BoxRec

Khan may well go on to prove he is the best guy we have ever had. His weight division is pretty good on tallent.
But at the moment, Hattons record is the better.

The Maidana result was somewhat soured when an ancient Morales fought him next. If an old fighter a couple divisions out of his natural division could run him close ... Then how good is Maidana really?
And if Zab had fought as good as we were expecting, then that would have put a different shine on Khans win ... but Zab didn't turn it to fight that night.

How many fans made the trip out to see Khan? How many PPV were there??

tonyevs wrote:Khan may well go on to prove he is the best guy we have ever had. His weight division is pretty good on tallent.
But at the moment, Hattons record is the better.

The Maidana result was somewhat soured when an ancient Morales fought him next. If an old fighter a couple divisions out of his natural division could run him close ... Then how good is Maidana really?
And if Zab had fought as good as we were expecting, then that would have put a different shine on Khans win ... but Zab didn't turn it to fight that night.

How many fans made the trip out to see Khan? How many PPV were there??

To be fair, Morales is vastly experienced, and has struggled with his weight for years. He probably benefitted from the move up at this stage of his career.

Zab wasn't really allowed into the fight, I thought he looked pretty sharp the first two rounds, but he just couldn't going because Khan kept on popping him. Zab was never elite, true, and was past his best, but you have to give Khan credit for not allowing Judah into the fight.

G0mez wrote:Observer your full of garbage.

"he lacks a defining win such as Clottey" good grief.

"Collazo was a stepping stone" he was WBA champion and nobody Khan has faced to date would beat him.

"Hatton had a large frame and could easily campaign at 147" you've not a clue. Hatton is 5'6.

Hatton fought about 10 times with the WBU in 3 years. He didn't sit on it for a decade. He fought Vince Philips, Magee, Thaxton, Tackie all in and around that period as he learnt his trade.

Hatton was so popular he'd pack the MEN with those fights. He'd not ask for them to be PPV either.

Unlike Khan who got banged out for some WBO inter belt in front of about 3,000 tops in 60 seconds - despite having a huge career head start with the Olympics.

Okay, after you stop frothing at the mouth for a few seconds, take a deep breath and actually read what i have to say...

-You may not rate Clottey, fair enough, but my point still stands about the likes of Cotto, Mosely, De La Hoya etc. doesn't it?

-Nobody Khan faced would beat Collazo? Well Firstly that is an opinion, and your opinion only.
Khan is only 24 with plenty of potential fights ahead of him. He is arguably beaten the same calibre of fighters in Maidana, Maligniaggi and Zab. These were all belt holders too...
But for Khan these were just stepping stones to get bigger fights and unify the division, unlike how it was for Hatton whom it was a "Career-defining fight".

Secondly, you may think Collzao would beat beat all of Khans key opposition so far, i beg to differ. Considering Collazo's signature wins were against Rivera and Migeul Gonzales, hardly breaking into the Top tier of fighters.

- I "aint got a clue" ? You aint got a clue... i said "frame". i did not refer to his height.

Mike Tyson was notoriously short for his weight division... As was Duran, Qawi, Naz, Tua,Toney (latter career) even Pacquaio to a certain extent now. The likes of is Arthur Abraham and Calderon are also worth a mention.

You're telling me Hatton, someone who walks around officially overweight and who kills himself to drain to 140 would struggle at 147 because of his weight?

- Regardless of how many times he defend the WBU belt, fact is if it was Khan, you'd been steaming about how he should unify the division etc.

- Hatton was popular, i agree, arguably the most popular British fighter in the modern era alongside Naz. But this not a popularity contest, it's about achievements.

- Yes Khan was sparked out, and what? This is about what Boxers achieve. Incase you have not worked it out, sport is not about who or how you lost, it's about what you win and what you achieve. About your Trophy cabinet, the championships and who you beat.

- Amir Khan got a head start through the Olympics? Yea, who does this brat think he is working his ass off as a teen, dedicating and committing himself to something he loves and getting Britain's only medal in boxing.

