Page 2 of 2

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 19 Jun 2009, 08:07
by Dioufy
I reckon Khan has KO potential in his fists. Perhaps these pressure KO's are due to the fact that Khan's predominately in against much smaller guys. But saying that, I think he'll swarm Kotelnik and stop him on his fight after five rounds.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 19 Jun 2009, 08:20
by Wales
Wuoldnt you think he'd be more likesly to KO smaller guys and TKO the bigger ones... not sure how your theory works there...

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 19 Jun 2009, 08:26
by Dioufy
Whenever I have sparred or fought someone smaller and more compact I find it hard to land. But someone my own size I find it easier to hit them on the button. Perhaps it isn't a good theory, but smaller guys, for me, are harder to hit clean, and thus knock out.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 19 Jun 2009, 09:43
by Wales
I (respectfuly) disagree... whilst i understand the premis, I dont think Khans opponents have been that hard to hit. He just doesnt to me appear to have concussive power.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 19 Jun 2009, 10:07
by overhand_right
Dioufy wrote:I reckon Khan has KO potential in his fists.
Only if he misses his opponent & connects with his own chin.

Seriously, 4 years and 21 fights since he turned pro. If he had 'KO potential' in his fists he would of shown it by now, especially given the feebleness of the majority of his victims.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 19 Jun 2009, 10:23
by n1ebf
I think Amir wants to keep right away from Prescott and maybe fight him, if need be, when the memory is less fresh.

If he fought the same way he would get smashed into oblivion again. However, if he got on the back foot and peppered the jab for 4 or 5 rounds he could win a comfortable points decision. Prescott would know at ANY point in the fight though he has the power to take Khan out, so can't would have to box a very negative fight all night in my opinion.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 19 Jun 2009, 11:31
by alexpaterson
I cant see how Khan can go a hole fight without taking a bomb from Prescott he has lapses in concentration and when he has one Prescott would jump and KO him imo total wrong fight for Khan

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 19 Jun 2009, 11:39
by Dioufy
overhand_right wrote:
Dioufy wrote:I reckon Khan has KO potential in his fists.
Only if he misses his opponent & connects with his own chin.

Seriously, 4 years and 21 fights since he turned pro. If he had 'KO potential' in his fists he would of shown it by now, especially given the feebleness of the majority of his victims.
Fair enough. Just saying that Khan does seem to be able to whack a little. Freddie Roach said he hits like a welterweight since moving up in weight. That's why I put potential there, because I feel he COULD start to bang a little at 140lbs. Just my opinion, matey.

And Wales, perhaps it's just me, but I definitely hate sparring smaller guys. Just can't seem to hit them right. If anyone has any techniques, they would be wonderfully received. It's been a pain of mine ever since I started boxing.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 19 Jun 2009, 12:07
by danny harding
Wales wrote:
yiddo14 wrote:
We know he can spark Khan, but has Khan got the power to stop Prescott before that happens?
has Khan ever Sparked anyone?
he did knock that fat featherweight out with 1 shot in the first round, cant remember his name think he was french ive not bothered to look it up, he hasnt got a chance against prescott he will get sparked out even quicker , doesnt matter who trains him they cant help that chin of his

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 19 Jun 2009, 13:49
by finchy36
Some great comments from my original question. Thank You. Let's put a different spin on it, who WANTS Khan to win the world title and possibly one day avenge his defeat against Prescott? Secondly, if your answer is no then why? I get an annoying feeling when I think of Khan getting all the accolades and a shot before Prescott but can't put my finger on why?

Audley Harrison had a similar dislike and James DeGale is getting the same now. Why do we cheer these guys on at the Olympics then turn on them when they are pro?

In my opinion the reason behind the Audley backlash was because he seemed content with what he had from the day the BBC paid over a million for his first 10 fights - he never seemed to try or put any effort in as a pro. But why do we get a similar feeling with Khan and DeGale?

Be great to hear the different views and opinions on this one guys.

