Thoughts?
Should he have remained at 160. I remember after the Super 6, he was contemplating going back down, but decided to stay up. Captured the WBO title and ran with it..
He's 5'8.. Could he have been an ATG had he stayed at 160?
Arthur Abraham.. Too Small for 168?
-
Ruthless-RKO
- Welterweight
- Posts: 101713
- Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59
Re: Arthur Abraham.. Too Small for 168?
He always looked big at middle, he’s not tall but is solidly built
Re: Arthur Abraham.. Too Small for 168?
No. He looked tight at the weight towards the end and as regards ATG, no way! He's strong but limited and only fights for one minute per round, any ATG level middleweight would shut him out, at worst.Ruthless-RKO wrote: ↑30 Nov 2017, 11:30 Thoughts?
Should he have remained at 160. I remember after the Super 6, he was contemplating going back down, but decided to stay up. Captured the WBO title and ran with it..
He's 5'8.. Could he have been an ATG had he stayed at 160?
-
Ruthless-RKO
- Welterweight
- Posts: 101713
- Joined: 24 Apr 2016, 11:59
Re: Arthur Abraham.. Too Small for 168?
What let's him down is, he never engaged in any unification. He made countless defences of the IBF middleweight title. but not once fought a unification..
Even at 168, he didn't either.
Kinda like Joe Calzaghe.