Round-by-Round: Jessica McCaskill vs. Lauren Price | Sky Sports - 11 May 2024

[JamesPhilips]

she was fantastic, that has to be one of the best performances from someone with less than 10 fights.

Please tell me you’re not being serious. It was an awful fight between what appeared to be 2 novices who couldn’t fight. You can’t possibly take women’s boxing seriously

[Coco]

she was fantastic, that has to be one of the best performances from someone with less than 10 fights.

Please tell me you’re not being serious. It was an awful fight between what appeared to be 2 novices who couldn’t fight. You can’t possibly take women’s boxing seriously

I think that's unfair, Price is fast on her feet, got fast hands and gets her shots off, at this level she beats pretty much everyone.
On the other hand she hasn't got an attractive personality or fighting style, obviously a non puncher too.
Nobody will want to fight her unless they are getting paid well.
She beats Jonas every day of the week.
And I don't take womens boxing seriously,

[jameswilson]

She lost early in her career but I think Sandy Ryan could end up cleaning up at welterweight. There's a lot of women fighting right the way up in weight because welterweight and light middleweight are so threadbare compared to 126-140 which has Serrano, Baumgardner, Taylor and Cameron to get through if you want to have a run at title level.

Mikaela Mayer ballsed this up by taking a fight against a beatable champ but on British soil (we all know how that decision goes elsewhere.)

I think Ryan is a genuine welterweight, it really felt like she beat Harper to hell through size and strength, really made it look easy. She obviously also beat McCaskill on American soil but got a dodgy draw.

I think she beats Price.

I think either 3 minute rounds or 12 rounds for World title fights is close to coming in.

[SeanBrennan]

she was fantastic, that has to be one of the best performances from someone with less than 10 fights.

Please tell me you’re not being serious. It was an awful fight between what appeared to be 2 novices who couldn’t fight. You can’t possibly take women’s boxing seriously

I am and I do. I like all boxing. We're all different and like different stuff. My daughter is getting into it and she loved watching it.

[Loynesy]

I get exasperated by this intrinsic level of sexism. Do you not take the Olympic 100m Women's final seriously? The Wimbledon Ladies tennis final?

They are not men so the comparison to men is just irrelevant. My 12 year old daughter has been doing karate since she was 4, she will hopefully get her black belt within 2 years. She can kick the arse out of 95% of the people at her Dojo, but guess what -the other 5% are boys but they love training with her and respect her.

We occasionally get an England Woman's cricketer to come down and play a club game and she's by far the best player in the team.

You can't compare a female boxer with Terence Crawford or other elite male boxers.

I don't think there is a single poster on this forum that would last a round with Katie Taylor.

If you don't like women's boxing fine - just don't watch it but the sexist comments are just irrelevant.

[Counter-puncher]

don't try and tell me you actually enjoyed that non-league football match?

the players were all rubbish compared to Ronaldo, none of them will ever play in the Premier League

[JamesPhilips]

I get exasperated by this intrinsic level of sexism. Do you not take the Olympic 100m Women's final seriously? The Wimbledon Ladies tennis final?

They are not men so the comparison to men is just irrelevant. My 12 year old daughter has been doing karate since she was 4, she will hopefully get her black belt within 2 years. She can kick the arse out of 95% of the people at her Dojo, but guess what -the other 5% are boys but they love training with her and respect her.

We occasionally get an England Woman's cricketer to come down and play a club game and she's by far the best player in the team.

You can't compare a female boxer with Terence Crawford or other elite male boxers.

I don't think there is a single poster on this forum that would last a round with Katie Taylor.

If you don't like women's boxing fine - just don't watch it but the sexist comments are just irrelevant.

You genuinely believe that

[Loynesy]

Well unless there is an elite male boxer poster on here, of course.

Have you ever been in a situation with an elite female martial artist? I see it twice a week.

[Loynesy]

If you look at the scientific data, those sports that have mathematical matrix eg Athletics, bowling speeds in cricket, serve speeds in tennis, golf swing speeds etc tend to show that elite female athletes tend to be between 8-12% below their elite male counterparts.

If you think you are only less than 8 - 12% worse than Terence Crawford then yes, you will beat Katie Taylor. Otherwise, sports science tells us you won't.

[JamesPhilips]

If you look at the scientific data, those sports that have mathematical matrix eg Athletics, bowling speeds in cricket, serve speeds in tennis, golf swing speeds etc tend to show that elite female athletes tend to be between 8-12% below their elite male counterparts.

If you think you are only less than 8 - 12% worse than Terence Crawford then yes, you will beat Katie Taylor. Otherwise, sports science tells us you won't.

Right. Sure. That’s why world class women football teams (the quality of which is way higher comparatively than female boxing which has 1 woman to every 15 male pros) are consistently beaten comprehensively by 14 and 15 year old local boys teams and old men.

[Boxerbeetle]

If you look at the scientific data, those sports that have mathematical matrix eg Athletics, bowling speeds in cricket, serve speeds in tennis, golf swing speeds etc tend to show that elite female athletes tend to be between 8-12% below their elite male counterparts.

If you think you are only less than 8 - 12% worse than Terence Crawford then yes, you will beat Katie Taylor. Otherwise, sports science tells us you won't.

Mmm, I dunno. There's lots of intangibles in boxing which can't be measured in the same way as other sports, particularly the non-contact ones you mention. Personally I think I'd back myself against Katie Taylor. although admittedly I'm cruiserweight size so unlikely to be sanctioned.

