BoxRec

this whole forum is a bunch of bullshit,too many haters for me but i look to see whos calling who, why cant boxing fans get behind boxers, some two faced ppl on here and too many know it alls,pratts, good luck smith, dilks and any other fighter whos posted on this thread, some boxers respect each other regardless,some fighters knock other fighters a case of sour grapes perhaps..?

avidlemon wrote:It is all bollocks to be honest. He has shown he could be a very good, maybe great boxer, but it is all potential right now. He does however need to beat people like Dilks to retain his credability. Dilks did of course lose in his fight for the commonwealth, but many people had him winning the fight, so If Groves is serious about being the best Supermiddle in the country, maybe he should fight Dilks first.

I heard somewhere that Dilks was looking for an opponent.

Avid you keep harping on about Groves needing to prove himself before he challenges for the British title, but who really deserves to be ahead of him in the queue?

Dodson is coming of two failed attempts at regaining the British title, and has recently declared that he may never make smw again.
Salem is facing 'an inevitable custodial sentence'.
DeGale's level of opposition has clearly been inferior.
Mendy wishes to campaign at middle.
Kenny Anderson has been unfortunate in that he has seen two eliminators fall through, but several accounts suggest he was fortunate to get the win against Mendy (although Jeff Thomas is adamant that the right man won), and I don't really think he merits mandatory status ahead of Groves when you consider his opposition to date.
And then there's Quigley who has only fought twice in the last one and a half years, and hasn't fought since his disputed loss to Smith.

Of the above the only fighter who has an argument to be above Groves in the pecking order is Quigley.
As for Dilks, if he had an agreement to fight Groves in his first defence, George should honour said agreement.

It's all good fun Smigga

im not his number 1 fan but i do admire smigga for coming on here&telling it how it is....
but groves would finish you&u know that....

Proper funny thread this.

I reckon we all have a big royal rumble. All of us who've posted on here with Magee, Groves, Anderson and DeGale.

Then we can all have a good laugh over a babysham afterwards.

(I'd win by the way, Rick Flair circa '92 stylee)



(for the avoidance of doubt, and for the nuggets on here that cant seem to distinguish between a valid point and someone taking the piss...I'm taking the piss)

the truth wrote:this whole forum is a bunch of bullshit,

Bye then

It's definitely gone a bit OTT here, with some intelligent responses and valid questions being overshadowed by the trolls and unnecessary vitriol.
I think Paul Smith has provided a sensible justification for his position and Carl Dilk's 'fight anyone' stance has to be applauded.
It's so easy to lose perspective on this forum at times and the bottom line is that we should be grateful that we have such a rich vein of talent in the domestic super-middleweight scene.
If we manage to avoid the awful scenario we had a few years ago at light-middle where matches involving Roberts, Alexander etc didn't happen when they should have, the next couple of years should be electric and an absolute feast for us fight fans.
If they don't happen, that's when the criticisms will have real weight and justification

Spud wrote:

the truth wrote:this whole forum is a bunch of bullshit,

Bye then

bye bye " spud " never a name more fitting i might add!! bet uve never been near the ring with a pair of gloves on for someone being such an " expert " see ya " SPUD"

Ahh bless your cotton socks!!!

Its been a while - I see the Village is missing you again!!!

no they sent me looking for u and i found u here " spud "

No matter who paul fights next there's always going to be someone who will have something to say and want him to fight someone else he can't win! And there's no point people coming on here and having a go at him for who he's fighting and who he's not fighting because at the end of the day like bellews said its not down to him who he fights next! There's idiots on here trying to mak out he's avoiding people disrespecting him when people with half a brain know he will fight anyone who's put in front of him anyone! There will be a few of use who will write back at this post saying he should be fighting degale or groves next, and as good as they both are in my opinion I don't think they deserve to fight for a british title yet, both of them havnt beat anyone worth talking about yet if were honest and I think if they both fought the likes of quigly, dodson, anderson dilks in the next few fights then I think they'd have more of an argument about fighting paul but now right now!

joe selkirk wrote:No matter who paul fights next there's always going to be someone who will have something to say and want him to fight someone else he can't win! And there's no point people coming on here and having a go at him for who he's fighting and who he's not fighting because at the end of the day like bellews said its not down to him who he fights next! There's idiots on here trying to mak out he's avoiding people disrespecting him when people with half a brain know he will fight anyone who's put in front of him anyone! There will be a few of use who will write back at this post saying he should be fighting degale or groves next, and as good as they both are in my opinion I don't think they deserve to fight for a british title yet, both of them havnt beat anyone worth talking about yet if were honest and I think if they both fought the likes of quigly, dodson, anderson dilks in the next few fights then I think they'd have more of an argument about fighting paul but now right now!

There is every point people giving their opinions and challenging what they believe is incorrect.

