Gammer vs Paul king result

Dirk Kelly · Post by **Dirk Kelly** » 12 Jun 2007, 11:29

Why LOL? Paul King is one hard b@stard who comes to survive, its all about how good you look beating him that matters.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 12 Jun 2007, 11:52

dopey wrote:Why LOL? Paul King is one hard b@stard who comes to survive, its all about how good you look beating him that matters.

Indeed - easy to be dismissive of the likes of Kingy. Gammer was still pretty novicey when he fought an in shape and motivated Williams - I like him and think he can come back well.

jomothepure · Post by **jomothepure** » 12 Jun 2007, 12:16

I'm not completely sold on Gammer tbh. Lacks the chin and power to take him much further than domestic level. Even there, he'd be beaten by Sprott, Skelton, Aud and Danny, even with those fours' various creaking bones and frailties.

Scrap · Post by **Scrap** » 12 Jun 2007, 12:24

If pauls in the mood and trained for a week hes a handfull

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 12 Jun 2007, 12:34

boxrec wrote:what are sprott, skelton, williams and harrisons main weaknesses?

Sprott - Size, Punch output, and occasionally bottles when facing a big man.

Williams - Conditioning, Punch resistance (and balance), Foot speed (related to conditioning), Tactical awareness.

Skelton - Defense, Technique, Age, Balance.

Harrison - Chin, Stamina, Punch output, Heart, Fear of Getting hit.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 12 Jun 2007, 13:50

jomothepure wrote:I'm not completely sold on Gammer tbh. Lacks the chin and power to take him much further than domestic level. Even there, he'd be beaten by Sprott, Skelton, Aud and Danny, even with those fours' various creaking bones and frailties.

I'm not totally sold on him either - it's just because not many people have seen him, plus a points win v Paul King might lead naive folk to the conclusion that he's shit - and he's not.

Scooby Doo · Post by **Scooby Doo** » 12 Jun 2007, 13:52

Good result by Kingy.

TerribleTerry · Post by **TerribleTerry** » 12 Jun 2007, 14:58

Scrap wrote:If pauls in the mood and trained for a week hes a handfull

He was giving the ring rusty Pele Reid a few things to think about before being pole axed late on.

Its the way Pual looks, so gaunt and unathletic, that fools a lot of people..

He is big, strong and fearless. That combination can make you dangerous in the shallow talent pool we have a heavy..

sweetscience · Post by **sweetscience** » 12 Jun 2007, 15:09

to be fair both gammer and king are shite

dont no why i clicked on this thread

adios

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 12 Jun 2007, 17:45

paul king is fornicating crap...come on guys, get a grip, if you are decent you stop guys of this quality, im not doubting paul kings bollocks, but hell, are we saying that he is good..

Scooby Doo · Post by **Scooby Doo** » 12 Jun 2007, 18:12

I have read through this thread and I don't think anyone says Paul King is good, brilliant or whatever, just a solid journeyman who on his own admission enjoys his present status of being a much wanted heavyweight journeyman fighter who wants to earn a few quid, good luck to him.

dondada · Post by **dondada** » 13 Jun 2007, 05:16

rhino222 wrote:paul king is effing crap...come on guys, get a grip, if you are decent you stop guys of this quality, im not doubting paul kings bollocks, but hell, are we saying that he is good..

No, we aren't.

el_grande_mauro_mina · Post by **el_grande_mauro_mina** » 13 Jun 2007, 08:54

I think Gammer is a good fighter, for once Williams trained, came in light and motivated and Gammer was on the recieving end of a fired up, commited Williams who stopped him in a good fight.

Wasn't Gammer meant to be fighting McDermott or someone like that and the fight fell through with Kingy being a late replacement. King is a tough guy and when motivated can stay the distance. There is no shame in the result IMO.

Dirk Kelly · Post by **Dirk Kelly** » 13 Jun 2007, 09:35

Carlos-Wigan wrote:I think Gammer is a good fighter, for once Williams trained, came in light and motivated and Gammer was on the recieving end of a fired up, commited Williams who stopped him in a good fight.

Wasn't Gammer meant to be fighting McDermott or someone like that and the fight fell through with Kingy being a late replacement. King is a tough guy and when motivated can stay the distance. There is no shame in the result IMO.

Spot on, Gammer faced a Williams who was coming off the Harrison defeat, did his homework (for once some might say), knew what he had to do by coming in light and using speed and movement to outwork, out class and eventually defeat Gammer.

After seeing Gammer fight on the Harrison vs. Williams 1 undercard I was never convinced of him, he looked flat footed, attacked in very straight lines and was there for the taking for someone to use speed and footwork to get in and out avoiding his bombs.

he was supposed to fight Kenna instead of King till a stray Simpkin elbow broken Kenna's nose. This is a fight Kenna should have had years ago IMO.

Coco · Post by **Coco** » 13 Jun 2007, 12:50

I think Gammer will win his Brit title back.

The others mentioned will look beyond the Lonsdale belt and have more miles on the clock so their careers will end sooner.

Scott can learn from his defeat and come back better.

I think he will beat McDermott in the eliminator so that whoever is champ at the time will be forced to fight him soon enough or vacate

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 13 Jun 2007, 13:19

Scrap wrote:If pauls in the mood and trained for a week hes a handfull

absolute tosh, handful of what exactly...... ??

all he can do is survive by spoiling and wrecking a decent scrap, we should not encourage fighters like this...

at least people like 'slick' miller came to have a blast with a 'chin or be chinned' attitude. now thats what i call a journeyman !!

Coco · Post by **Coco** » 13 Jun 2007, 13:22

rhino222 wrote:
Scrap wrote:If pauls in the mood and trained for a week hes a handfull
absolute tosh, handful of what exactly...... ??

all he can do is survive by spoiling and wrecking a decent scrap, we should not encourage fighters like this...

at least people like 'slick' miller came to have a blast with a 'chin or be chinned' attitude. now thats what i call a journeyman !!

Journeymen with chin or be chinned attitudes don't last very long, so aren't really journeymen, and those sorts get hurt.

sweetscience · Post by **sweetscience** » 13 Jun 2007, 13:31

Coco wrote:
rhino222 wrote:
Scrap wrote:If pauls in the mood and trained for a week hes a handfull
absolute tosh, handful of what exactly...... ??

all he can do is survive by spoiling and wrecking a decent scrap, we should not encourage fighters like this...

at least people like 'slick' miller came to have a blast with a 'chin or be chinned' attitude. now thats what i call a journeyman !!
Journeymen with chin or be chinned attitudes don't last very long, so aren't really journeymen, and those sorts get hurt.

i agree with rhino

in my eyes there are two sorts of jouneymen:-

1. Complete jokes like Buckley and King who come to survive and throw nothing back

2. limited warriors - like Ernie and Billy Smith, they come to win

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 13 Jun 2007, 13:43

sweetscience..im completely with you, and you have given good examples too. the smith brothers give their all and are in shape too.

king is a lump of lard who will not impress anyone who is attending a show for the first time, people want to see athletes and not tomato-cans !!

we are supposed to be trying to sell our sport to non boxing fans.

Scooby Doo · Post by **Scooby Doo** » 13 Jun 2007, 18:19

Rhino I thought you liked your journeyman boxers you stated they are the life blood of the sport. Why your change of stance now?

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 13 Jun 2007, 19:06

complete bollocks, ive never ever been a fan of anyone who does not try to win.....it stinks