BoxRec

saturday_kid wrote:Its a poor main event imo, nothing against both boxers. Haskins isn't the best to watch is he, thats not his fault and he's good at what he does.

I disagree, it is Haskins's fault and he should tidy up his style and try to be more entertaining.

saturday_kid wrote:Just makes me wander we get this main event next week yet in 2 weeks from the same promoter we get Jamie Moore defending his Euro belt and Gary Davis Vs Ian Napa for the British on the same FFN. I would've rather have seen Davis Napa as a main event and tonights fight on with Moore's fight, maybe scheduling didn't permit, it does seem however though that as long as Maloney gets Jeffries or Sutherland n the bill he can get away with some poor main events.

I agree.

Horse wrote:

saturday_kid wrote:Its a poor main event imo, nothing against both boxers. Haskins isn't the best to watch is he, thats not his fault and he's good at what he does.

I disagree, it is Haskins's fault and he should tidy up his style and try to be more entertaining.

i love it when boxrec experts have stylistic tips for established boxers. 'he should tidy up his style and try to be more entertaining'. that's absolute genius, that is.

WestEndRiot wrote:As i said in an earlier thread, it's great that Maloney is doing these shows in the north east after years of no professional boxing whatsoever, but Haskins v Burkinshaw as a main event is very, very poor. It's the kind of fight you wouldn't even expect as chief support on your average tv bill. In addition, it's the only competitive fight of the whole night.

I think it would be okay as chief support, as long as it was shown delayed instead of live in case it was boring.

Counter-puncher wrote:i love it when boxrec experts have stylistic tips for established boxers. 'he should tidy up his style and try to be more entertaining'. that's absolute genius, that is.

You don't think he should try to be more entertaining? You don't think his technique needs work?

He is sloppy and he won't go very much further unless he can sort it out. What did I say that deserved derision?

Horse wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:i love it when boxrec experts have stylistic tips for established boxers. 'he should tidy up his style and try to be more entertaining'. that's absolute genius, that is.

You don't think he should try to be more entertaining? You don't think his technique needs work?

He is sloppy and he won't go very much further unless he can sort it out. What did I say that deserved derision?

i don't think, if his style does need work, that you are necessarily the person to give advice on it, and i find it shall we say stupid to say if he does need to change his style it is in order to make it 'more entertaining'

put it this way, say a fighter keeps leaking right hands, its obvious he needs to tighten his defence up, fair enough.

but he needs to make his style 'more entertaining'? for who exactly? who the eff are you or me or anyone else to dictate his style to him, like, for our enjoyment and 'entertainment'? what do you want him to do, an Ali shuffle at the start of every round, go out throwing bombs like hes in the 'Contender' final fighting for a million dollars?

he's the one getting punched in the head for a living not you, so he gets to make those decisions.

'he should try to be more entertaining'. jesus. Dana White wants you as a fan, mate, you are his wetdream as fans go, get yourself to a UFC card sharpish. end of a round without too much action, 'BOOOOOOOHHHH YOU SUCK', cancel his contract quick he isn't entertaining enough, 'just bleed baby'.

Horse wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:i love it when boxrec experts have stylistic tips for established boxers. 'he should tidy up his style and try to be more entertaining'. that's absolute genius, that is.

You don't think he should try to be more entertaining? You don't think his technique needs work?

He is sloppy and he won't go very much further unless he can sort it out. What did I say that deserved derision?

I think he's just having a laugh at the general advice given out in throwaway fashion, Horse, when these things are very difficult to execute in practice. What you say is correct, of course.

I love the advice given by pissed up people at ringside. I think this might deserve a thread of its own.

"Hit him!"
"Knock him out!"
"Kill the (enter racial expletive if in small town in north east England)!"
"Jab!" etc, ad nauseum.

What never fails to amuse me is when it's deathly quiet in a Yorkshire small hall between rounds. Some poor lass in a state of undress trudges round the ring with the round number card for the umpteenth time. Then some bloke penetrates the silence with "GET THEE RAT OUT!"

'entertainment' is my problem there. the bloke has a job its called boxing. he wants to win fights, he will make better money that way and maybe make his way up in the sport. he does NOT have to think about whether some d1ck like me on the internet does, or does not, think his style is pleasing on the eye.