Gomez, this is not about Hatton. Hatton will go down as one of the best British champions according to fans, im not going to dispute that.
But this is about you throwing your toys out of your pram everytime Amir Khan is mentioned. I'm not sure whether or not Khan refused you an autograph or was too busy to take a picture with you and you're upset, but seriously, get over it.

Khan probably will go on to eclipse Hatton's achievements but I don't think he is there yet. He is much more talented than Hatton imo but Hatton had a big heart and had some good wins also. When Hatton was in the big fights there was a buzz about British boxing so it would be good if Khan carries this on. Hatton probably did choose some easier fights but at the end of the day it got him his big fights and big money.

If Khan keep winning against good opponents imagine the Mayweather coming over here that would be excellent. Im not saying Khan would win but his speed and workrate would give Mayweather more problems than Marquez and Mosley did.

G0mez wrote:Observer your full of garbage.

"he lacks a defining win such as Clottey" good grief.

"Collazo was a stepping stone" he was WBA champion and nobody Khan has faced to date would beat him.

"Hatton had a large frame and could easily campaign at 147" you've not a clue. Hatton is 5'6.

Hatton fought about 10 times with the WBU in 3 years. He didn't sit on it for a decade. He fought Vince Philips, Magee, Thaxton, Tackie all in and around that period as he learnt his trade.

Hatton was so popular he'd pack the MEN with those fights. He'd not ask for them to be PPV either.

Unlike Khan who got banged out for some WBO inter belt in front of about 3,000 tops in 60 seconds - despite having a huge career head start with the Olympics.

Hatton not ask for PPV - how naive?

gibbo wrote:

crusader wrote:

gibbo wrote:the facts are hatton only ever lost to the two best fighters on the planet as he was fighting for p4p stats. khan lost to an unknown fighter who has gone on to do nothing for a nothing belt. khan won his title of kotelnyk who was a poor champion. hatton won his title of tszyu who was a p4p champ. the facts are on here for everyone to see hattons legancy AT THE MOMENT is far Superior to khans

If Kotelnik was a poor champ than Collazo was even worse and Maussa was terrible.

Not once did i mention collazo or maussa. kotelnik won his belt of gavin rees who don't get me wrong i like, but he is a European level fighter. tszyu won his belt of zab inside two, and he was alot better then.

I do like khan and if he carry on the way he is going he can have a far better legacy than hatton. but i will say this when his time comes to face mayweather imo mayweather will be way past his best.

I never said you mentioned them. I'm just pointing out how you only made comparisons that benefit Hatton in the argument. You mention Kotelnik and call him a poor world champ, but he is better than Collazo, Maussa, and Urango--who are three of Hatton's best wins, and he is just as good as Malignaggi.

Kotelnik was just made for Khan to look good, that's why he's being underrated by Khan detractors.

He'd always struggle with taller, longer fighters that have quick footwork..... whereas he'd excel against fighters that are static or can be tagged with jabs and straight shots. He clearly beat Alexander, and for me edged both M'Baye and Witter too.

Him vs Matthysse or Bradley would both be good fights.

LeedsLad wrote:Kotelnik was just made for Khan to look good, that's why he's being underrated by Khan detractors.

He'd always struggle with taller, longer fighters that have quick footwork..... whereas he'd excel against fighters that are static or can be tagged with jabs and straight shots. He clearly beat Alexander, and for me edged both M'Baye and Witter too.

Him vs Matthysse or Bradley would both be good fights.

Thats the problem Kotelnik would easily be top 3 in the division if he was able to get the fights but he is far too easily avoided especially after the Alexander debacle.

observer1 wrote:

G0mez wrote:Observer your full of garbage.

"he lacks a defining win such as Clottey" good grief.

"Collazo was a stepping stone" he was WBA champion and nobody Khan has faced to date would beat him.

