2 points noone has made about Pavlik-Taylor

E · Post by E » 01 Oct 2007, 19:22

Two matters that have not really been addressed:

1.) Pavlik's body punching: why is it that average boxing fans don't even see body punches? Pav lowered Taylor's guard and hurt him and slowed him down with his hurtful body punches. Why do even knowlegable boxing fans repeatedly underestimate and discount effective body punching? To me, it was clear from round 3 how Pav's body punches were hurtful and Taylor was droping his hands.

2.) Press about the fight: I was soooooo disappointed about the press coverage of the fight. I read about 5 newspapers a day, especially on Monday with the sports' pages. I can't believe how little coverage this exciting, undisputed fight got coverage. The only paper I saw that carried a picture was (unexpectly) the Daily Mail....and I believe only mentioned in the results section in the GUardian. There wasn't even a fight picture. The fight just seemed an after thought - worrying for the future of Boxing as a major sport....

Goz · Post by **Goz** » 01 Oct 2007, 19:42

I mentioned Pavliks body punching on another thread!

Me Me Me!! I did!!!

stujones · Post by **stujones** » 01 Oct 2007, 19:45

E wrote:Two matters that have not really been addressed:

1.) Pavlik's body punching: why is it that average boxing fans don't even see body punches? Pav lowered Taylor's guard and hurt him and slowed him down with his hurtful body punches. Why do even knowlegable boxing fans repeatedly underestimate and discount effective body punching? To me, it was clear from round 3 how Pav's body punches were hurtful and Taylor was droping his hands.

2.) Press about the fight: I was soooooo disappointed about the press coverage of the fight. I read about 5 newspapers a day, especially on Monday with the sports' pages. I can't believe how little coverage this exciting, undisputed fight got coverage. The only paper I saw that carried a picture was (unexpectly) the Daily Mail....and I believe only mentioned in the results section in the GUardian. There wasn't even a fight picture. The fight just seemed an after thought - worrying for the future of Boxing as a major sport....

Dissapointed but not surprised at your second point.... ITV are phasing out this phoning stuff - so fingers crossed - but again its not clear what their contract with Warren is about. Thats the only way its going to get paper coverage if its not involving a Brit.

jamesmcdonnell · Post by **jamesmcdonnell** » 01 Oct 2007, 21:27

This fight will receive little or no press coverage, as there is no British fighter involved. The newspapers rarely routinely cover international boxing these days.

STP · Post by **STP** » 01 Oct 2007, 21:31

Nobody is really interested in boxing, these days.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 02 Oct 2007, 04:29

I wouldn't worry. Pavlik is becoming the US Hatton. Dart playing, down to earth action packed guy with an army of fans who follow him anywhere. We know how many Hatton can take over to America. It's surprising that an American fighter, Pavlik, can get 5000 of his home fans to follow him for his big bout even into AC. If the papers don't cover, it doesn't matter. Boxing IS a cable thing unless you watch Amir Khan and therefore a bit of a culty thing despite it being the most exciting spectacle in the world that can attract big crowds.

whiskey · Post by **whiskey** » 02 Oct 2007, 07:33

Pavlik is a quality addiditon to the div in every sense.

He wins by throwing punches and attacking... not running and defending..

whiskey · Post by **whiskey** » 02 Oct 2007, 07:34

Must add though, jermain was more exciting in defeat than in victory too.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 02 Oct 2007, 09:02

Pavlik's certainly not short of marketable options: Taylor 2, Duddy, Mora.

I've seen all I want of Taylor, if I'm being honest.

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 02 Oct 2007, 09:52

Terry D wrote:
Autobarn wrote:Pavlik's certainly not short of marketable options: Taylor 2, Duddy, Mora.

I've seen all I want of Taylor, if I'm being honest.
So if the rematch is made you won't be tuning in?

Taylor must have done you wrong at some point. Boring fights granted at times but boxing fans will put up with dull fights from the likes of Hopkins, why single Jermain out? Is it because he is such a good-looking fellow

yeah, I'd watch Pavlik-Taylor 2.

In fact, I never wanted to see Hopkins again after Taylor 1 and 2 but got excited about him getting Tarver and then was sick of him after his 0-0 (about as many clean shots as there were in the fight) bore with Winky. How's that for balance?