Counter-puncher wrote:i don't think, if his style does need work, that you are necessarily the person to give advice on it, and i find it shall we say stupid to say if he does need to change his style it is in order to make it 'more entertaining'

I doubt Haskins will read what I wrote, so it wasn't really meant as advice.

Counter-puncher wrote:put it this way, say a fighter keeps leaking right hands, its obvious he needs to tighten his defence up, fair enough.

but he needs to make his style 'more entertaining'? for who exactly? who the eff are you or me or anyone else to dictate his style to him, like, for our enjoyment and 'entertainment'? what do you want him to do, an Ali shuffle at the start of every round, go out throwing bombs like hes in the 'Contender' final fighting for a million dollars?

This sport is also a business and a fighter will, more likely than not, make more money if he is entertaining, it is a part of the sport.

Counter-puncher wrote:he's the one getting punched in the head for a living not you, so he gets to make those decisions.

Yes, and if he is not entertaining then people will most likely not pay to watch him in great numbers, he will get poor viewing figures and therefore less opportunities in this sport.

Counter-puncher wrote:'he should try to be more entertaining'. jesus. Dana White wants you as a fan, mate, you are his wetdream as fans go, get yourself to a UFC card sharpish. end of a round without too much action, 'BOOOOOOOHHHH YOU SUCK', cancel his contract quick he isn't entertaining enough, 'just bleed baby'.

What do you have against a person wanting this sport, and the boxers who participate in it, to be entertaining? Do you think you are more cultured if you can appreciate fights that the average person would consider boring?

I want entertainment and if a fighter is boring then I am going to see it as a negative aspect of their fighting abilities.

Counter-puncher wrote:'entertainment' is my problem there. the bloke has a job its called boxing. he wants to win fights, he will make better money that way and maybe make his way up in the sport.

One can win fights and be entertaining, it is not a choice between the two.

Counter-puncher wrote:he does NOT have to think about whether some d1ck like me on the internet does, or does not, think his style is pleasing on the eye.

He does not have to, but it is a good idea. Who dreams of being a boring boxer anyway?

oh sorry it wasn't actually advice, just an amazingly 'vapid' to coin KG's phrase marginal comment.

right, so lets say if brawling isn't the right style for him, but on your non-advice he decides to make the change to being a hatton-style face-firster, and he ends up losing 4 of his next 6 fights, and is left without a title, noone is interested in his fights, no TV no 'big Civic Hall' cards, that would make a change to an 'entertaining' style a great idea for him, then. would it?

out of interest when you are doing your british top 30 p4p list do you factor 'entertainment' into your many variables?

One can win fights and be entertaining, it is not a choice between the two

really? you mean things in your world aren't automatically split into some false dichotomy? you surprise me.

What do you have against a person wanting this sport, and the boxers who participate in it, to be entertaining? Do you think you are more cultured if you can appreciate fights that the average person would consider boring?

you can want it all you like but i still don't think you understand my point

if Haskin's own chances of winning are maximised by his current style, then not only is he unlikely to consider the entertainment aspect, but he would be stupid to do so.

you're completely within your rights to wish for more entertainment, if you want. just don't be too disappointed when boxers unsurprisingly follow their own agenda. which is generally going to be best served by them getting hit less in the head, losing fewer braincells, and tragically falling a little short in the 'horse p4p entertainment stakes'

Horse wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:he does NOT have to think about whether some d1ck like me on the internet does, or does not, think his style is pleasing on the eye.

He does not have to, but it is a good idea. Who dreams of being a boring boxer anyway?

'it is a good idea'. you just get better. 'who dreams of being a boring boxer' jesus i feel like i am about to turn into Carbo here.

look i have no evidence to back me up here but i imagine the vast majority of boxers dream of being winners

do you think Sven Ottke wakes up every morning having made loads of money and accrued a reasonable amount of prestige, do you think he wakes up and kicks himself every day for not being an entertaining fighter?