"Hatton had a large frame and could easily campaign at 147" you've not a clue. Hatton is 5'6.

Hatton fought about 10 times with the WBU in 3 years. He didn't sit on it for a decade. He fought Vince Philips, Magee, Thaxton, Tackie all in and around that period as he learnt his trade.

Hatton was so popular he'd pack the MEN with those fights. He'd not ask for them to be PPV either.

Unlike Khan who got banged out for some WBO inter belt in front of about 3,000 tops in 60 seconds - despite having a huge career head start with the Olympics.

Okay, after you stop frothing at the mouth for a few seconds, take a deep breath and actually read what i have to say...

-You may not rate Clottey, fair enough, but my point still stands about the likes of Cotto, Mosely, De La Hoya etc. doesn't it?

-Nobody Khan faced would beat Collazo? Well Firstly that is an opinion, and your opinion only.
Khan is only 24 with plenty of potential fights ahead of him. He is arguably beaten the same calibre of fighters in Maidana, Maligniaggi and Zab. These were all belt holders too...
But for Khan these were just stepping stones to get bigger fights and unify the division, unlike how it was for Hatton whom it was a "Career-defining fight".

Secondly, you may think Collzao would beat beat all of Khans key opposition so far, i beg to differ. Considering Collazo's signature wins were against Rivera and Migeul Gonzales, hardly breaking into the Top tier of fighters.

- I "aint got a clue" ? You aint got a clue... i said "frame". i did not refer to his height.

Mike Tyson was notoriously short for his weight division... As was Duran, Qawi, Naz, Tua,Toney (latter career) even Pacquaio to a certain extent now. The likes of is Arthur Abraham and Calderon are also worth a mention.

You're telling me Hatton, someone who walks around officially overweight and who kills himself to drain to 140 would struggle at 147 because of his weight?

- Regardless of how many times he defend the WBU belt, fact is if it was Khan, you'd been steaming about how he should unify the division etc.

- Hatton was popular, i agree, arguably the most popular British fighter in the modern era alongside Naz. But this not a popularity contest, it's about achievements.

- Yes Khan was sparked out, and what? This is about what Boxers achieve. Incase you have not worked it out, sport is not about who or how you lost, it's about what you win and what you achieve. About your Trophy cabinet, the championships and who you beat.

- Amir Khan got a head start through the Olympics? Yea, who does this brat think he is working his ass off as a teen, dedicating and committing himself to something he loves and getting Britain's only medal in boxing.

Gomez, this is not about Hatton. Hatton will go down as one of the best British champions according to fans, im not going to dispute that.
But this is about you throwing your toys out of your pram everytime Amir Khan is mentioned. I'm not sure whether or not Khan refused you an autograph or was too busy to take a picture with you and you're upset, but seriously, get over it.

Your perhaps one of the very worst posters on this forum.

If your not taking on all-comers over the Iraq war, your defending Amir Khan.

Why is that ? because your input is very shallow. Your arguments are weak and without foundation.

G0mez wrote:

observer1 wrote:

G0mez wrote:Observer your full of garbage.

"he lacks a defining win such as Clottey" good grief.

"Collazo was a stepping stone" he was WBA champion and nobody Khan has faced to date would beat him.

"Hatton had a large frame and could easily campaign at 147" you've not a clue. Hatton is 5'6.

Hatton fought about 10 times with the WBU in 3 years. He didn't sit on it for a decade. He fought Vince Philips, Magee, Thaxton, Tackie all in and around that period as he learnt his trade.

Hatton was so popular he'd pack the MEN with those fights. He'd not ask for them to be PPV either.

Unlike Khan who got banged out for some WBO inter belt in front of about 3,000 tops in 60 seconds - despite having a huge career head start with the Olympics.

Okay, after you stop frothing at the mouth for a few seconds, take a deep breath and actually read what i have to say...

-You may not rate Clottey, fair enough, but my point still stands about the likes of Cotto, Mosely, De La Hoya etc. doesn't it?

