BoxRec

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 10:40**

Gazmac81 wrote:Maybe they will meet in final

its a good line up again this time

[/quote]

Have they done the draw yet or is that tomorrow?

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 10:45**

will find out tomorrow , should be on ringside

Jeff Thomas wrote:
Gazmac81 wrote:Maybe they will meet in final

its a good line up again this time

Have they done the draw yet or is that tomorrow?[/quote]

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 10:46**

So its Kev, El Maachi, Witter, Lynes.... who else?

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 10:50**

There the seeded ones and rest are

Bobby gladman ,John Wayne Hibbert , Peter Mcdonough and Nathan Graham

only one ive saw is Mcdonough

Jeff Thomas wrote:So its Kev, El Maachi, Witter, Lynes.... who else?

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 10:57**

Me too I think

Hibbert looks a decent puncher. Stopping Patterson is good form.

Gladman- no stoppages looks like he's being matched fairly capably for a novice but the draw with Scriven and close fight with Warburton would indicate that perhaps pace is not his thing.

Nathan Graham is on youtube here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cY1GKopStj8

Mixed record - weird he's been around a good while. His last fight is on youtube too.

And you know what your going to get with Mcdonagh- hard fight.

Interesting one.

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 11:13**

Jeff Thomas wrote:Listen DES let's compare 10k times I bet I kick your ass

Now your diverting away from the subject and avoiding the issue.....A normal trait for those who begin to realise they are wrong but of course cant admit it (remember, there is no shame in it)

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 11:15**

Des1 wrote:
Jeff Thomas wrote:Listen DES let's compare 10k times I bet I kick your ass
Now your diverting away from the subject and avoiding the issue.....A normal trait for those who begin to realise they are wrong but of course cant admit it (remember, there is no shame in it)

Read my post numbnuts

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 13:01**

Back to Tony Doherty (the original subject remember?) - how did such a 'talented' fighter get stopped (comprehensively) by Geraint Harvey who had lost forty odd of his previous fights?

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 13:43**

josco wrote:Back to Tony Doherty (the original subject remember?) - how did such a 'talented' fighter get stopped (comprehensively) by Geraint Harvey who had lost forty odd of his previous fights?

Geraint is a tough lad, and a real battler. 40 odd losses but matched very hard and always gave his best. I saw him beat Chris Johnson too and Johnson is a smashing boxer.

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 14:12**

josco wrote:Back to Tony Doherty (the original subject remember?) - how did such a 'talented' fighter get stopped (comprehensively) by Geraint Harvey who had lost forty odd of his previous fights?

I can remember Neil Foran getting wrecked by Glyn Rhodes years back. Glyn had lost a few and Foran was a former top amateur and was 'one to watch'.

It does happen from time to time.

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 15:16**

OH for fornicate sake this thread is out of control. it was meant to be about tony dohert. Anyone who reads fighting fit knows all of this. there is not fit just fit for purpose. You can be fit for boxing without running. Running is beneficial but there are other means. Throughout this thread ive mostly agreed with what Jeff thomas has been saying as he seems to be someone reading the up to date articles and journals to be knowledgeable on the matter. Des i do not mean this in an offensive way but you seem to be stuck in your ways and will never actually embrace new ideas. my suspicion is that your a trainer that has done it for many many years.

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 18:42**

Jeff Thomas wrote:DES1

I'm just going to summarise what you've put in this thread. Mainly for comedy purposes.

Despite not knowing what 'fit' means, you say that running is the best and most efficient way to get 'fit'.

You think that lung expansion is the common and correct terminology for lung capacity and that running is the 'best' way to do it.

A professional boxer or footballer is certain to be an expert in anatomy & physiology.

Its impossible to overtrain.

You should get enough rest, but only so long as it doesn't strech to over 24 hours because most boxers run everyday or have one day off from running.

Let me help you desmond. Fitness is extremely difficult to define and perhaps the best way to put it would be suitably adapted. In such that a marathon runner is fit to run marathons and a boxer is fit to box.A swimmer is fit to swim and so on. I think your a little confused in that you think that everybody in the world is trying to increase there lung capacity. Are body builders not fit? Are power lifters not fit? Are golfers not fit?

