BoxRec

I think Kenny would do himself proud, there have been many worse challengers for the title, Anderson is a good fighter, Commonwealth gold medalist too

Being a good amateur doesn't mean a fighter is a good pro. Anderson has defeated only two opponents who possess winning records, and he isn't qualified to challenge for a world title.

crusader wrote:Being a good amateur doesn't mean a fighter is a good pro. Anderson has defeated only two opponents who possess winning records, and he isn't qualified to challenge for a world title.

Of course in theory you are right, but in the real world of boxing, esp with the WBO his credentials are enough.
And as I said if the Scot was given the chance I believe he is good enough to do himself proud, he is no Samuel Kebede, Tucker Pudwill or Bobby Gunn

Give Kenny his chance,hes had enough bad luck and if he were to lose hes only back in the position hes in now.good luck to him

yiddo14 wrote:Would he be the least credible challenger in the history of the major organisations? Can't think of a fighter to have challenged for a title with as little credentials as him if it were to happen.

Howard Clarke? Joe Hipp? But he would be up there among the least credible, not worst in terms of ability, but least credible.

stujones wrote: Howard Clarke? Joe Hipp? But he would be up there among the least credible, not worst in terms of ability, but least credible.

Howard beat the top IBF ranked Jason Papillon to earn his shot, Howard could fight. He gave Vargas a good scrap too.

MachoMan09 wrote:If Kenny Anderson were to get a shot at the WBO title, any sliver of credibility that organisation has would go up in smoke. He's done nothing to warrant consideration let alone actually be given the nod. Of course, on a personal level, it would be nice to see Kenny get some good fortune but the bigger picture is more important.

Much worse challengers are dug out to fight for the belts of all bodies. I do not see why you are singling out Anderson. At least Anderson can fight.

As far as the WBO goes it hardly ranks alongside Tim Tomoshak being pulled out of the crowd, beer in hand, to fight Tommy Morrison for the heavyweight belt.

Coco wrote:

stujones wrote: Howard Clarke? Joe Hipp? But he would be up there among the least credible, not worst in terms of ability, but least credible.

Howard beat the top IBF ranked Jason Papillon to earn his shot, Howard could fight. He gave Vargas a good scrap too.

Papillon wasn't the IBF #1 contender at the time, I think he was in the top 6, but his ranking was rediculously inflated - and he'd won no major honour.

Howard could fight, I agree there.... saw him fight Michael Smyth and he got robbed silly.... but if we are honest (on achievement), barely deserved to be a voluntary defence for a British title - let alone fight for the world title. At least nobody is complaining about Anderson's mandatory challenger status for Groves.

I don't mind this fight as long as it's not for the title (if that is possible in this situation) and it's just to keep the bill alive. Bit of a shambles if it is for the title.

DeGale has turned it down apparently.

MachoMan09 wrote:

Coco wrote:

MachoMan09 wrote:If Kenny Anderson were to get a shot at the WBO title, any sliver of credibility that organisation has would go up in smoke. He's done nothing to warrant consideration let alone actually be given the nod. Of course, on a personal level, it would be nice to see Kenny get some good fortune but the bigger picture is more important.

Much worse challengers are dug out to fight for the belts of all bodies. I do not see why you are singling out Anderson. At least Anderson can fight.

As far as the WBO goes it hardly ranks alongside Tim Tomoshak being pulled out of the crowd, beer in hand, to fight Tommy Morrison for the heavyweight belt.

I could have worded my post better. More along the lines of:

If Kenny Anderson were to get a shot at the WBO title, it would again demonstrate just how little credibility these so called "world title" belts actually hold. He's done nothing to warrant consideration let alone to actually be given the nod. Of course, on a personal level, it would be nice to see Kenny get some good fortune but the bigger picture is more important, isn't it?

Isn't it a bit of a moot argument? I mean if this were the wbu (are they still going?) nobody would bat an eyelid. Granted bafflingly people have accepted the wbo as a fourth title (as if three wasn't too many to begin with) but the fact that the belt isn't held by Ward, perhaps the most clearly defined top man in any division currenty makes it completely pointless to debate whether a "world title shot" is deserved or not.
Fighter ranked so far apart facing off is a slightly different debate and in this instance a more worthy one to my mind, I don't get everyone being hung up on the belt when anyone who considers Steiglitz to be the world champion needs locking up.

Would Anderson stand a fair chance of winning? If the answer is yes then I don't see what the problem is. It's not like the other contenders are ready and waiting to step in.

smoggy7188 wrote:I dont see how people complain about Karpency and Krasniqi and then get on the idea of Anderson getting a world title shot, what has he done? He has maybe one or two decent wins at best.

Agree with this, only he has no decent wins in my opinion.

Nothing against Anderson, good for him if he gets the fight.

jameswilson wrote:

yiddo14 wrote:Would he be the least credible challenger in the history of the major organisations? Can't think of a fighter to have challenged for a title with as little credentials as him if it were to happen.

Bobby Gunn.

michael bentt vs tommy morrison for the wbo heavyweight title when he was 10-1 so i wouldnt be suprised if anderson can get this fight and wouldnt mind betting he'd beat stieglitz.