-Nobody Khan faced would beat Collazo? Well Firstly that is an opinion, and your opinion only.
Khan is only 24 with plenty of potential fights ahead of him. He is arguably beaten the same calibre of fighters in Maidana, Maligniaggi and Zab. These were all belt holders too...
But for Khan these were just stepping stones to get bigger fights and unify the division, unlike how it was for Hatton whom it was a "Career-defining fight".

Secondly, you may think Collzao would beat beat all of Khans key opposition so far, i beg to differ. Considering Collazo's signature wins were against Rivera and Migeul Gonzales, hardly breaking into the Top tier of fighters.

- I "aint got a clue" ? You aint got a clue... i said "frame". i did not refer to his height.

Mike Tyson was notoriously short for his weight division... As was Duran, Qawi, Naz, Tua,Toney (latter career) even Pacquaio to a certain extent now. The likes of is Arthur Abraham and Calderon are also worth a mention.

You're telling me Hatton, someone who walks around officially overweight and who kills himself to drain to 140 would struggle at 147 because of his weight?

- Regardless of how many times he defend the WBU belt, fact is if it was Khan, you'd been steaming about how he should unify the division etc.

- Hatton was popular, i agree, arguably the most popular British fighter in the modern era alongside Naz. But this not a popularity contest, it's about achievements.

- Yes Khan was sparked out, and what? This is about what Boxers achieve. Incase you have not worked it out, sport is not about who or how you lost, it's about what you win and what you achieve. About your Trophy cabinet, the championships and who you beat.

- Amir Khan got a head start through the Olympics? Yea, who does this brat think he is working his ass off as a teen, dedicating and committing himself to something he loves and getting Britain's only medal in boxing.

Gomez, this is not about Hatton. Hatton will go down as one of the best British champions according to fans, im not going to dispute that.
But this is about you throwing your toys out of your pram everytime Amir Khan is mentioned. I'm not sure whether or not Khan refused you an autograph or was too busy to take a picture with you and you're upset, but seriously, get over it.

Your perhaps one of the very worst posters on this forum.

If your not taking on all-comers over the Iraq war, your defending Amir Khan.

Why is that ? because your input is very shallow. Your arguments are weak and without foundation.

LOL

"without Foundation?"

Every opinion i made i backed up with some form of evidence. i.e. Hatton and other short boxers

Which is more than you can say, bringing up off-topic rhetoric when you can't think of anything else to say. I sometimes wonder if you are indeed a grown man or some high school kid.

That's your facts then?

"Hatton... And other short boxers"

That simply doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

I think you have a Khan curtain set, Khan rug, Khan lampshade and duvet. And a crusty Khan pillow case with a whole where Khan's mouth is.

That's fine, but don't set about ridiculing Hatton in your quest to elevate Khan's greatest when you know nothing about the guy.

G0mez wrote:

observer1 wrote:

G0mez wrote:Observer your full of garbage.

"he lacks a defining win such as Clottey" good grief.

"Collazo was a stepping stone" he was WBA champion and nobody Khan has faced to date would beat him.

"Hatton had a large frame and could easily campaign at 147" you've not a clue. Hatton is 5'6.

Hatton fought about 10 times with the WBU in 3 years. He didn't sit on it for a decade. He fought Vince Philips, Magee, Thaxton, Tackie all in and around that period as he learnt his trade.

Hatton was so popular he'd pack the MEN with those fights. He'd not ask for them to be PPV either.

Unlike Khan who got banged out for some WBO inter belt in front of about 3,000 tops in 60 seconds - despite having a huge career head start with the Olympics.

Okay, after you stop frothing at the mouth for a few seconds, take a deep breath and actually read what i have to say...

-You may not rate Clottey, fair enough, but my point still stands about the likes of Cotto, Mosely, De La Hoya etc. doesn't it?

