BoxRec

leeharding wrote: hate carl froch the wanker.

How come, Lee? I was very piss*d off with him for a while when he called the ed. of Boxing Monthly to complain about a piece I did on him. It was a knockabout school report piece and I put something like "Carl needs to cut down on the smoking...even if it is the footwear of his opponents."

A seemingly obvious reference to "I'll smoke your boots" which his promoters were desperately trying to make a catchphrase for him by including it in EVERY fekking press release sent out.

Froch called Glyn wanting to make it clear that he didn't smoke, lived the life, etc. Jesus Christ. Obviously went completely over his bonce.

The VERY next day I got a press release with the "smoke your boots" line in, yet again. Was mega pissed off.

However, I've calmed down now.

Joe and Naz - Naz cause I didn't like him, Joe cause I thought he was overated and I thought deserved not be a "0" after the Reid fight.

I tend to "root" for the Underdog regardless of nationality. Like I was supporting Witter against Judah, but then supporting Bradley (I'd seen him before and was impressed), but back to Witter for the Alexander fight.

I don't like Joe but wanted him to win every fight. Do you know what, if Joe lost to Reid then that would've been the best thing ever to happen to him. Yes, he may have a record of 40/4 but imagine the names he could've fought. It was his stupid obsession with staying undefeated that spoiled his reputation with me.

I never want a british guy to lose if he is fighting foreign opposition

The closest I think I came to 'wanting' a brit to lose was when an Ingle fighter who was supposed to be the new Naz fought in South Africa I think and was blatantly shite but kept sticking his tongu out and taking the piss - don't mind this if your good enough ala Naz.

However as I said he was shite - got a draw (luckily) and was never seen again.

Dioufy wrote:I don't like Joe but wanted him to win every fight. Do you know what, if Joe lost to Reid then that would've been the best thing ever to happen to him. Yes, he may have a record of 40/4 but imagine the names he could've fought. It was his stupid obsession with staying undefeated that spoiled his reputation with me.

For me I think he had the best managed career ever. Yes, he was an exceptional fighter in British terms, but I think had he fought the "names" in their pomp - he would have ended up forgotton about in 2000.

I don't know about that.

Derek Chisora & the Walsh brothers. Whenever they fight, I want them to lose.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

leeharding wrote: hate carl froch the wanker.

How come, Lee? I was very piss*d off with him for a while when he called the ed. of Boxing Monthly to complain about a piece I did on him. It was a knockabout school report piece and I put something like "Carl needs to cut down on the smoking...even if it is the footwear of his opponents."

A seemingly obvious reference to "I'll smoke your boots" which his promoters were desperately trying to make a catchphrase for him by including it in EVERY fekking press release sent out.

Froch called Glyn wanting to make it clear that he didn't smoke, lived the life, etc. Jesus Christ. Obviously went completely over his bonce.

The VERY next day I got a press release with the "smoke your boots" line in, yet again. Was mega pissed off.

However, I've calmed down now.

that's not like you Ian.

i've never taken to hatton for how he talks about himself in teh 3rd person and the way he fights ive never been a fan of the pressure fighter unless they are called manny pacquiao, julio cesar chavez or jon thaxton
im all for exciting blood fights like vasquez-marquez trilogy just many a hatton fight has been boring

all 3 brits that i dislike have been KO'd so im pretty happy

Hatton
Khan
Mcintosh

i have legit reason why i dont like them but at the moment there isnt anyone i want to see KO'd apart from khan again

Dioufy wrote:I don't know about that.

Just my take, I know it must sound like I do Joe contiunually a disservice, but as good as Ricky is - he got handled easily Mayweather and it was really only his charisma that got him a 2nd chance for this "P4P title" and now with the Pacquiao loss - well its going to take a long time for the rebuilding process to begining.

I think had Joe fought Hopkins/Jones in 2000..... then, partly cause of his lack of charisma, he would have been not given more opportunities. Look at decent fighters such as Bryant Brannon - anhilated by Jones, and then forgotton about.

stujones wrote:

Dioufy wrote:I don't know about that.

Just my take, I know it must sound like I do Joe contiunually a disservice, but as good as Ricky is - he got handled easily Mayweather and it was really only his charisma that got him a 2nd chance for this "P4P title" and now with the Pacquiao loss - well its going to take a long time for the rebuilding process to begining.

I think had Joe fought Hopkins/Jones in 2000..... then, partly cause of his lack of charisma, he would have been not given more opportunities. Look at decent fighters such as Bryant Brannon - anhilated by Jones, and then forgotton about.

Perhaps, but let us assume that Joe doesn't lose all these 'big' fights and manages to win one, or more. He stayed a 168lbs for too long - he missed big fights. I'm not going to mention the names as we know who they are, but I feel Joe had the quality to at least extend Jones jr and definitely BHOP. Ottke is a different fish - he would not have come out of Germany and Joe would not have gone over there, for obvious reasons. Joe going to the States much earlier than the BHOP fight would've got him big fights, especially in New York - the good-looks and the Italian stance could've been exploited. Too many obscure names on his record, who I don't even know now, nevermind before the fight. If Joe wanted to become a true legend like he said he wanted to be, then he would've took a massive risk, like Hatton did against Pacquiao and Mayweather, like Froch did against Taylor and this super-6 series, and Haye, who regardless of what people say, isn't avoiding the Klitsckho's. At the end of the day, the "0" means little to true boxing fans.