Paul Smith's had two tough fights in a row, so I think he deserves to defend and win the British belt outright against whomever he sees fit. Now, don't get me wrong, I personally believe Smith is very overrated and will lose again once he steps up in real class - in fact I had him losing to Quigley. But take nothing away from him. He puts everything on the line and has fought through some pretty horrendous cuts to win - that shows a quality only a few fighters have. And, if we're honest, he seems like a really decent guy with good articulation, something of which a lot of people don't possess.

Ideally I would love to see a Quigley rematch, but that probably won't happen. If Paul won convincingly then that would take away the controversy that fight caused. He would also win the belt outright, and I believe him when he says that he's giving the belt up to move onto the Euro scene. Furthermore, there isn't an abundance of deserving contenders at the moment. Dilks isn't great, DeGale and Groves are way too green, so folk should go easy on Smith if he takes a fight with a Mendy or McGuire. After all, you can tell he wants that belt outright.

And to the person who said he would give Groves 8/11 over Paul Smith; all I can say is that you better not bet for real, otherwise you could end up in big, big trouble. Groves is way too green for someone who is battle-hardened like Smith is. Smith KO7, IMO.

Dioufy wrote:Paul Smith's had two tough fights in a row, so I think he deserves to defend and win the British belt outright against whomever he sees fit. Now, don't get me wrong, I personally believe Smith is very overrated and will lose again once he steps up in real class - in fact I had him losing to Quigley. But take nothing away from him. He puts everything on the line and has fought through some pretty horrendous cuts to win - that shows a quality only a few fighters have. And, if we're honest, he seems like a really decent guy with good articulation, something of which a lot of people don't possess.

Ideally I would love to see a Quigley rematch, but that probably won't happen. If Paul won convincingly then that would take away the controversy that fight caused. He would also win the belt outright, and I believe him when he says that he's giving the belt up to move onto the Euro scene. Furthermore, there isn't an abundance of deserving contenders at the moment. Dilks isn't great, DeGale and Groves are way too green, so folk should go easy on Smith if he takes a fight with a Mendy or McGuire. After all, you can tell he wants that belt outright.

And to the person who said he would give Groves 8/11 over Paul Smith; all I can say is that you better not bet for real, otherwise you could end up in big, big trouble. Groves is way too green for someone who is battle-hardened like Smith is. Smith KO7, IMO.

Excellent (and well balanced) post, in full agreement.

Well I think the points and opinions that are being made shouldn't be aimed at paul! Pauls a boxer its not his job to make fights that's the whole point of having promoters and matchmakers! Trust me paul would fight anyone groves deagale any of them, no one knows what franks plans are for alls u know one of them could be fighting paul after his next defence when them fights make a bit more sence, so I'll say it again its pointless having a go at paul over who he's fighting when knowone knows what's going to happen in the next fight or two, if people have a problem with matchmaking it should be a new topic aimed at the matchmakers not the boxers!

Dioufy,

I have come to highly respect Paul Smith - still disagree with him on many issues and I will still be stubborn enough to write on this forum my points - however the way Smith has handled the various degree of criticisms from all angles has to be applauded so much so I want to see him do well - so I can have some more banter on here with him to give him that opportunity of ramming my early criticisms of him down my throat - in fact when he does fight for the European title I will find a disguise to see him fight live!!!

But lets get down to your post - I am in complete agreement - the fight I would most like to see is a rematch with Quigley - I am sure it would be a truly excellent match up where both fighters would have the opportunity to iron out any faults or criticisms from the first fight.

With regards McDermott - Yes I think it would be a fantastic achievement for Paul Smith to win the Lonsdale Belt outright and in some ways I view it as quite refreshing that Smith is insisting on doing so before he moves on - however to use Darren McDermott as a legitimate opponent for a fight for the British Super Middleweight title is for me not a good choice at all bearing in mind all of the other opponents that could be used who are presently making a name for themselves at Super Middleweight.

With regards to your comments concerning how good Smith is - I actually side with you and as you know I did so very early on - but because it was me voicing that opinion - you and other posters will realise all hell broke loose and the ensuing banter just got worse and worse and was fortunately sorted out privately which is why I have the utmost respect for Smith now.

Finally with all this talk of Smith and Groves - the Super Middleweight I have criticised most not because of his ability but some of his character traits is James Degale - I actually after many months thinking about it - think he will come out on top of the UK Suoermiddleweights in the next 12 months - call it a hunch as to why I think that.

joe selkirk wrote:Well I think the points and opinions that are being made shouldn'

Very weak argument indeed.

Whilst a boxer has a contract with the promoter he has every opportunity to turn an opponent down and ask for another.

Even if a contract is that water tight - a boxer has an opportunity of not renewing the contract with the said promoter when it is due for renewal.