-Nobody Khan faced would beat Collazo? Well Firstly that is an opinion, and your opinion only.
Khan is only 24 with plenty of potential fights ahead of him. He is arguably beaten the same calibre of fighters in Maidana, Maligniaggi and Zab. These were all belt holders too...
But for Khan these were just stepping stones to get bigger fights and unify the division, unlike how it was for Hatton whom it was a "Career-defining fight".

Secondly, you may think Collzao would beat beat all of Khans key opposition so far, i beg to differ. Considering Collazo's signature wins were against Rivera and Migeul Gonzales, hardly breaking into the Top tier of fighters.

- I "aint got a clue" ? You aint got a clue... i said "frame". i did not refer to his height.

Mike Tyson was notoriously short for his weight division... As was Duran, Qawi, Naz, Tua,Toney (latter career) even Pacquaio to a certain extent now. The likes of is Arthur Abraham and Calderon are also worth a mention.

You're telling me Hatton, someone who walks around officially overweight and who kills himself to drain to 140 would struggle at 147 because of his weight?

- Regardless of how many times he defend the WBU belt, fact is if it was Khan, you'd been steaming about how he should unify the division etc.

- Hatton was popular, i agree, arguably the most popular British fighter in the modern era alongside Naz. But this not a popularity contest, it's about achievements.

- Yes Khan was sparked out, and what? This is about what Boxers achieve. Incase you have not worked it out, sport is not about who or how you lost, it's about what you win and what you achieve. About your Trophy cabinet, the championships and who you beat.

- Amir Khan got a head start through the Olympics? Yea, who does this brat think he is working his ass off as a teen, dedicating and committing himself to something he loves and getting Britain's only medal in boxing.

Gomez, this is not about Hatton. Hatton will go down as one of the best British champions according to fans, im not going to dispute that.
But this is about you throwing your toys out of your pram everytime Amir Khan is mentioned. I'm not sure whether or not Khan refused you an autograph or was too busy to take a picture with you and you're upset, but seriously, get over it.

Your perhaps one of the very worst posters on this forum.

If your not taking on all-comers over the Iraq war, your defending Amir Khan.

Why is that ? because your input is very shallow. Your arguments are weak and without foundation.

I don't think he is, I think he made a lot of sense.

I feel that you may be right about Colazo (still can't believe Ricky beat him) but that you are trying to trivialise the lads points via flippancy.

Mugabi you need to stop with this approach as you come accross as childish in your responces, that then also brings the validity of your writings into question.


Just a friendly peice of advise

I think Hatton vs Collazo was a tough fight to score..... last time I watched it, a while ago admittedly, I had it 114-112 to Hatton.

7-5, a knockdown for Hatton in the first and a 10-8 for Collazo in the last. Collazo allowed Hatton to steal the 11th round on marching forward throwing arm shots and hugging, which cost him a draw on my card.

Officially of course it wouldn't have meant anything other than him losing a split rather than unanimous decision.

Hatton was badly conditioned and had to take it easier in the middle rounds after a fairly bright start. Plus, trying to get Collazo out of there after a flash knockdown didn't help.

crusader wrote:

gibbo wrote:

crusader wrote: If Kotelnik was a poor champ than Collazo was even worse and Maussa was terrible.

Not once did i mention collazo or maussa. kotelnik won his belt of gavin rees who don't get me wrong i like, but he is a European level fighter. tszyu won his belt of zab inside two, and he was alot better then.

I do like khan and if he carry on the way he is going he can have a far better legacy than hatton. but i will say this when his time comes to face mayweather imo mayweather will be way past his best.

I never said you mentioned them. I'm just pointing out how you only made comparisons that benefit Hatton in the argument. You mention Kotelnik and call him a poor world champ, but he is better than Collazo, Maussa, and Urango--who are three of Hatton's best wins, and he is just as good as Malignaggi.