I think Calzaghe was odds-on favourite in every fight, apart from Lacy who was 5/6 with Joe being 11/10. To me, that's poor in nearly 50 fights.

I know what you are saying Douffy, just the stance I have is I cannot see Joe beating those names in their prime.

Lets be honest, in the states there was only 3 real name fighters at the weight. Toney, Hopkins and Jones. I really cannot see Joe causing them problems in their prime. Thats my opinion.

Yes, Joe had the chance to be a global superstar, with his looks, style and Italian roots - but for me, I think he knew in his heart - he wasn't really in the league of these 3 and has made much more money, achieved much more - by avoiding these names untill they were past their best.

He could have gone to the states and beaten fighters like Brewer and Mitchell, which would have got some respect - but still... the reason why these didn't fight Jones is because the public knew Brewer/Mitchell were not in his league - so not that much respect.

Joe chin would have meant each of these 3 fights would have gone rounds, but I can only see one sided points defeats - and IMO all involved with Joe thought that also.

Had Joe lost to these comprehensively, then I think the only way back for him would have been to go to Germany and get some respect from the US Journo's with good wins there.

Again, perhaps you're right, and that's why, for me, Joe Calzaghe's career is one big fat question mark.

And tell me, mate, who the feck is Douffy?

Carl Froch

In two minds whether I wanna see him get steamrolled like Hatton or a beatdown followed by a late TKO such as Margarito against Shane

I'm sick of his mouth (mouthing off against Khan after his victory) and his nuthuggers'(probably used the apostrophe wrong) spin on here and ESB

I've never know a fighter to get dropped by a clear legitamate punch only for people to come on here and start talking about feet being tangled and this and that. From my replay I didnt see his feet in knots. Maybe I should go specsavers. Were his feet tangled whe he got smacked on to the ropes a couple of punches before being put on his ass

And I'm also sick of hearing his Martyr story afetr every fight. He had two broken arms, detached retina, 10 broken ribs, 3 nipples, swine flu yadayadayada. and he still prevailed. Imagine how he would be if he was 'healthy'? Newsflash, he would be the same! Leadenfooted, slow, throwing uppercuts out of range and defending with his face

I wish I shared your optimism about Dirrell @ Hitman but I dont think he is the one to do it

Derek Chisora.

Asterix wrote:Derek Chisora & the Walsh brothers. Whenever they fight, I want them to lose.

Like many have said, the nationality of the fighter makes no odds to me but as I generally see/hear more about British fighters progressing from early career, it tends to be them that I follow.

The Walsh brothers are the exception, but to be fair to them its because their fans have behaved like apes at both of the events I have seen them at.

DeGale against that giraffe unbeaten lad who he beat in the 1st round he was all mouth then he has got better now letting his fists do the talking more

BARNEYKX wrote:NAZ was the one i always wanted to see get a good hammering because of his demeaning attitude to opponents and his big headedness, two very bad faults to an otherwise brilliant fighter,I jumped for joy when he got stuffed

What he said, don't think i have ever sided against a Brit apart from Naz and he still seems like a right tool today!

There have been a few Brits i have not supported over the years, but i cant say i go in for this hatred of some fighters and "dancing in the street" when so-and-so loses Philosophy, some people go in for.

Hatton - got tired of him and wanted him to see him lose his zero, I'll admit I was a bit sad for him when he did lose
Harrison - rubbed me the wrong way

Not sure there any others but that doesn't mean I won't support an international opponent over a Brit, I like fast slick types so am a fan of allot of the Americans. I like Froch but would like to see a talented up and comer like Dirrell beat him, I'll still root for him against Abraham/Kessler though

Although i'll usually root for the home boxer, i don't mind sometimes if the overseas boxer wins.
We have seen some very good displays by boxers like Winky Wright, Harry Simon, Jake Matlata etc.

All you can do is applaud guys like that when they've won.

I always support the Brit, but I wasn't too arsed when Ricky got sparked by Manny

The only British boxer that I can recall wanting to lose to foreign opposition, based on dislike, was Ashley Theophane.

I read an article in which he was interviewed and he came across very poorly, and that made me want to see him get knocked out by anyone.

Would have done almost anything within reason to see Jones or Hopkins beat Calzaghe.

Always wanted Scott Harrison o get beat as well.

Whenever i see a British boxer get built up against nobodies, i always want them to lose eventually.

Best I can come up with is Herbie Hide

I don't really know why, I just think he makes an entertaining loser! I remember watching him Ko'd once then sighing that he was going nowhere in the game if he can't beat 'bums' like the fella standing right next to him!