BoxRec

clopixolacuphase wrote:

expe wrote:

clopixolacuphase wrote:I was ringside to watch him win his 'title', wasn't impressed, have not watched any of his fights since and am not surprised at what happened last night.

I don't dislike him but he was moved too carefully, matched very softly and then Warren threw him in with a very hard man. It was not a shrewd move. Who's Warren's biggest draw now? Chisora?

Warren's got Chisora, Saunders, Gavin, 3 of the Smith brothers, Butler, Buglioni, Cleverly, Bradley Saunders, Mitchell Smith, Gethin, Neil Dawson, Scott Harrison, Heffron, Callum Johnson, Enzo, McKenzie, Liam Walsh, Joe Murray, Lewis Rees, Selkirk and Skeete. There's more but those are the names that stand out, so he's not short of fighters but has none at the top level. Wouldn't surprise me to see Denton Vassell sign with him either.

I know he's got a big stable still I was just wondering who his biggest draw was, and reading through that list I'm sticking with Chisora. I would make a point of watching Chisora fight, maybe Gavin and Saunders if the opponent was right. A lot of those names I couldn't even tell you what they look like, let alone what weight class they fight in. Warren used to have the big names, Calzaghe and Hatton, and now the 'names' in British boxing (Froch, Haye, Khan, Fury, Burns, Murray, Brooke, barker, etc) are with other promoters. Nobody Fwank has at the moment is PPV worthy, are they?

Murray? Most people haven't heard of Brook and Barker, especially Barker.

Happy Slapper wrote:

clopixolacuphase wrote:

expe wrote: Warren's got Chisora, Saunders, Gavin, 3 of the Smith brothers, Butler, Buglioni, Cleverly, Bradley Saunders, Mitchell Smith, Gethin, Neil Dawson, Scott Harrison, Heffron, Callum Johnson, Enzo, McKenzie, Liam Walsh, Joe Murray, Lewis Rees, Selkirk and Skeete. There's more but those are the names that stand out, so he's not short of fighters but has none at the top level. Wouldn't surprise me to see Denton Vassell sign with him either.

I know he's got a big stable still I was just wondering who his biggest draw was, and reading through that list I'm sticking with Chisora. I would make a point of watching Chisora fight, maybe Gavin and Saunders if the opponent was right. A lot of those names I couldn't even tell you what they look like, let alone what weight class they fight in. Warren used to have the big names, Calzaghe and Hatton, and now the 'names' in British boxing (Froch, Haye, Khan, Fury, Burns, Murray, Brooke, barker, etc) are with other promoters. Nobody Fwank has at the moment is PPV worthy, are they?

Surely Frampton is his biggest draw?

Frampton's with McGuigan.

His name would hold some cachet and may well open a few doors but a 2:2 degree isnt worth a lot these days, Cardiff uni or not.

I have recruited a few graduates recently and the market is such we can easily hold out for a 2:1 minimum. Graduates are accepting almost any job to get a foot in the door- completely different to 10-15 years back.

Realistically clev is going to box for another 5-10 years. This loss is a setback. A big one. It could be tempered by kovalev cleaning up the division in next 18 months so at least he was beaten by "the man". He could carve himself a good living at euro and fringe world level, just needs a couple of rebuilding fights and see where he's at.

I hope he finds something like that if he decides to stick to his promise and leave the sport now he lost.

He seems a nice guy.

expe wrote:

clopixolacuphase wrote:
I know he's got a big stable still I was just wondering who his biggest draw was, and reading through that list I'm sticking with Chisora. I would make a point of watching Chisora fight, maybe Gavin and Saunders if the opponent was right. A lot of those names I couldn't even tell you what they look like, let alone what weight class they fight in. Warren used to have the big names, Calzaghe and Hatton, and now the 'names' in British boxing (Froch, Haye, Khan, Fury, Burns, Murray, Brooke, barker, etc) are with other promoters. Nobody Fwank has at the moment is PPV worthy, are they?

Murray? Most people haven't heard of Brook and Barker, especially Barker.

Well, Barker holds a world title now, Murray is known internationally (although not very well in the UK) for his performance against Sergio, and they are both
likely to get a big money fight soon with the division's elites. Brook is a good fighter who has just been unlucky with injuries and I think he'll win a title and get some good paydays.

I can't believe I forgot Degale and Groves, as SMW is my favorite division! Groves has his world title shot coming in a big money fight, and Degale won't be far off. Neither guy is a Warren fighter. The public knows them both. Jesus, when they fought it was at the 02 and wasn't that PPV as well or am I well off with that one?