:box:

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 19 Jun 2009, 14:34
by Exoddus
I just re-watched Khan Vs Prescott. He got absolutely hammered. Totally annihilated. If they had a rematch. I can't see how Khan could win. I guess that's why there hasn't been a rematch. Imagine the confidence Prescott would have going into the fight.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 20 Jun 2009, 15:16
by Rob Magic
If Khan wins the WBA title he's gonna have to make some mandatory defences. Salita (30-0) to begin with, then the winner of Maidana (25-1) & Ortiz (24-1). Tough ones there straight away unless old Frankie has a way around it so he ends up defending against lower opposition.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 20 Jun 2009, 15:19
by Rob Magic
finchy36 wrote:Some great comments from my original question. Thank You. Let's put a different spin on it, who WANTS Khan to win the world title and possibly one day avenge his defeat against Prescott? Secondly, if your answer is no then why? I get an annoying feeling when I think of Khan getting all the accolades and a shot before Prescott but can't put my finger on why?

Audley Harrison had a similar dislike and James DeGale is getting the same now. Why do we cheer these guys on at the Olympics then turn on them when they are pro?

In my opinion the reason behind the Audley backlash was because he seemed content with what he had from the day the BBC paid over a million for his first 10 fights - he never seemed to try or put any effort in as a pro. But why do we get a similar feeling with Khan and DeGale?

Be great to hear the different views and opinions on this one guys.

:box:
Dont like DeGale because of his arrogance and dont like Khan because of all the "Im gonna fight this guy and this guy" then when they call him out BOOM not intrested.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 22 Jun 2009, 13:53
by finchy36
I know what you mean, Rob. I was desperate to see Thaxton v Khan a year/18 months or so ago and got the feeling Khan was ducking. I believe Thaxton would have ko'd Khan. However, if and when (and that is a big if) the fight ever happened Khan would now win because of father time. :verysad:

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 22 Jun 2009, 16:41
by observer1
finchy36 wrote:I know what you mean, Rob. I was desperate to see Thaxton v Khan a year/18 months or so ago and got the feeling Khan was ducking. I believe Thaxton would have ko'd Khan. However, if and when (and that is a big if) the fight ever happened Khan would now win because of father time. :verysad:
Rubbish. Thaxton had his chance but pulled out. When Khan was looking for bigger things, it was too late for him.

Khan beat the man who beat the man. Khan beat Earl in 72 seconds.

'Nuff said.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 23 Jun 2009, 01:32
by Des1
observer1 wrote:
finchy36 wrote:I know what you mean, Rob. I was desperate to see Thaxton v Khan a year/18 months or so ago and got the feeling Khan was ducking. I believe Thaxton would have ko'd Khan. However, if and when (and that is a big if) the fight ever happened Khan would now win because of father time. :verysad:
Rubbish. Thaxton had his chance but pulled out. When Khan was looking for bigger things, it was too late for him.

Khan beat the man who beat the man. Khan beat Earl in 72 seconds.

'Nuff said.
Khan beat a totally washed up Earl in one round....Just like Castle did which proves nothing.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 23 Jun 2009, 08:52
by Rob Magic
finchy36 wrote:I know what you mean, Rob. I was desperate to see Thaxton v Khan a year/18 months or so ago and got the feeling Khan was ducking. I believe Thaxton would have ko'd Khan. However, if and when (and that is a big if) the fight ever happened Khan would now win because of father time. :verysad:
Depends which Thaxton turns up. The Thaxton who beat Melero could give Khan a good go but the Thaxton who lost to Mezaache, NO chance.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 23 Jun 2009, 11:15
by Gaz_73
Exoddus wrote:I just re-watched Khan Vs Prescott. He got absolutely hammered. Totally annihilated. If they had a rematch. I can't see how Khan could win. I guess that's why there hasn't been a rematch. Imagine the confidence Prescott would have going into the fight.
It depends on how Khan prepares for a rematch.

He knows that he can't trade with Prescott and it is up to him and his team to devise a strategy to avoid the bombs. I don't think it is impossible that Khan could out box Prescott and who knows how the fight happening at a higher weight could affect the outcome.

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 23 Jun 2009, 11:18
by bynino
He should stay away from prescott. Unless he fights inside a forcefield. And Iam pretty sure his management will keep him well away too!

Re: khan v prescott II

Posted: 23 Jun 2009, 13:26
by Dioufy
For me, if Khan keeps winning and so does Prescott, then I would love to see them fight within a year of today. I love fighters avenging their defeats - it shows a mental toughness, especially if it was a KO loss. It's what Khan needs to do before eradicating that loss.