Your knowlege is limited at best and piggybacking on Machomans posts having no weight to support your own non-arguments demonstrates this. Over-training syndrome is common amongst athletes. But I wasn't even talking about over-training. I was talking about something completely different but don't worry you wouldn't understand. I can explain further the problems of training whilst suffering DOMS if you want?

You also seem to miss the point that you can perform any exercise to intervals and tempos not just running thus the wanking comment. There are exercises other then running that I would consider more challenging on the CV system and muscles then running - so if I perform them at the same intensity as a run am I not likely to get the same physiological benefits or is it something to do with magic fairy running powers that make your lungs magically expand.

Your posts coupled with your naievity are proper hilarious and I really hope your not a trainer of any description because your likely to get someone hurt with your lack of insight. If you only train yourself and go for runs on your own feel free to crack on running round like forrest gump but you won't make any serious gains unless you understand what your doing and why your doing it.

Thanks though i've had a good laugh today magic boy.

Jeffrey, again, running is infact the most economical and efficient way to get fit.

I didn't say that expansion was the correct terminology for lung capacity did I? Yet the term I used is understandable to everybody, you understood it didn't you.

Yes, a boxer or footballer would have a very good idea as one who participates and knows their fitness and how their body feels.

Quite right, it is impossible to over train. The effects of what you would call 'over training' would be 'under resting'.

You adjust your training, when I say under resting its what you do in between your training sessions say doing manual work, or not relaxing, not getting enough sleep etc. If you sleep and rest properly then 24hrs is well enough time to recover. So please dont imply that I mean't something different.

And please stop trying attempt to impress me with with the 'correct' terminology as we all know what it is, it doesn't make a statement that you are more knowledgeable on the issue. Of course we know the lungs dont physically 'expand'...Its called a figure of speech Jeffrey. Ok, maybe a lazy way of explaining but everyone understands it.

Make up your mind what your talking about. Running is non beneficial, then it is beneficial?? Your talking about over training...Then your not?

No, I wouldn't necessarily say all body builders or power lifters are 'fit' as what they do is based on strength. You can be strong and pumped up without being very fit....You do know that dont you. Yes, golfers obviously have a certain amount of fitness to be able to walk and swing a club but a golfer who runs regular would be fitter than the average golfer (thats not saying that would make him better, but in general he would be fitter).

I would get someone seriously hurt if I was a trainer if I recommend that they run regular as its a very good bases for fitness

I wouldn't suggest anyone to run like Forest Gump, just plodding one pace.

Jeffrey, I quite understand your frustration if you do not understand the methods of running and that your running consist of a weedy little plod

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 19:01**

Des, all I'm going to say is clueless nonsense,

I'm sure your a nice bloke so all the best but I can't debate with you any further

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 19:01**

Des, all I'm going to say is clueless nonsense,

I'm sure your a nice bloke so all the best but I can't debate with you any further

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 19:52**

Jeff Thomas wrote:Des, all I'm going to say is clueless nonsense,

I'm sure your a nice bloke so all the best but I can't debate with you any further

Are you on here every minute of the day?.......Anyway Jeff, yes I understand that you are clueless to it. That is quite obvious. You cannot debate any longer because you are unable to. I take you accept that it is beneficial for boxers to have running as part of their training regime. If you need any help of understanding of anything else just ask, as I said I'd happily help you. It takes a lot to get you out of your ignorance but hey...We got there in the end

Posted: **01 Jun 2011, 21:04**

Anyone who thinks running is bad or not necessary for boxing, come and bring your fighter (who's done no running) to spar with me for 8x3s.

Posted: **02 Jun 2011, 09:29**

Gray-Fox wrote:Anyone who thinks running is bad or not necessary for boxing, come and bring your fighter (who's done no running) to spar with me for 8x3s.

BoxRec

Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty

Re: Tony "Doc" Doherty