In this case Frank W arren is the person you are insuating should take the blame - not in my book - look at that sh*t Mr
W arren took in the case of the opponents for Hatton and Calzaghe - but yet no one questioned Hatton or Calzaghe why they kept on signing contract renewals.

JamesH wrote:

Dioufy wrote:Paul Smith's had two tough fights in a row, so I think he deserves to defend and win the British belt outright against whomever he sees fit. Now, don't get me wrong, I personally believe Smith is very overrated and will lose again once he steps up in real class - in fact I had him losing to Quigley. But take nothing away from him. He puts everything on the line and has fought through some pretty horrendous cuts to win - that shows a quality only a few fighters have. And, if we're honest, he seems like a really decent guy with good articulation, something of which a lot of people don't possess.

Ideally I would love to see a Quigley rematch, but that probably won't happen. If Paul won convincingly then that would take away the controversy that fight caused. He would also win the belt outright, and I believe him when he says that he's giving the belt up to move onto the Euro scene. Furthermore, there isn't an abundance of deserving contenders at the moment. Dilks isn't great, DeGale and Groves are way too green, so folk should go easy on Smith if he takes a fight with a Mendy or McGuire. After all, you can tell he wants that belt outright.

And to the person who said he would give Groves 8/11 over Paul Smith; all I can say is that you better not bet for real, otherwise you could end up in big, big trouble. Groves is way too green for someone who is battle-hardened like Smith is. Smith KO7, IMO.

Excellent (and well balanced) post, in full agreement.

Good post Dioufy, in total agreement with you

joe selkirk wrote:Well I think the points and opinions that are being made shouldn't be aimed at paul! Pauls a boxer its not his job to make fights that's the whole point of having promoters and matchmakers!

Very weak argument indeed.

Whilst a boxer has a contract with the promoter he has every opportunity to turn an opponent down and ask for another.

Even if a contract is that water tight - a boxer has an opportunity of not renewing the contract with the said promoter when it is due for renewal.

In this case Frank W arren is the person you are insuating should take the blame - not in my book - look at that sh*t Mr
W arren took in the case of the opponents for Hatton and Calzaghe - but yet no one questioned Hatton or Calzaghe why they kept on signing contract renewals.

Spud, like I say, there isn't an abundance of deserving contenders. Darren McDermott isn't the best - I see a lot of weaknesses, but he's game, and has fought up at the super middleweight limit before. I think he would be a decent challenge to Smith. I think Smith knocks him out, but at least he'll be knocking out a big middleweight and fighting someone who will come to win. McDermott's record isn't even bad; a loss to Elcock which was a horrible BBBofC error which, hopefully, will never be repeated and a loss to Barker. He's beat some decent names, including someone Smith lost to. IMO, it wouldn't be the worst opponent in the world. You have to remember, we don't live in a perfect world, and boxing, as much as it pains me to say, is the complete paradox to the word perfect world.

Dioufy wrote:You have to remember, we don't live in a perfect world, and boxing, as much as it pains me to say, is the complete paradox to the word perfect world.

A very valid point - however Mr W arren has made many contacts in his years as a boxing promoter - if he were anew promoter who had to penny pinch a tadge I would understand more - but in the case of opponents for Smith then Mr W arren in my view may and should dig a little deeper into his pockets and more to the point Smith should be insisting on higher quality opponents to have himself ready for a European title assault or higher - you have to ask is McDermott that sort of opponent.

Can anyone please explain to me what's the reason behind Magee and Smith not getting it on? Is it because of money reasons or because it'll be for the European belt, and thus, Smith won't get the Lonsdale belt for keeps?

Dioufy wrote:Can anyone please explain to me what's the reason behind Magee and Smith not getting it on? Is it because of money reasons or because it'll be for the European belt, and thus, Smith won't get the Lonsdale belt for keeps?

There was an article on here pal that documented it - I remember speaking to Pat Magee when the idea was first thought of about fighting Paul Smith - I remember then him disagreeing with me concerning the money issue - he was more than happy to compromise on the money issue if there was a compromise on the venue for the fight - as there was a question whether it would be Belfast or Liverpool. However there was going to be very little discussion on the "options" issue which was proposed as something like 3 or 5 fights if Magee won!!!

Damn bureaucracy. Options on fighters should be banned for good. They're the reason 50% of good potential fights don't get made.

Are u a bit backward spud? I don't think there's anythink wrong with how pauls being matched people like u are my point is if u or anyone else rnt happy with how he's being matched don't have a go at paul have a go at the matchmakers! And are u trying to say allegedly has offerd paul fights against the likes of deagale and groves and paul has knocked them back for easier fights? Not in a million years! If boxers had the power to pick anchoose their opponents why have we got matchmakers what's there purpose if we can pick and knock back fights! We fight who were told to fight! When fights don't get made u might think its someone not fancying it although that might occasionaly happen defintly not in this case the fights don't get made becuase of money not because the boxer tells the promoter get me a easy fight!