Possible Fight of the Year looms...

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 08 Oct 2003, 09:59

Neil Sinclair against Jimmy Vincent for the vacant WBU welterweight title will probably feature on the undercard of Hatton's next fight in December.
This one doesn't need a crappy title. It's a 12-rounder that could develop into the fight of the year.

MightyWarrior · Post by **MightyWarrior** » 08 Oct 2003, 10:07

Good fight this. Some people are suggesting this is warren's way of getting Vincent knocked off, and avoiding having to give him the rematch he's owed for the British title.

Frank would never be so underhanded would he?

Kilburn · Post by **Kilburn** » 08 Oct 2003, 10:18

If Vincent loses to Sinclair (which he probably will) then will this mean that Jimmy somehow loses his #1 position in the British rankings?

Have to say I'd be gutted if Vincent v Barnes II didn't happen. The first one was a fantastic spectacle thanks to BOTH fighters.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 08 Oct 2003, 10:44

Bit upset, as I was expecting Vincent vs Barnes II before the end of the year.

Got to fancy Sinclair in this fight, his chin is far from 100% solid, but I doubt Vincent's got the power to inflict the damage that Santos did.

The interesting question is whether Sinclair has the power to KO the mighty tough Vincent.

I say he's got the power to earn Vincent's respect, which will win him the contest, but he won't KO Vincent.

Sinclair Pts.

Still hoping Vincent gets the chance for revenge against Barnes.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 08 Oct 2003, 11:51

Kilburn wrote:If Vincent loses to Sinclair (which he probably will) then will this mean that Jimmy somehow loses his #1 position in the British rankings?

Have to say I'd be gutted if Vincent v Barnes II didn't happen. The first one was a fantastic spectacle thanks to BOTH fighters.

Good point. Vincent has stepped aside (apparently for big money) to allow Barnes to make a soft first defence of his British title (possibly against Mark Winters) once the champion recovers from the injured hand he suffered in their fight and a pub incident in which he and Matthew Hall were slashed.
But Jimmy only stepped aside on the premise that he remains Barnes's mandatory contender. So, for the first time in his career, Vincent finds himself in a great position. He has already been well compensated for stepping aside, gets another big payday against Sinclair, in a fight he has a chance of winning. And, if he does lose, is guaranteed a shot at Barnes.

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 08 Oct 2003, 13:46

bennie wrote:
Kilburn wrote:If Vincent loses to Sinclair (which he probably will) then will this mean that Jimmy somehow loses his #1 position in the British rankings?

Have to say I'd be gutted if Vincent v Barnes II didn't happen. The first one was a fantastic spectacle thanks to BOTH fighters.
Good point. Vincent has stepped aside (apparently for big money) to allow Barnes to make a soft first defence of his British title (possibly against Mark Winters) once the champion recovers from the injured hand he suffered in their fight and a pub incident in which he and Matthew Hall were slashed.
But Jimmy only stepped aside on the premise that he remains Barnes's mandatory contender. So, for the first time in his career, Vincent finds himself in a great position. He has already been well compensated for stepping aside, gets another big payday against Sinclair, in a fight he has a chance of winning. And, if he does lose, is guaranteed a shot at Barnes.

Bennie, Winters vs Barnes would be fairly interesting.

Unless, David has learned alot from the Vincent defeat (well, that's what I'm calling it) then Winters could pose some questions .

Mark Winters was once a good boxer, who could still surprise.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 08 Oct 2003, 14:09

Barnes-Vincent to me was the worst robbery in a British ring i have seen for many years, in fact in any ring for that matter. No one can convince me that Barnes ever won that fight, only the warped mind of the referee saw him winning. Vincent is a true warrior and an honest competitor and i hope he beats Sinclair which is unlikely as although Sinclair has a weak chin Vincent should lack the power to stop him. Warren is a fraud promoter who only enjoys mismatches, he has no intention of putting his overhyped "prodigy" Barnes in against Vincent to get exposed again, you can only get away with a Germanesque decision once before people start to get supicious.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 08 Oct 2003, 15:37

steve689 wrote:Barnes-Vincent to me was the worst robbery in a British ring i have seen for many years, in fact in any ring for that matter. No one can convince me that Barnes ever won that fight, only the warped mind of the referee saw him winning. Vincent is a true warrior and an honest competitor and i hope he beats Sinclair which is unlikely as although Sinclair has a weak chin Vincent should lack the power to stop him. Warren is a fraud promoter who only enjoys mismatches, he has no intention of putting his overhyped "prodigy" Barnes in against Vincent to get exposed again, you can only get away with a Germanesque decision once before people start to get supicious.

He has to put him in with Vincent again. The Board have mandated a rematch. The only way it won't happen is if Vincent beats Sinclair and thus concentrates on the WBU title, or Barnes relinquishes.

Priff · Post by **Priff** » 09 Oct 2003, 04:04

steve689 wrote:Barnes-Vincent to me was the worst robbery in a British ring i have seen for many years, in fact in any ring for that matter. No one can convince me that Barnes ever won that fight, only the warped mind of the referee saw him winning.

I couldn't agree more.
I was really gutted for Vincent because I felt he had lost his one chance of making some real money, but it looks like his performance has really put him in the mix. I'm really glad about that.

I know he thrashed Barnes the first time, but Barnes has time to improve and if I recall correctly, he was under prepared for the fight. Not sure if the re-match is a forgone conclusion.