Coco wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 12:10
Sykes was a bum as a person, but as a fighter??
Obviously we was not world class but he fought for a British title.
If this was true it would make 95% of Brit professionals bums.
6-3, which should be 6-4 is a bum's record. Especially when one of those losses was a 1st round KO to a nobody.
Have a look at the British ratings and you will see that most have a losing record, you are calling a lot of folk bums, including fighters who have fought for titles.
You need to have a better understanding of what it even takes to get into a ring, let alone to start winning fights.
Coco wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 12:10
Sykes was a bum as a person, but as a fighter??
Obviously we was not world class but he fought for a British title.
If this was true it would make 95% of Brit professionals bums.
6-3, which should be 6-4 is a bum's record. Especially when one of those losses was a 1st round KO to a nobody.
Whaaat i hope your joking , 6...3 is,nt a bums record , 6 losses out of 6 fights , not a bum either , just someone who,s not excelled at the sport , not a bum ,,, are you a millionaire or you a bum
Coco wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 12:10
Sykes was a bum as a person, but as a fighter??
Obviously we was not world class but he fought for a British title.
If this was true it would make 95% of Brit professionals bums.
6-3, which should be 6-4 is a bum's record. Especially when one of those losses was a 1st round KO to a nobody.
We all have different understandings of different words/descriptions; how do you define a bum in boxing terms?
Is it the ratio of wins v fights, or a persons ability to actually fight?
As you no doubt know, a fight record can be very misleading. Campbell Hatton has got 6 wins on his record ... yet without the advantage of his surname and very careful matchmaking - its pretty safe to say he would today be 6 losses from 6 fights.
Whereas Sykes had 6 wins, and was good enough to challenge for the British title within 18mths of being professional.
Coco wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 12:10
Sykes was a bum as a person, but as a fighter??
Obviously we was not world class but he fought for a British title.
If this was true it would make 95% of Brit professionals bums.
6-3, which should be 6-4 is a bum's record. Especially when one of those losses was a 1st round KO to a nobody.
Have a look at the British ratings and you will see that most have a losing record, you are calling a lot of folk bums, including fighters who have fought for titles.
You need to have a better understanding of what it even takes to get into a ring, let alone to start winning fights.
Coco wrote: ↑09 Mar 2022, 12:10
Sykes was a bum as a person, but as a fighter??
Obviously we was not world class but he fought for a British title.
If this was true it would make 95% of Brit professionals bums.
6-3, which should be 6-4 is a bum's record. Especially when one of those losses was a 1st round KO to a nobody.
We all have different understandings of different words/descriptions; how do you define a bum in boxing terms?
Is it the ratio of wins v fights, or a persons ability to actually fight?
As you no doubt know, a fight record can be very misleading. Campbell Hatton has got 6 wins on his record ... yet without the advantage of his surname and very careful matchmaking - its pretty safe to say he would today be 6 losses from 6 fights.
Whereas Sykes had 6 wins, and was good enough to challenge for the British title within 18mths of being professional.
Sykes gave Gardner a good go for a while, then the going got tough and he jacked.
He had talent, but claims that he could have been a world beater are grossly exaggerated
Fairly play to him - he said he was shitting himself when Fury got aggressive with him. Fury’s a big, intimidating bloke with history of going extreme with things so I’m not overly surprised.
I also think Paul wipes the floor with Tommy and I would love to see Big Johns face as his son is taking a hiding from a youtuber. I wouldn't be surprised if he goes off the radar for a while after the fight.