'mein gott, ich bin rich, ich bin moderately famous, ich bin got out of a very dangerous sport with all my marbles and plenty of cash, but no, the holy grail eludes me, i need to consult horse of boxrec fame, horse was i entertaining?

met with deafening silence, one of germnay's most successful ever boxers goes crying into the Dortmund night, onlookers can hear him muttering 'i knew i should have gone and knocked out a couple of times, and woe is me for not having nearly enough scartissue around my eyes, whats that, yes thats right you can hear me speaking clearly, i am not slurring my words or walking on my heels but those benefits are for naught when you consider that some people on a boxing forum deride me as a boring fighter'

yeah i bet Sven Ottke is just kicking himself, right now, and will be every day for the rest of his life.

Counter-puncher wrote:oh sorry it wasn't actually advice, just an amazingly 'vapid' to coin KG's phrase marginal comment.

I hardly think my comment was amazingly vapid, you are surely easily amazed if you considered it such.

Counter-puncher wrote:right, so lets say if brawling isn't the right style for him, but on your non-advice he decides to make the change to being a hatton-style face-firster, and he ends up losing 4 of his next 6 fights, and is left without a title, noone is interested in his fights, no TV no 'big Civic Hall' cards, that would make a change to an 'entertaining' style a great idea for him, then. would it?

I did not suggest that Haskins should completely change his style to that of an all out brawler. I would think that he could work on his current style and make it both more entertaining and successful for winning fights.

Counter-puncher wrote:out of interest when you are doing your british top 30 p4p list do you factor 'entertainment' into your many variables?

A fighter with the ability to be entertaining and win, would suggest he has more ability than a fighter who wins in a boring fashion. So I do take it into consideration, although it is far from the most important factor.

Counter-puncher wrote:One can win fights and be entertaining, it is not a choice between the two

really? you mean things in your world aren't automatically split into some false dichotomy? you surprise me.

You seemed to be suggesting that the two things were diametrically opposed. I felt I should make you aware that that was not the case.

Counter-puncher wrote:What do you have against a person wanting this sport, and the boxers who participate in it, to be entertaining? Do you think you are more cultured if you can appreciate fights that the average person would consider boring?

you can want it all you like but i still don't think you understand my point

if Haskin's own chances of winning are maximised by his current style, then not only is he unlikely to consider the entertainment aspect, but he would be stupid to do so.

Just like Witter? Witter's incredibly boring and safety first win over Corley, hindered his chances of getting big fights because very few people wanted to watch him. Witter could easily have won the fight and tried to entertain the viewers, instead he didn't take any risks against a fighter who didn't seem to have much to threaten him. In my opinion that was the stupid thing to do.

Counter-puncher wrote:you're completely within your rights to wish for more entertainment, if you want. just don't be too disappointed when boxers unsurprisingly follow their own agenda. which is generally going to be best served by them getting hit less in the head, losing fewer braincells, and tragically falling a little short in the 'horse p4p entertainment stakes'

No, it is generally in their interests to win fights and entertain. I don't see how you could not understand this point, or why you seem to be so offended by it.

Based on your replies, you seem to think that the only way of being entertaining is to get hit a lot in the face. I never suggested that it was a good idea for Haskins to allow his opponents to hit him more in order to entertain the fans.

I do think it would be a good idea if he tried not to hold as much and worked on his accuracy. I think that by doing this he would make his style more entertaining and also make himself a better fighter with more chance of winning.

Horse wrote:
I do think it would be a good idea if he tried not to hold as much and worked on his accuracy. I think that by doing this he would make his style more entertaining and also make himself a better fighter with more chance of winning.

that i can agree with

We must be getting close to last chance saloon for Haskins now? As Ian said he looked as though he's be an entertaining very very inferior version of Naz when he broke onto the scene.

I haven't seen much of Burkinshaw but based on the support of 26 and others on here I'm interested to see him tonight.

I wonder if the Bristol lads will follow Haskins all that way? Some of his fans have been a bit naughty in the past so I hope it doesn't kick off.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

Horse wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:i love it when boxrec experts have stylistic tips for established boxers. 'he should tidy up his style and try to be more entertaining'. that's absolute genius, that is.

You don't think he should try to be more entertaining? You don't think his technique needs work?

He is sloppy and he won't go very much further unless he can sort it out. What did I say that deserved derision?

I think he's just having a laugh at the general advice given out in throwaway fashion, Horse, when these things are very difficult to execute in practice. What you say is correct, of course.

