardly be PPV on its own. I've bought every PPV over the years, but I won't fork out 15 quid for Khan until it's Pac/Diaz/Campbell/Guzman/Casamayor/Katsidis in the other corner.Asterix wrote:I'm not going to comment on the TV status as I don't really care. I'm interested in the opponent.
It's good to see that he's as tall as, or taller than, Khan. It's also good to see that he can knock people out. He obviously has a very dubious record, so I'm looking forward to seeing how he stacks up. The two positives I've listed are great news. It will answer some more questions about Khan. After this fight, though, Warren really does need to arrange for tougher competition or Khan probably won't be ready when he has to face a World class boxer (if he ever will be - that remains to be seen).
From the following report of that fight, Prescott sounds defensively poor and rather slow:G0mez wrote:chesh wrote:Some interesting facts about Prescott's record:
12 of his 19 opponents had losing records;
5 of his last 9 opponents had losing records;
9 of his opponents had never won a fight;
one opponent, stopped in 3 by Prescott, has been stopped as quickly - or more quickly - on 11 other occasions.
Puts his record into perspective. Any more revealing statistics welcome!
Teddy Atlas actually scored his last fight for the other guy by a point or two.
His name was Arbin and was 10-0-1
Well, Waylon, the following words from Vic Wakeling of Sky would suggest Khan's team have free rein to do what they want:WildWaylon wrote:Well dont buy, and if everyone else does the same it will be a flop. Then Warren and Sky will have to think again. Christ we pay enough for TV, first theres the license fee, then there is subscribing to Sky Sports, add to that PPV and its too bloody expensive. I dont agree with PPV, its a total rip off. This fight isnt big enough for most fans to say "I must have that" so I cant see it selling. I havent heard of the guy, like yourselves, but the interesting thing is he does have a good KO record. I know he hasnt fought anybody with a name so he will probably get a hiding but you never know he might just land a big one. Has Khan got a new trainer or is he still working with a sub? If so its not a solid camp and that could be a big problem if his training program isnt what it should be. Lets hope Warren doesnt take the piss with Sky as he did with ITV.
Didn't they test the water with Bruno/McCall? I seem to remember them doubting whether or not the British public would entertain it. The thinking was if they buy the fight, they'll buy football etc...states wrote:I'm 30 years old now. I remember when SKY was first launched, and the idea of paying for something other than the TV license was seen as outrageous. Mind you, They've always been sharp fuckers. They collared football, which still drives their subscription today.
But back to boxing: I missed fights such as Tyson-Douglas, because my parents wouldn't get SKY. I managed to see most of the Lewis/Hamed PPV era, because enough people were interested, and me and my fellow students could pile round. I've paid for (most) of the Hatton shows, because I have my own house, and can afford it now. In fact, I've bought some right shite on PPV. But I have to draw the line at this. I really think SKY are overestimating the number of Khan fans. I hope this bombs.
Do you work for SN?leforge wrote:The other Friday fights lined up by Warren are fine.
Sky have to understand that MOST Khan fans have Freeview ITV BBC Channels etc.states wrote:
I really think SKY are overestimating the number of Khan fans. I hope this bombs.
Deserter wrote:black panther wrote:Khan is just a big a household name as Hatton if not more so
Non taken - I see your point! I suppose I'm just trying to look at it from Joe Public's point of view. I always get aunties(and when I say "aunties" I just mean old women who know my mum - in asian culture you call everyone significantly older than you auntie or uncle) telling me they saw the Amir Khan fight but don't have a clue who Hatton is. But I suppose Hatton appeals to a different fan base.Spot on with that DG. The only people who will buy this are the casual boxing fans/football fans and that is it.DG. wrote:Sky have to understand that MOST Khan fans have Freeview ITV BBC Channels etc.states wrote:
I really think SKY are overestimating the number of Khan fans. I hope this bombs.
The girls at work watch KHAN on ITV but won't be buying SKY.
The hardcore Boxing Fans kn ow KHAN is mostly hype - we are not buying it.
The football meat heads? some will buy it but not many.
It Bombs.
Happy Slapper wrote:Spot on with that DG. The only people who will buy this are the casual boxing fans/football fans and that is it.DG. wrote:Sky have to understand that MOST Khan fans have Freeview ITV BBC Channels etc.states wrote:
I really think SKY are overestimating the number of Khan fans. I hope this bombs.
The girls at work watch KHAN on ITV but won't be buying SKY.
The hardcore Boxing Fans kn ow KHAN is mostly hype - we are not buying it.
The football meat heads? some will buy it but not many.
It Bombs.
To the opponent - at least he is a genuine lightweight, who can punch a bit, but you just get the feeling Frankie has done his homework and this guy will get blown away.