WHO WIN: David Bailey OR Amir Khan?

TheRock · Post by **TheRock** » 06 Jul 2005, 04:46

WHO WIN: David Bailey OR Amir Khan? and why?

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 06 Jul 2005, 04:47

Khan. Because he won't be allowed to lose.

TheRock · Post by **TheRock** » 06 Jul 2005, 05:00

Huh? What do you mean he wont be allowed to lose?

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 06 Jul 2005, 05:02

Well, even if you take into consideration the huge difference in class between the two, Khan's obviously not going to be given someone who has the remotest chance of beating him in his first fight.

bradinho · Post by **bradinho** » 06 Jul 2005, 05:11

Yeh the promoter, sponsers etc would be extremely upset and a lot of money would be lost in Khan loses.

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 06 Jul 2005, 05:13

Can Khan (ha ha) knock Bailey out? I don't think he's been stopped yet. There's an interesting one for you.

BubiScholz · Post by **BubiScholz** » 06 Jul 2005, 05:19

allegedly

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 06 Jul 2005, 05:43

Eh?! Is this a trick question?? You don't give your future star of boxing anything other than a slam dunk in his pro debut...and possibly his next 25 fights too.

Thinking of Olympic star pro debuts, the hardest one I can recall was for Holyfield. He made his debut in NY alongside all the other USA stars from the 1984 Games - Whitaker, Taylor, Breland, Biggs etc.

And his fight was the toughest, against a decent fighter with 10 or so wins. They knew he was the real deal even back then.

Old bones Ian · Post by **Old bones Ian** » 06 Jul 2005, 06:29

MightyWarrior wrote:Eh?! Is this a trick question?? You don't give your future star of boxing anything other than a slam dunk in his pro debut...and possibly his next 25 fights too.

Thinking of Olympic star pro debuts, the hardest one I can recall was for Holyfield. He made his debut in NY alongside all the other USA stars from the 1984 Games - Whitaker, Taylor, Breland, Biggs etc.

And his fight was the toughest, against a decent fighter with 10 or so wins. They knew he was the real deal even back then.

going back a few years , the hardest debut for an olympic boxer has got to be Pete Rademacher, who challenged Floyd Patterson for the heavyweight title.
Rademacher was knocked down 6 times and knocked out in the 2nd round, he did knock Patterson down once as well.

Dutch Windmill · Post by **Dutch Windmill** » 06 Jul 2005, 07:05

topper123 wrote: going back a few years , the hardest debut for an olympic boxer has got to be Pete Rademacher, who challenged Floyd Patterson for the heavyweight title.
Rademacher was knocked down 6 times and knocked out in the 2nd round, he did knock Patterson down once as well.

Watched this fight the other day. Patterson was knocked down in the 2nd and it lasted 6 rounds

Rademacher had a pretty piss poor pro career considering he was olympic champ.

TheRock · Post by **TheRock** » 06 Jul 2005, 07:05

jomothepure wrote:Well, even if you take into consideration the huge difference in class between the two, Khan's obviously not going to be given someone who has the remotest chance of beating him in his first fight.

Well it will be his first pro fight and he will learn from pro boxing to gain more experence.... after few fights he will face someone much stronger..

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 06 Jul 2005, 07:10

TheRock wrote:
jomothepure wrote:Well, even if you take into consideration the huge difference in class between the two, Khan's obviously not going to be given someone who has the remotest chance of beating him in his first fight.
Well it will be his first pro fight and he will learn from pro boxing to gain more experence.... after few fights he will face someone much stronger..