[Counter-puncher]

i'm not sure how many of us could go 3mins at KT's pace without a heart attack. i certainly couldn't and i doubt i could hit her with a bag of rice

[jameswilson]

don't try and tell me you actually enjoyed that non-league football match?

the players were all rubbish compared to Ronaldo, none of them will ever play in the Premier League

And I’m not watching it but I’m gonna go and click into that thread dedicated to it and slag it off,

[Loynesy]

If you look at the scientific data, those sports that have mathematical matrix eg Athletics, bowling speeds in cricket, serve speeds in tennis, golf swing speeds etc tend to show that elite female athletes tend to be between 8-12% below their elite male counterparts.

If you think you are only less than 8 - 12% worse than Terence Crawford then yes, you will beat Katie Taylor. Otherwise, sports science tells us you won't.

Right. Sure. That’s why world class women football teams (the quality of which is way higher comparatively than female boxing which has 1 woman to every 15 male pros) are consistently beaten comprehensively by 14 and 15 year old local boys teams and old men.

You are missing my point. They are not beaten by the local pub team, they are beaten by people who are in that 8-12% better category.

[Boxerbeetle]

don't try and tell me you actually enjoyed that non-league football match?

the players were all rubbish compared to Ronaldo, none of them will ever play in the Premier League

In fairness, there's a massive proportion of football fans who genuinely aren't interested in the sport past the Premier League. May as well not exist to them. Bloody plastics.

[Boxerbeetle]

i'm not sure how many of us could go 3mins at KT's pace without a heart attack. i certainly couldn't and i doubt i could hit her with a bag of rice

I'd take it at a slower pace, let her punch herself out and then score a huge final round knockout

[JamesPhilips]

If you look at the scientific data, those sports that have mathematical matrix eg Athletics, bowling speeds in cricket, serve speeds in tennis, golf swing speeds etc tend to show that elite female athletes tend to be between 8-12% below their elite male counterparts.

If you think you are only less than 8 - 12% worse than Terence Crawford then yes, you will beat Katie Taylor. Otherwise, sports science tells us you won't.

Right. Sure. That’s why world class women football team (the quality of which is way higher comparatively than female boxing which has 1 woman to every 15 male pros) are consistently beaten comprehensively by 14 and 15 year old local boys teams and old men.

You are missing my point. They are not beaten by the local pub team, they are beaten by people who are in that 8-12% better category.

If you genuinely believe that Katie Taylor has 88-92% of Crawford’s talent I would suggest you are seriously deluded.
Or that she could knock out any man here in a round she can’t even knock any women out

I assume you’ve never boxed?

[Loynesy]

I'm basing my analysis purely on sports science.

And yes, I have but at a very low amateur junior level and at Cambridge where frankly it's impossible to knock anyone out with 16oz gloves.

I'm the antithesis of a keyboard warrior so let's just agree to disagree.

[Loynesy]

Incidentally at no point did I say Katie Taylor had 88-92% of Taylor or indeed any other boxers "talent". She wouldn't last 30 seconds with him. I was just pointing out the physical differences between genders.

[rd350lc]

Price was always going to be too much for the American, now they need to start putting bums on seats.

Why don't they fight 3 minute rounds?
I don't think anyone is ever able to answer that .

Institutional sexism!

Probably, but still not a scientific reason.
I'd honestly love to know why women can't fight 3 minute rounds?
I bet some would welcome it .

[Boxerbeetle]

Why don't they fight 3 minute rounds?
I don't think anyone is ever able to answer that .

Institutional sexism!

Probably, but still not a scientific reason.
I'd honestly love to know why women can't fight 3 minute rounds?
I bet some would welcome it .

I dunno why they don't play 5 sets at tennis either tbh.

[rd350lc]

Institutional sexism!

Probably, but still not a scientific reason.
I'd honestly love to know why women can't fight 3 minute rounds?
I bet some would welcome it .

I dunno why they don't play 5 sets at tennis either tbh.

Never watched it Beetle, but it's like they're only 3/4 doing it .
Fitness can't be the issue and they're landing much softer punches too .
Don't get it myself.

[Loynesy]

Institutional sexism!

Probably, but still not a scientific reason.
I'd honestly love to know why women can't fight 3 minute rounds?
I bet some would welcome it .

I dunno why they don't play 5 sets at tennis either tbh.

BB - with tennis it's nothing to do with the female players, they would happily play 5 sets in the slams. It's the tournament organisers and the broadcasters as it would mess up their schedules and need to make the Slams more days.

[SeanBrennan]

I get exasperated by this intrinsic level of sexism. Do you not take the Olympic 100m Women's final seriously? The Wimbledon Ladies tennis final?

They are not men so the comparison to men is just irrelevant. My 12 year old daughter has been doing karate since she was 4, she will hopefully get her black belt within 2 years. She can kick the arse out of 95% of the people at her Dojo, but guess what -the other 5% are boys but they love training with her and respect her.

We occasionally get an England Woman's cricketer to come down and play a club game and she's by far the best player in the team.

You can't compare a female boxer with Terence Crawford or other elite male boxers.

I don't think there is a single poster on this forum that would last a round with Katie Taylor.

If you don't like women's boxing fine - just don't watch it but the sexist comments are just irrelevant.

agree with this post 100%%%

[SeanBrennan]

I'm basing my analysis purely on sports science.

And yes, I have but at a very low amateur junior level and at Cambridge where frankly it's impossible to knock anyone out with 16oz gloves.

I'm the antithesis of a keyboard warrior so let's just agree to disagree.

a very sensible sentiment here. Well done Loynesy