Taylor's definitely had 2 compeling fights - Winky and Pavlik. I change my view: I'd watch him 1 more time. Just not keen on his style/personality if I'm being honest.

thepocketrocket · Post by **thepocketrocket** » 02 Oct 2007, 10:11

Bring on John Duddy!!!

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 02 Oct 2007, 11:51

The body shot may have been crucial in getting Pavlik back in the fight. In the 3rd he hooked Taylor downstairs to set up a # of right crosses that had Taylor looking quite hurt on the ropes.

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 02 Oct 2007, 13:38

Terry D wrote:
Autobarn wrote:
Terry D wrote: So if the rematch is made you won't be tuning in?

Taylor must have done you wrong at some point. Boring fights granted at times but boxing fans will put up with dull fights from the likes of Hopkins, why single Jermain out? Is it because he is such a good-looking fellow
yeah, I'd watch Pavlik-Taylor 2.

In fact, I never wanted to see Hopkins again after Taylor 1 and 2 but got excited about him getting Tarver and then was sick of him after his 0-0 (about as many clean shots as there were in the fight) bore with Winky. How's that for balance?

Taylor's definitely had 2 compeling fights - Winky and Pavlik. I change my view: I'd watch him 1 more time. Just not keen on his style/personality if I'm being honest.
He seems a decent enough guy outside the ring. A little bland maybe but anyone who hangs with Bill Clinton gets my vote.

Taylor had the toughest title winning test in recent history. Although he was the perfect man to beat Hopkins, who cannot counter natural speed, Taylor still had to step in and do it. Saturday was a disappointment but for some reason, yourself excluded, he just seems to rub people up the wrong way.

Credit to Noone for pointing out Pavlik's body attack though

Does Audely know you are cheating on him with Taylor?

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 02 Oct 2007, 13:47

Terry D wrote:
MIKEE wrote:
Terry D wrote: He seems a decent enough guy outside the ring. A little bland maybe but anyone who hangs with Bill Clinton gets my vote.

Taylor had the toughest title winning test in recent history. Although he was the perfect man to beat Hopkins, who cannot counter natural speed, Taylor still had to step in and do it. Saturday was a disappointment but for some reason, yourself excluded, he just seems to rub people up the wrong way.

Credit to Noone for pointing out Pavlik's body attack though
Does Audely know you are cheating on him with Taylor?
You're a funny bastard Mikee.

One tries.

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 02 Oct 2007, 13:53

Terry D wrote:
MIKEE wrote:
Terry D wrote: You're a funny bastard Mikee.
One tries.
Nice philosophy. You should point it out to Taylor.

That was Saturday night for you... one tried, one did....

WildWaylon · Post by **WildWaylon** » 02 Oct 2007, 15:47

Different sports have their highs and lows - Cricket was once our national sport but lost its popularity and Football took over - Now cricket is popular again but will never regain its position as Englands number one game - Rugby was once a minority sport but since the mid 80s it has gained more and more fans and is now a very major sport - Boxing was at one time very big especially during the Clay/Ali era - Waiting for one of his bouts was similar to a kid waiting for Christmas day - Almost everyone tuned in to see the Ali bouts - In those days however all the emphasis was on the HW division and they were the only guys I think who got the big paydays - Things have changed a lot and the other weights have had their share of the limelight for quite a few years now - Boxing seemed to go downhill after the Benn/Eubank/Collins/Naz era but there are signs it is picking up again with the likes of Khan/Hatton/Calzaghe/Haye/Macca - Boxing needs to be on National TV (ITV BBC) not Sky and Setanta to get back to where it was - Who has the most recognizable face Khan or Hatton? - To the average Joe, Khan is the star, but he shouldnt be - We have some cracking bouts comming up Hatton/Mayweather Calzaghe/Kessler Haye/Mormeck that involve British fighters - None of these fights are forgone conclusions like the many we have seen in recent years - These are genuine best v best fights and this is what boxing needs for the sport to get back its once high profile status.

Phenomenal-Nutrition · Post by **Phenomenal-Nutrition** » 02 Oct 2007, 16:15

Hasn't boxing always needed a big British Interest though? Would we have been such big Ali fans if eh didn't fight Cooper/London/Bugner? Would we have been Hagler fans if he didnt beat Minter? Or would Tyson be quite as big hear if it wasn't for Frank Bruno? Why do we know Barrera again - Prince Naseem Hamed.

