BoxRec

Hopefully it's Seth Mitchell in............ New Zealand.

sure.

seth wouldn't even know who chauncy was.

I'm sure he does 53 wins is alot. I'm not entirely sure he'd know where N.Z was though

yid14 wrote:Hopefully it's Seth Mitchell in............ New Zealand.

Mitchell is on a ten KO win streak. He would not come cheap.

So now it might be Oliver McCall on the Cameron-Barrett undercard. Chauncy certainly get's his name out there.

McCall is fighting the unbeaten 27 year old Italian heavyweight Francesco Pianeta in Germany tonight.

Let's see how the Old Bull comes out of that before we talk about Chauncey fighting him.

Brute wrote:McCall is fighting the unbeaten 27 year old Italian heavyweight Francesco Pianeta in Germany tonight.

Let's see how the Old Bull comes out of that before we talk about Chauncey fighting him.

Seems the 47 year old lost on points, no surprise there. I'm not saying it would be a good match-up just saying that's what the N.Z papers are reporting.

Away from Rugby and cricket the NZ press do seem to aim low.

To be perfectly honest outside of a select few (a very small minority) the rest of the NZ Media have no idea about boxing whatsoever! They'd report an Ali Comeback if someone in the street told them so! Just today one knowledgible NZ Boxing reporters listed Joseph Parkers height at 1.83cm, he is in fact 1.93cm! Could of been a typo but it just looks bad! I've seen some cringeworthy info reported on boxing in NZ!

Maybe Chauncy could fight Pianeta. Pianeta beat Colin Wilson a few years ago.

Chauncy lost on points.

Sherman “Tank” Williams vs Mark de Mori?

114-114, 112-115, 110-119. No collusion there!

Losing to a 5'11" 39 year old rated 72 places behind him by "Boxrec" does not push Chauncey's case.

Not overly shocking given the level of opponents Chauncy had been facing. If you keeps fighter low level opponents, eventually one will make you look silly....

dan h wrote:Not overly shocking given the level of opponents Chauncy had been facing. If you keeps fighter low level opponents, eventually one will make you look silly....

Exactly. Look what happened to Mundine with Wood as a prime example of that.

Wood was up for that fight. Mundine took him too lightly and did not train properly.

Brute wrote:Wood was up for that fight. Mundine took him too lightly and did not train properly.

Losers always have excuses.

Wood won. Mundine lost

Not an excuse. It was Mundine's own fault he was not ready for the fight. More training and less publicity hunting are the secrets to success in sport.

Brute wrote:Not an excuse. It was Mundine's own fault he was not ready for the fight. More training and less publicity hunting are the secrets to success in sport.

Wood won. Mundine lost.

The result is all that matters

[quote="Brute"]Not an excuse. It was Mundine's own fault he was not ready for the fight. More training and less publicity hunting are the secrets to success in sport.[/quote]
not an excuse? pmsl

that's rubbish.

he simply got beaten by the better man on the day.

No argument, but Mundine won the rematch because he was better prepared.

buster007 wrote:

Brute wrote:Not an excuse. It was Mundine's own fault he was not ready for the fight. More training and less publicity hunting are the secrets to success in sport.

not an excuse? pmsl

that's rubbish.

he simply got beaten by the better man on the day.

[quote="Brute"]No argument, but Mundine won the rematch because he was better prepared.[/quote]
denial.

You don't think Mundine was in better shape when he fought Wood the second time?

Do you think Wood lay down? I don't understand what you are saying.

he got caught by a shot and was ko'd. it happens in boxing when not expected u know. hence tough luck.