Ok the call him poor was probably the wrong word but it was one of the easier champs at that time. since khan has got his belt he has done tremendous. beating miadana and judah. even stepping in with mccloskey an unbeaten fighter. But i just think there is alot of pressure and hopes from fans put on this kid. for me he still aint the finished article, for me he still aint had that defining fight as where hattons did against tszyu. Imo none of the fighter above would of even lasted the distance with tszyu let alone come close to beating him. hopfuly khan v bradley can be made and if khan wins that and i think he will then i will consider him to have a better legacy than hatton.

how would you see the khan of now coming of against the tszyu that hatton beat?

gibbo wrote:

crusader wrote:

gibbo wrote:
Not once did i mention collazo or maussa. kotelnik won his belt of gavin rees who don't get me wrong i like, but he is a European level fighter. tszyu won his belt of zab inside two, and he was alot better then.

I do like khan and if he carry on the way he is going he can have a far better legacy than hatton. but i will say this when his time comes to face mayweather imo mayweather will be way past his best.

I never said you mentioned them. I'm just pointing out how you only made comparisons that benefit Hatton in the argument. You mention Kotelnik and call him a poor world champ, but he is better than Collazo, Maussa, and Urango--who are three of Hatton's best wins, and he is just as good as Malignaggi.

Ok the call him poor was probably the wrong word but it was one of the easier champs at that time. since khan has got his belt he has done tremendous. beating miadana and judah. even stepping in with mccloskey an unbeaten fighter. But i just think there is alot of pressure and hopes from fans put on this kid. for me he still aint the finished article, for me he still aint had that defining fight as where hattons did against tszyu. Imo none of the fighter above would of even lasted the distance with tszyu let alone come close to beating him. hopfuly khan v bradley can be made and if khan wins that and i think he will then i will consider him to have a better legacy than hatton.

how would you see the khan of now coming of against the tszyu that hatton beat?

I think Khan would win running like a thief in the night.

The Tszyu (post Phillips up to Judah) fuking kills anyone at that weight AND I mean Mayweather also.
The ruskies timing against spedsters was a joy to behold.
If you think Corley shook Mayweather up Imagine what the 'Zab Judah' lead right would have done to him.
Tszyu aint Castillio, he was the real deal.
Vince Phillips was THE best thing that could ever have happened to him.
Hurtado nealry beat Pernell Whitaker whereas Tszyu destroyed him.

I'm telling you folks Tszyu was a lot better than most think and I believe would have ground Mayweather and all the other speedsters to a pulp.

Jon Saxon wrote:

gibbo wrote:

crusader wrote: I never said you mentioned them. I'm just pointing out how you only made comparisons that benefit Hatton in the argument. You mention Kotelnik and call him a poor world champ, but he is better than Collazo, Maussa, and Urango--who are three of Hatton's best wins, and he is just as good as Malignaggi.

Ok the call him poor was probably the wrong word but it was one of the easier champs at that time. since khan has got his belt he has done tremendous. beating miadana and judah. even stepping in with mccloskey an unbeaten fighter. But i just think there is alot of pressure and hopes from fans put on this kid. for me he still aint the finished article, for me he still aint had that defining fight as where hattons did against tszyu. Imo none of the fighter above would of even lasted the distance with tszyu let alone come close to beating him. hopfuly khan v bradley can be made and if khan wins that and i think he will then i will consider him to have a better legacy than hatton.

how would you see the khan of now coming of against the tszyu that hatton beat?

I think Khan would win running like a thief in the night.

The Tszyu (post Phillips up to Judah) fuking kills anyone at that weight AND I mean Mayweather also.
The ruskies timing against spedsters was a joy to behold.
If you think Corley shook Mayweather up Imagine what the 'Zab Judah' lead right would have done to him.
Tszyu aint Castillio, he was the real deal.
Vince Phillips was THE best thing that could ever have happened to him.
Hurtado nealry beat Pernell Whitaker whereas Tszyu destroyed him.

I'm telling you folks Tszyu was a lot better than most think and I believe would have ground Mayweather and all the other speedsters to a pulp.