I love the advice given by pissed up people at ringside. I think this might deserve a thread of its own.

"Hit him!"
"Knock him out!"
"Kill the (enter racial expletive if in small town in north east England)!"
"Jab!" etc, ad nauseum.

What never fails to amuse me is when it's deathly quiet in a Yorkshire small hall between rounds. Some poor lass in a state of undress trudges round the ring with the round number card for the umpteenth time. Then some bloke penetrates the silence with "GET THEE RAT OUT!"

Tho not being funny mate what to expect em to say, do you a want a shakesperean soliliquy or somat? Perhaps we could put them in the format of walking in a hatton wonderland or some other shite football chant....Or perhaps a chapter out of war and peace, its what happens at sport..the words you daft twat, run, smack him one, throw the jab, pass it, shoot, try, goal, what a punch, yessssssssssssssssssssss you beauty..........put your f-in head down, these are the things we all shout in excitement when watching sport...no offence like.....but you expectation of meaningful insight at a live event is somewhat above realistically expect fella.
Though racism shouldnt be tolerated at all , some of the comments at Macc Haye from the welsh macc fans sat near me were a disgrace, still like Macc they got theirs when half of our stand turned and in unison chanted EASY EASY for 10 mins after the ko til they left. Tho I suppose I could have tried to be eloquent and explained to the lads the error of their ways....

Lol at rat..sub that for badger down south...

J wrote:
Tho not being funny mate what to expect em to say, do you a want a shakesperean soliliquy or somat? Perhaps we could put them in the format of walking in a hatton wonderland or some other shite football chant....Or perhaps a chapter out of war and peace, its what happens at sport..the words you daft twat, run, smack him one, throw the jab, pass it, shoot, try, goal, what a punch, yessssssssssssssssssssss you beauty..........put your f-in head down, these are the things we all shout in excitement when watching sport...no offence like.....but you expectation of meaningful insight at a live event is somewhat above realistically expect

FFS. All I'm saying is I find the shouts listed funny, especially when things like "Hit him!" are framed as advice. I'm not expecting 'meaningful insight'.

easy tiger im just having a bit of laff with you....

J wrote:easy tiger im just having a bit of laff with you....

Think I need a bit of sunshine. 8)

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

J wrote:
Tho not being funny mate what to expect em to say, do you a want a shakesperean soliliquy or somat? Perhaps we could put them in the format of walking in a hatton wonderland or some other shite football chant....Or perhaps a chapter out of war and peace, its what happens at sport..the words you daft twat, run, smack him one, throw the jab, pass it, shoot, try, goal, what a punch, yessssssssssssssssssssss you beauty..........put your f-in head down, these are the things we all shout in excitement when watching sport...no offence like.....but you expectation of meaningful insight at a live event is somewhat above realistically expect

FFS. All I'm saying is I find the shouts listed funny, especially when things like "Hit him!" are framed as advice. I'm not expecting 'meaningful insight'.

for some (by no means not all) trainers in the yorkshire area, this is the extent of the tactical insight that fighters get from trainers:

"Hit him"

"Hit him FFS"

"Hit him yer bastard"

we do things differently down here

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

J wrote:easy tiger im just having a bit of laff with you....

Think I need a bit of sunshine. 8)

you know you are welcome anytime mate (20 20 world cup next year?) late april....

flights 450 return at present.


You gonna get chance to hook up when im in london mate sent you an email?

Wake up call wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKiUT4tigg4

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=klOaUBYg ... re=related

First one was a nice uppercut KO vs a very limited guy to be fair.

Second one I thought he looked good in spells but was boxing on the inside a lot against a short stocky guy when he had the height and reach in his favour, doesn't seem an overly clever boxer or to have a wide variety of punches in his arsenal. Could go either way tonight this, 2 fairly limited fighters but Haskins experience and (in my opinion) slight edge in talent should win it if he turns up.

Really looking forward to this, I hope Ross gets his hand held up at the end. I am not a fan of Haskins and I dont like his style of boxing. Would be nice to see him clobbered during one of his wild punches. I agree its not a fight that should be top of the bill but I am getting used to this on FFN. Just hope it doesnt turn into a srappy mess.