Most of the others listed so far can be justified in some respect, but not one fight being made between Lee/Barker/Macklin/Murray is fvcking inexcusable.
Boxerbeetle wrote:Most of the others listed so far can be justified in some respect, but not one fight being made between Lee/Barker/Macklin/Murray is fvcking inexcusable.
This for me is a prime example of why multiple belts f*cks the sport up massively. If there was just one title these would have been fighting for the European British etc.
Barker v macklin was signed for Warrens magnificent 7 card but Barker's hip problems started in training for that fight.
Where was all the glamor for Calzaghe vs Froch? When Joe was beating Kessler convincingly and bossing the division Carl was fighting Reid and Dobson. Poles apart but a great matchup in their primes that Joe would struggle in the early rounds, figure him out and dominate there on in.
Boxerbeetle wrote:Most of the others listed so far can be justified in some respect, but not one fight being made between Lee/Barker/Macklin/Murray is fvcking inexcusable.
This for me is a prime example of why multiple belts f*cks the sport up massively. If there was just one title these would have been fighting for the European British etc.
Barker v macklin was signed for Warrens magnificent 7 card but Barker's hip problems started in training for that fight.
This. These four could have made good money fighting each other at this level. To not have one match up between them was crazy
Where was all the glamor for Calzaghe vs Froch? When Joe was beating Kessler convincingly and bossing the division Carl was fighting Reid and Dobson. Poles apart but a great matchup in their primes that Joe would struggle in the early rounds, figure him out and dominate there on in.
Frost turned down that fight. Always wished joe went to Germany and done a number on ottke
I would've liked to see JML-Gamboa at their peaks. They shared a promoter--one who loves in-house fights--but they were kept apart and JML unravelled before it was made.
Boxerbeetle wrote:Most of the others listed so far can be justified in some respect, but not one fight being made between Lee/Barker/Macklin/Murray is fvcking inexcusable.
This for me is a prime example of why multiple belts f*cks the sport up massively. If there was just one title these would have been fighting for the European British etc.
Barker v macklin was signed for Warrens magnificent 7 card but Barker's hip problems started in training for that fight.
This. These four could have made good money fighting each other at this level. To not have one match up between them was crazy
I remember all the comparison to Benn/Watson and Eubank yet not a single fight. It was about one getting a belt so one could be stake. Any combination of either at their best would have produced brilliant fan friendly fights. If there was just a single world champion they would have had to fight as they wouldn't have been able to get world title fights so easily.
9 world title challenges between them and not a single fight.
I do particularly think Murray would have fought any regardless of what was at stake.
Where was all the glamor for Calzaghe vs Froch? When Joe was beating Kessler convincingly and bossing the division Carl was fighting Reid and Dobson. Poles apart but a great matchup in their primes that Joe would struggle in the early rounds, figure him out and dominate there on in.
Calzaghe vacated when Froch became his mandatory didn't he?
Where was all the glamor for Calzaghe vs Froch? When Joe was beating Kessler convincingly and bossing the division Carl was fighting Reid and Dobson. Poles apart but a great matchup in their primes that Joe would struggle in the early rounds, figure him out and dominate there on in.
There wasn't really any clamour for it until Carl beat Pascal. By that point Joe was still fighting but had decided to fight Jones. Shame really but you're right; there was never any demand for it.
Far more for Calzaghe Johnson, Calzaghe Beyer, Calzaghe Ottke. Always some reason or other as to why they didn't happen. Also, there was a lot of buzz for Calzaghe Pavlik when the latter had gone through Miranda and Taylor.
foreman v tyson would have been good- and a rematch Ali v foreman- Mcguigan v nelson is another- toney v benn and Eubank
Benn and Eubank v graham- I could go on all day the list would be endless
Stevieb8006 wrote:Calzaghe vs ottke should've happened, would love to have seen that.
Barker vs Macklin.
Who were those four fighters. That never met cos they had different promoters? Steve Roberts was one I think. They all had wbf type belts
Dead right, that should have happened, but both seemed to have an aversion to aeroplane use; something Calzaghe seemed to get over at the end of his career when some paydays against washed up legends were there for him to take up.
To be fair, Calzaghe did fight outside of the UK once, ironically in Germany, whereas I don't recall Ottke ever having a fight outside of Germany.
Stevieb8006 wrote:Calzaghe vs ottke should've happened, would love to have seen that.
Barker vs Macklin.
Who were those four fighters. That never met cos they had different promoters? Steve Roberts was one I think. They all had wbf type belts
Dead right, that should have happened, but both seemed to have an aversion to aeroplane use; something Calzaghe seemed to get over at the end of his career when some paydays against washed up legends were there for him to take up.
To be fair, Calzaghe did fight outside of the UK once, ironically in Germany, whereas I don't recall Ottke ever having a fight outside of Germany.
Hopkins was that washed up he was still winning world title fights six years later. Ridiculous comment.