The one guy I would have picked to beat him was Mosley. Iron clad chin, great workrate, extremely quick and heavy handed.

Mosley should have fought at 140 instead of chasing oscar up the weights.

I think it has, for some reason, been forgotten just how bloody good Tszyu was at 140 between Phillips and Hatton. It's almost like we're reimagining Tszyu, because we don't want to think Hatton could beat anyone that good.

Around the time he fought Mitchell the second time, I'd have made him no worse than 50-50 against Mayweather. Hatton beat him because of a pure style-makes-fights equation, and because pre-Tszyu, before he forgot his boxing skills and decided brute strength was the way forward, Hatton was an excellent fighter.

Johnny Cucumber wrote:Tszyu was better than anyone Khan has fought.

so at this stage I'd have to say Hatton, but if Khan beats Bradley then I think they would be on a par.

Would agree with that - just a shame no-one likes him, really ...

danfoster wrote:

Johnny Cucumber wrote:Tszyu was better than anyone Khan has fought.

so at this stage I'd have to say Hatton, but if Khan beats Bradley then I think they would be on a par.

Would agree with that - just a shame no-one likes him, really ...

Eh?? no one likes him?? what you mean racists on this board?

Jon Saxon wrote:

danfoster wrote:

Johnny Cucumber wrote:Tszyu was better than anyone Khan has fought.

so at this stage I'd have to say Hatton, but if Khan beats Bradley then I think they would be on a par.

Would agree with that - just a shame no-one likes him, really ...

Eh?? no one likes him?? what you mean racists on this board?

See, I find this kind of statement astonishing. Calling someone a racist is one of the worst insults possible, and yet you've thrown it at JC with such casual abandon.

What, so if you're white, you have to like someone of colour or you're a racist?

I think you've misunderstood the meaning of the word.

I think it shows how much opinion Hatton generated and what he did for the sport when you can log into boxrec and still see guys trying to shit on his career years after his last fight.... Lets be honest, anyone on these boards, except the mentally retarded would take Hattons best wins over Khans best and that is the bottom line, however people try to twist it. That said, Hatton should've been mixing with world class a little earlier in his career, by the time he made it he was already feeling the affects of his lifestyle. I hope Khan goes on to surpass what Hatton achieved and he certainly has the foundation there to do that now but he is a couple of quality wins off that standard as things stand.

Carbo wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:

danfoster wrote: Would agree with that - just a shame no-one likes him, really ...

Eh?? no one likes him?? what you mean racists on this board?

See, I find this kind of statement astonishing. Calling someone a racist is one of the worst insults possible, and yet you've thrown it at JC with such casual abandon.

What, so if you're white, you have to like someone of colour or you're a racist?

I think you've misunderstood the meaning of the word.

No young man I know exactly what I am saying, Khan comes across as a really nice kid.

All this shite is either down to jealousy or racism or a combination of both.

Jon Saxon wrote:

Carbo wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote: Eh?? no one likes him?? what you mean racists on this board?

See, I find this kind of statement astonishing. Calling someone a racist is one of the worst insults possible, and yet you've thrown it at JC with such casual abandon.

What, so if you're white, you have to like someone of colour or you're a racist?

I think you've misunderstood the meaning of the word.

No young man I know exactly what I am saying, Khan comes across as a really nice kid.

All this shite is either down to jealousy or racism or a combination of both.

Really? So, because you thiannk he comes across as a really nice kid, anyone who thinks otherwise is either jealous or racist?

For what it's worth, Amir Khan came across as a lovely kid at the Olympics, and does in training now. But there was a time when he simply didn't. There was the crazy driving, the attitude, and one or two of the stories here about him and his hangers on that seemed to suggest he was developing into something other than a really nice kid.

