hare just got beat

REAL_DEAL · Post by **REAL_DEAL** » 04 Dec 2003, 18:01

james hare got stopped in the 10th corner stopped the fight, hare didnt even win a round,

bad luck hare

also if bennie asked me what would of happened before the fight i would of said rivera would of beat hare :P

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 04 Dec 2003, 18:33

I missed the fight, but I am absolutely stunned - no longer in the running for boxer of the year then.

Gutted, I can't really believe it - I thought he was for real.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 04 Dec 2003, 19:20

What the hell has happened to Hare! He looked so good against Bergman, he looked a bit shaky in his last fight, and now this! Cosme Rivera really wasn't highly touted either.

Hare looked like a great bet for future genuine world title contention to me.

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 04 Dec 2003, 19:36

That was a disastrous loss for Hare. He was IBF number three and close to a proper world title shot. He now needs to look to the domestic scene again. He won a British title eliminator a couple of years back, but then opted for the Commonwealth title. Perhaps the winner of Vincent-Magee would be an option. But, as I say, a disastrous night.

Bard of Boxrec · Post by **Bard of Boxrec** » 04 Dec 2003, 19:43

yeah but could you seriously imagine him in there with mayorga?

bennie · Post by **bennie** » 04 Dec 2003, 19:48

Riddick Blowe wrote:yeah but could you seriously imagine him in there with mayorga?

Or Spinks...

Eric the Viking · Post by **Eric the Viking** » 04 Dec 2003, 20:04

IMO, this illustrates the danger of rating fighters mainly due to their & their opponents' records. Hare came into the fight undefeated - that's good. But who had he beat? OK, Matolcsi - 17-3 is pretty good, right? But dig a little deeper and you see that of Matolcsi's 17 wins, only five were vs. opponents with winning records (and one of those was a whopping 1-0). Bergman's re'sume' is slightly betrter, but he got it by beating mostly the same kinds of inflated-record stiffs Hare had been fed.

No way should Hare have been rated anywhere near the top 10. But as we just saw, these things have a way of correcting themselves sooner or later.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 04 Dec 2003, 20:21

Teh difference is however, that Bergman was a very experienced
operator at top level, and wasn't a pug by any stretch, not just that
but Hare had looked so good defensively, how can he just get banged
about like that by Rivera.

I'm astonished by this, but I thought that his last fight was pretty ominous, I wonder whether there are some external factors involved here, Hare looked a lot better than this result would indicate, I've been to watch him fight before, and he just looked so skilfull.

Twinkle Toes · Post by **Twinkle Toes** » 05 Dec 2003, 02:49

Terry O'Conner had the fight even :)

I think he is losing the plot of late.

mrbassie · Post by **mrbassie** » 05 Dec 2003, 05:21

definately losing it. That was as one sided as it gets. Hare was terrible, didn't even try to come forward most of the fight, duh! no defence either, left the jab hanging...every mistake in the book. Worse thing is the UK is filled with other fighters who are just the same, of course to sky they're "potential world class".

Priff · Post by **Priff** » 05 Dec 2003, 06:15

Twinkle Toes wrote:Terry O'Conner had the fight even :)

I think he is losing the plot of late.

Yeah man. I loved the raised eyebrows at ringside when they announced that one.

Bard of Boxrec · Post by **Bard of Boxrec** » 05 Dec 2003, 09:28

bennie wrote:
Riddick Blowe wrote:yeah but could you seriously imagine him in there with mayorga?
Or Spinks...

well, mayorga after he's through with spinks...

DIRT SUGAR · Post by **DIRT SUGAR** » 05 Dec 2003, 09:34

I think his recent results flattered him to be honest but he looked tired and slow. Saying that, the uppercuts and bodyshots Rivera was hitting with had something to do with that and fair play Hare admitted he was a good fighter.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 05 Dec 2003, 10:29

I've seen Hare fight several times, and the way he performed just does not sound right. Hare was always defensively excellent, and a very sharp and crisp puncher, if he was leaving the jab hanging out, and getting banged about then something sounds wrong.

Maybe he just cannot take a shot, prior to this fight, he never seemed to get tagged often enough to tell.

I really am mystified, Hare was no joke, maybe Rivera is one of those fighters whose past record does not do justice to his talent, I spoke to someone who has trained with Rivera, and they told me that they think he may go a lot further...

A damned shame, hope Hare can get back,

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 05 Dec 2003, 16:52

I was desperate to let the fight go to the scorecards to see what the judges were seeing but it was not to be, i felt someone would have a silly score. Sky annoy me constantly with there lack of world boxing knowledge, Hare was poor and his opponent was better because he was more experienced and used his height and reach advantages well but when we get Spencer Oliver saying stuff like "Hare is finding out what it's like in true world class tonight against this guy Rivera" it rattles me. Rivera is good but not true world class, the first and only time before last night i had seen Rivera was a poor showing against an equally dire campaigner called Wilfedo Negron for the IBA Welterweight America's title and it was desperate stuff, Rivera's win over Hare showed that Hare will have trouble at range. A rematch? No chance, i'd count my losses and stay away from Rivera, Hare is too small to beat him IMO.