I don't think the British media were bothered about Roy Jones or James Toney in the 90s, but they would if they came and beat Benn/Eubank.

Obviously there are the exceptions like Ray Leonard/Tyson that transcend the sport. But not even Delahoya made many waves over here, although Hamed and Hatton have been HUGE

m1kee50 · Post by **m1kee50** » 02 Oct 2007, 16:25

Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:Hasn't boxing always needed a big British Interest though? Would we have been such big Ali fans if eh didn't fight Cooper/London/Bugner? Would we have been Hagler fans if he didnt beat Minter? Or would Tyson be quite as big hear if it wasn't for Frank Bruno? Why do we know Barrera again - Prince Naseem Hamed.

I don't think the British media were bothered about Roy Jones or James Toney in the 90s, but they would if they came and beat Benn/Eubank.

Obviously there are the exceptions like Ray Leonard/Tyson that transcend the sport. But not even Delahoya made many waves over here, although Hamed and Hatton have been HUGE

good point

WildWaylon · Post by **WildWaylon** » 02 Oct 2007, 16:43

MIKEE wrote:
Phenomenal-Nutrition wrote:Hasn't boxing always needed a big British Interest though? Would we have been such big Ali fans if eh didn't fight Cooper/London/Bugner? Would we have been Hagler fans if he didnt beat Minter? Or would Tyson be quite as big hear if it wasn't for Frank Bruno? Why do we know Barrera again - Prince Naseem Hamed.

I don't think the British media were bothered about Roy Jones or James Toney in the 90s, but they would if they came and beat Benn/Eubank.

Obviously there are the exceptions like Ray Leonard/Tyson that transcend the sport. But not even Delahoya made many waves over here, although Hamed and Hatton have been HUGE
good point

A very good point, cant argue with most of that - DLH made a lot of waves with my wife though (her sporting pinup)

Actually I and I should think hundreds of thousands of others throughout the UK got up at 3am to watch Clay/Liston which was of course was an all American fight- After that we watched every one of his fights regardless of whether the opponent was British or not - The lippy kid wasnt given any sort of chance of beating the hardened prison brawler Liston - Clay said "Im gonna whoop that big ugly bear" and of course he did - Nobody before him mouthed off in such a way, the hype worked but he had to be able to back it up, and he did.

rhino222 · Post by **rhino222** » 02 Oct 2007, 18:23

pavlik is so so so limited its unbelievable. he is wide open but he fights fire with fire, he drags well disciplined men into the trenches, then schools them in tranch warfare.

its a refreshing thing in boxing, we have had too many years of the fancy dan tactical crap of hopkins etc. with pavlik you know he is gonna go to war, i dont rate his longevity but its bloody good box office...

Autobarn · Post by **Autobarn** » 03 Oct 2007, 03:01

rhino222 wrote:pavlik is so so so limited its unbelievable. he is wide open but he fights fire with fire, he drags well disciplined men into the trenches, then schools them in tranch warfare.

its a refreshing thing in boxing, we have had too many years of the fancy dan tactical crap of hopkins etc. with pavlik you know he is gonna go to war, i dont rate his longevity but its bloody good box office...

no he's not limited. he struggled with Taylor's speed and looks like a badly weight drained fighter to me who - as Steve Kim mentioned - can't use his legs because of the nightmare that is getting down to 160. He does have an excellent jab, fights very well on the inside (here is where Taylor is limited). When he got warmed up in the 7th he built a beautiful rhythm, hit Taylor with double jabs and rights and set up frightening barrages. Technically he's more compromised at this level, but his punch delivery is good, he can catch you with his power and he can learn on the job.

Victor Oganov is "so so limited" I'd say; not Pavlik.

steve689 · Post by **steve689** » 03 Oct 2007, 10:19

G0mez wrote:Must add though, jermain was more exciting in defeat than in victory too.

As Abrams said in BN, Taylor may get the credit he craves in defeat rather than victory. So it turned out.

2 points noone has made about Pavlik-Taylor

2 points noone has made about Pavlik-Taylor

Re: 2 points noone has made about Pavlik-Taylor