But irrespective of that, I may think he's a really nice kid, and you might, too, but we don't have the monopoly on something as subjective as whether someone is likable or not. I simply can't understand how you can say, "he's likable" or "she's beautiful" or "that song's great", and that's that, end of story, because that's what I like, so everyone who doesn't is 'wrong'. Two plus two is irrefutably five, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Nor can I understand -- even beyond the risible position that subjective issues have a 'right' and 'wrong' -- how you can make the leap that anything else is racist. Do you even know the race of the people saying they don't like him?

I'm sure there are some racists who don't like him because of his race, but to say that's the only reason people would dislike him is preposterous. And given the heinous nature of actual racism, I think it's better not to go bandying it about in such a blaze manner.

Carbo wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:

Carbo wrote: See, I find this kind of statement astonishing. Calling someone a racist is one of the worst insults possible, and yet you've thrown it at JC with such casual abandon.

What, so if you're white, you have to like someone of colour or you're a racist?

I think you've misunderstood the meaning of the word.

No young man I know exactly what I am saying, Khan comes across as a really nice kid.

All this shite is either down to jealousy or racism or a combination of both.

Really? So, because you thiannk he comes across as a really nice kid, anyone who thinks otherwise is either jealous or racist?

For what it's worth, Amir Khan came across as a lovely kid at the Olympics, and does in training now. But there was a time when he simply didn't. There was the crazy driving, the attitude, and one or two of the stories here about him and his hangers on that seemed to suggest he was developing into something other than a really nice kid.

But irrespective of that, I may think he's a really nice kid, and you might, too, but we don't have the monopoly on something as subjective as whether someone is likable or not. I simply can't understand how you can say, "he's likable" or "she's beautiful" or "that song's great", and that's that, end of story, because that's what I like, so everyone who doesn't is 'wrong'. Two plus two is irrefutably five, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Nor can I understand -- even beyond the risible position that subjective issues have a 'right' and 'wrong' -- how you can make the leap that anything else is racist. Do you even know the race of the people saying they don't like him?

I'm sure there are some racists who don't like him because of his race, but to say that's the only reason people would dislike him is preposterous. And given the heinous nature of actual racism, I think it's better not to go bandying it about in such a blaze manner.

IF you had given me a valid (and I mean valid) reasons for the dislike then I would get it, however my gut feeling is that there are quite a few racists on this and many other boxing forums.

Jon Saxon wrote:

Carbo wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:
No young man I know exactly what I am saying, Khan comes across as a really nice kid.

All this shite is either down to jealousy or racism or a combination of both.

Really? So, because you thiannk he comes across as a really nice kid, anyone who thinks otherwise is either jealous or racist?

For what it's worth, Amir Khan came across as a lovely kid at the Olympics, and does in training now. But there was a time when he simply didn't. There was the crazy driving, the attitude, and one or two of the stories here about him and his hangers on that seemed to suggest he was developing into something other than a really nice kid.

But irrespective of that, I may think he's a really nice kid, and you might, too, but we don't have the monopoly on something as subjective as whether someone is likable or not. I simply can't understand how you can say, "he's likable" or "she's beautiful" or "that song's great", and that's that, end of story, because that's what I like, so everyone who doesn't is 'wrong'. Two plus two is irrefutably five, but beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Nor can I understand -- even beyond the risible position that subjective issues have a 'right' and 'wrong' -- how you can make the leap that anything else is racist. Do you even know the race of the people saying they don't like him?

I'm sure there are some racists who don't like him because of his race, but to say that's the only reason people would dislike him is preposterous. And given the heinous nature of actual racism, I think it's better not to go bandying it about in such a blaze manner.

IF you had given me a valid (and I mean valid) reasons for the dislike then I would get it, however my gut feeling is that there are quite a few racists on this and many other boxing forums.

I wouldn't disagree that there will be racists out there who don't like him because he is a Muslim of Pakistani race.

But that doesn't mean that anyone who doesn't like him is racist.

People don't have to have valid reasons to dislike someone, to think someone's ugly, to not like the way a car looks, to not like a painting, to dislike a city, to dislike a song, or anything else along those lines.