glahn wrote:Horrible fight. Witter is awful to watch these days.
You tell me which British fighter would give khan a proper test with the possibilty of beating him?
John Murray
Kell Brook
I wouldnt be to gutted with Witter though, he USED to be quite fast and could bang a bit plus he would give Khan more than 2 or 3 rounds. How about a Barrera rematch?
Or FW asking him to step up and finally getting rid of "former world champion" and "was never Amazing" Alex Arthur? by letting Khan retire him?
REALISTICALLY, who do you think Khan should fight next, bearing in mind:
- it won't be Bradley or a current, live REALLY big name
- it needs to be a credible opponent (or one who can be made credible with a bit of spin)
- needs to be able to sell in the UK
- they don't want to pay much money
- they don't want to get him beat
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:REALISTICALLY, who do you think Khan should fight next, bearing in mind:
- it won't be Bradley or a current, live REALLY big name
- it needs to be a credible opponent (or one who can be made credible with a bit of spin)
- needs to be able to sell in the UK
- they don't want to pay much money
- they don't want to get him beat
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:REALISTICALLY, who do you think Khan should fight next, bearing in mind:
- it won't be Bradley or a current, live REALLY big name
- it needs to be a credible opponent (or one who can be made credible with a bit of spin)
- needs to be able to sell in the UK
- they don't want to pay much money
- they don't want to get him beat
Personally id still like to see the mccloskey fight,they wouldnt have to pay him that much.just a decent adequate offer would be enough!I still think that fight could be made aswell if khans team are fair.
allegedly the reason hatton-witter didn't happen is because of witter's less than exciting performances so sky veteod it.
But now we have a situation where we have witter who has lost 2 of his last 3 fights, doesn't hold a world title, has publicly said he can't make the weight anymore and has been inactive of late, is being put forward as a credible opponent for a sky PPV?
The_Don1 wrote:allegedly the reason hatton-witter didn't happen is because of witter's less than exciting performances so sky veteod it.
But now we have a situation where we have witter who has lost 2 of his last 3 fights, doesn't hold a world title, has publicly said he can't make the weight anymore and has been inactive of late, is being put forward as a credible opponent for a sky PPV?
kingfinn wrote:Maybe a dumb question but is there any reason why khan v bradley cant happen on april 16? like tv contracts or anything.
i dont know the answer to that myself to be honest.
cos khan wants a reasonablly credible opponent, but one that he knows he can beat for a moneyspinning UK return before facing someone who has a serious chance of beating him.
kingfinn wrote:Maybe a dumb question but is there any reason why khan v bradley cant happen on april 16? like tv contracts or anything.
i dont know the answer to that myself to be honest.
cos khan wants a reasonablly credible opponent, but one that he knows he can beat for a moneyspinning UK return before facing someone who has a serious chance of beating him.
that could be it i wouldnt blame him if it is the reason, but if bradley wants to fight in the UK it must be at least on the table.
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:REALISTICALLY, who do you think Khan should fight next, bearing in mind:
- it won't be Bradley or a current, live REALLY big name
- it needs to be a credible opponent (or one who can be made credible with a bit of spin)
- needs to be able to sell in the UK
- they don't want to pay much money
- they don't want to get him beat
Personally I think Prescott meets all of the above criteria.
Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:REALISTICALLY, who do you think Khan should fight next, bearing in mind:
- it won't be Bradley or a current, live REALLY big name
- it needs to be a credible opponent (or one who can be made credible with a bit of spin)
- needs to be able to sell in the UK
- they don't want to pay much money
- they don't want to get him beat
Personally I think Prescott meets all of the above criteria.
yeah but what about the not wanting to get him beat bit?!I have a feeling that prescott might just be khans bogeyman rather than being the better overrall fighter which is clear in all honesty,People will say look how comfortably that mitchell dealt with prescott and that was the case but i think the significant height difference actually helped mitchell in that fight because alot of prescott big shots were going over the top of mitchell instead of landing whereas khan who's a little shorter would take those shots because he's a taller man.
I don't think Prescott is Khan's bogeyman. Khan is a massive light welter, so god knows how he made 140lbs. It's obvious that Khan's chin issues where mainly because of draining, so with that not that much of an issue now I think things are different. Prescott too, has been exposed beyond belief - if a small, previously overrated Mitchell can out-box him then Khan definitely can. Prescott fell on his feet the last time they met - it wouldn't happen again, IMO.
Dioufy wrote:I don't think Prescott is Khan's bogeyman. Khan is a massive light welter, so god knows how he made 140lbs. It's obvious that Khan's chin issues where mainly because of draining, so with that not that much of an issue now I think things are different. Prescott too, has been exposed beyond belief - if a small, previously overrated Mitchell can out-box him then Khan definitely can. Prescott fell on his feet the last time they met - it wouldn't happen again, IMO.
yeah but what i was saying about the size of say khan vs mitchell is true i think,the sort of shots that caught khan in there fight were sailing over mitchells head because he was so much smaller.
Dioufy wrote:I don't think Prescott is Khan's bogeyman. Khan is a massive light welter, so god knows how he made 140lbs. It's obvious that Khan's chin issues where mainly because of draining, so with that not that much of an issue now I think things are different. Prescott too, has been exposed beyond belief - if a small, previously overrated Mitchell can out-box him then Khan definitely can. Prescott fell on his feet the last time they met - it wouldn't happen again, IMO.
yeah but what i was saying about the size of say khan vs mitchell is true i think,the sort of shots that caught khan in there fight were sailing over mitchells head because he was so much smaller.
So if Mitchell wasn't a munchkin and was, perhaps, 2/3 inches taller, he'd have been chinned, like Khan?
Dioufy wrote:I don't think Prescott is Khan's bogeyman. Khan is a massive light welter, so god knows how he made 140lbs. It's obvious that Khan's chin issues where mainly because of draining, so with that not that much of an issue now I think things are different. Prescott too, has been exposed beyond belief - if a small, previously overrated Mitchell can out-box him then Khan definitely can. Prescott fell on his feet the last time they met - it wouldn't happen again, IMO.
yeah but what i was saying about the size of say khan vs mitchell is true i think,the sort of shots that caught khan in there fight were sailing over mitchells head because he was so much smaller.
So if Mitchell wasn't a munchkin and was, perhaps, 2/3 inches taller, he'd have been chinned, like Khan?
Lol well im not saying that for definite but if you go and watch that fight back you'll see that 90% of the power shots that prescott was throwing were sailing over mitchell.P.s when he fought katsidis they were pretty much the same height and when katsidis was throwing he was catching mitchell on the chin more often than not.