Absolutely, given his age and innexperience (against seniors, not just pros) he needs to learn and gain experience. Given that and add it to Alloedgedly's strategy tho, I'd make that "after a few fights" more like double figures

Old bones Ian · Post by **Old bones Ian** » 06 Jul 2005, 07:18

Dutch Windmill wrote:
topper123 wrote: going back a few years , the hardest debut for an olympic boxer has got to be Pete Rademacher, who challenged Floyd Patterson for the heavyweight title.
Rademacher was knocked down 6 times and knocked out in the 2nd round, he did knock Patterson down once as well.
Watched this fight the other day. Patterson was knocked down in the 2nd and it lasted 6 rounds

Rademacher had a pretty piss poor pro career considering he was olympic champ.

i stand corrected

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 06 Jul 2005, 07:20

TheRock wrote:WHO WIN: David Bailey OR Amir Khan? and why?

Khan will win because he is much the better fighter and more accomplished boxer.

Bailey is a busy kid and had durability, at a level.

But he will be too small, too slow, and too weak to make any kind of impression on Khan.

A reasonable first opponent though, never been stopped.

KO Artist · Post by **KO Artist** » 06 Jul 2005, 07:26

topper123 wrote:
Dutch Windmill wrote:
topper123 wrote: going back a few years , the hardest debut for an olympic boxer has got to be Pete Rademacher, who challenged Floyd Patterson for the heavyweight title.
Rademacher was knocked down 6 times and knocked out in the 2nd round, he did knock Patterson down once as well.
Watched this fight the other day. Patterson was knocked down in the 2nd and it lasted 6 rounds

Rademacher had a pretty piss poor pro career considering he was olympic champ.
i stand corrected

If Rademachers pro career was piss poor after 22 fights in which he fought Patterson in his 1st and Folley in his 2nd, beating George Chuvalo in his 12th, Audley Harrisons acheivements in 5 year amount to dog shit.

BubiScholz · Post by **BubiScholz** » 06 Jul 2005, 07:39

KO Atrist wrote:
topper123 wrote:
Dutch Windmill wrote: Watched this fight the other day. Patterson was knocked down in the 2nd and it lasted 6 rounds

Rademacher had a pretty piss poor pro career considering he was olympic champ.
i stand corrected
If Rademachers pro career was piss poor after 22 fights in which he fought Patterson in his 1st and Folley in his 2nd, beating George Chuvalo in his 12th, Audley Harrisons acheivements in 5 year amount to dog shit.

THEBUTCH · Post by **THEBUTCH** » 06 Jul 2005, 09:09

I voted Khan, of course, but Bailey should make him work for the win.

KOJOE90 · Post by **KOJOE90** » 06 Jul 2005, 09:14

Khan on points.

Coconut · Post by **Coconut** » 06 Jul 2005, 09:23

Even if Bailey loses he should be able to take some ndecent photos of the event

Dutch Windmill · Post by **Dutch Windmill** » 06 Jul 2005, 09:31

KO Atrist wrote: If Rademachers pro career was piss poor after 22 fights in which he fought Patterson in his 1st and Folley in his 2nd, beating George Chuvalo in his 12th, Audley Harrisons acheivements in 5 year amount to dog shit.

"Dog shit" seem like the right words for describing Harrison's career so far.

ABA Boxing · Post by **ABA Boxing** » 06 Jul 2005, 11:29

If Khan was to lose!

Would he go back to the Amateurs & Then come back after getting more experience & maybe another Medal from the Olympics?

But as you say he wont lose. But there is always that what if

Freiheit · Post by **Freiheit** » 06 Jul 2005, 11:41

He cant fight in international championships if he had pro fights.

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 06 Jul 2005, 11:46

Khan is 1/29 with betfair. Bailey an absolutely terrible 2/1. Pitty the guy who's put £5 on at that price

Manos de Oro · Post by **Manos de Oro** » 06 Jul 2005, 12:08

Bailey KO1.

TheRock · Post by **TheRock** » 06 Jul 2005, 14:09

it's a 4 x 3 against David Bailey or a 4 x 2?

WHO WIN: David Bailey OR Amir Khan?

Who will win?

WHO WIN: David Bailey OR Amir Khan?

Re: WHO WIN: David Bailey OR Amir Khan?