The point is, Fwank has some building to do, don't you think?

clopixolacuphase wrote:

expe wrote:

clopixolacuphase wrote:
I know he's got a big stable still I was just wondering who his biggest draw was, and reading through that list I'm sticking with Chisora. I would make a point of watching Chisora fight, maybe Gavin and Saunders if the opponent was right. A lot of those names I couldn't even tell you what they look like, let alone what weight class they fight in. Warren used to have the big names, Calzaghe and Hatton, and now the 'names' in British boxing (Froch, Haye, Khan, Fury, Burns, Murray, Brooke, barker, etc) are with other promoters. Nobody Fwank has at the moment is PPV worthy, are they?

Murray? Most people haven't heard of Brook and Barker, especially Barker.

Well, Barker holds a world title now, Murray is known internationally (although not very well in the UK) for his performance against Sergio, and they are both
likely to get a big money fight soon with the division's elites. Brook is a good fighter who has just been unlucky with injuries and I think he'll win a title and get some good paydays.

I can't believe I forgot Degale and Groves, as SMW is my favorite division! Groves has his world title shot coming in a big money fight, and Degale won't be far off. Neither guy is a Warren fighter. The public knows them both. Jesus, when they fought it was at the 02 and wasn't that PPV as well or am I well off with that one?

The point is, Fwank has some building to do, don't you think?

There not names though, the average person hasn't got a clue who they are. Jamie McDonnell has a world title and he's a complete nobody. Warren just needs to wait 12 months while a couple of his fighters reach world level, there's no major additions that need to be made to his stable.

Other than Haye, Khan and, this is still at a push, Froch, the average person doesn't know anything about any of these boxers. The 'average' person doesn't give a fornicate about boxing. At all.

clopixolacuphase wrote: Yeah, with that PGCE he could be a Maths teacher. From 'world champ' to Maths teacher. The glamor! I'm sure he wouldn't be bitter every day of his life. Hey, maybe some sixth formers would crush on him? Never short of work, though! Nah, that's kind of cruel. Teaching is a worthwhile profession, just nowhere near what he would have wanted out of his life don't you think?

'World champ' He was a WBO titlist and he is smart enough to know that whatever purses he was earning are not going to keep him in clover forever, besides, where he is from, being a teacher is a noble profession for a sports star, in history, loads of the Welsh British Lions for example were teachers. The world doesn't owe him a living because he is a boxer. Rocky Graziano said something along the lines of this and that boxers either have to learn something after it is all over or 'put their money in their socks'.

Point is, it ends one day and you reset the alarm clock. Unless you were of huge marquee value like Frank Bruno or ultimately sucessful year after year like Naseem Hamed. I think we can safely say that Cleverly is going to end up like neither, but at least he has something other than boxing.

Media studies is the default course for a kid who wants to go to Uni but has no idea what they're interested in. It won't get you anywhere unless you do loads of work experience but it's OK if you want to have a fun time while you're young (I didn't do media studies at university by the way!) but getting a 2.2 or a third on a degree course, you might as well have not turned up to be honest. I don't know what he got I just pulled the mark out of the air as a joke. What did he get? Do you know?

I got a 2.2 and will be earning 60000 dollars a year tax free come this October. I have the opportunity to earn 100000 dollars the year after - not bad eh? So I don't think it's quite true
that a 2.2 equates to not turning up at all. I wouldn't have the opportunity to earn that money
without my qualifications. In fact, I would go as far as to say going to university (Thank you New Labour!) has changed my life beyond all recognition.

Cleverly got a 2.2.

Yeh a 2:2 degree isn't great these days, no disrespect intended but I know a lot of people who got a 2:1 who have struggled to get jobs just because loads of people got degrees at the same time and there aren't the jobs in certain areas to give all those people a job.

It all depends what you do with it I guess, but I do know bigger companies can sometimes set the bar at 2:1 for their recruiting processes. I got a 1st in Computing, worked in a couple of companies for a few years, got bored shitless and set up my own company, so essentially anyone could do that i guess, it aint what grade you get it's what you do with it.

TheCobra wrote:Yeh a 2:2 degree isn't great these days, no disrespect intended but I know a lot of people who got a 2:1 who have struggled to get jobs just because loads of people got degrees at the same time and there aren't the jobs in certain areas to give all those people a job.

My uncle who was management with Cummings engineering and graduated from Imperial College in London says if you don't do anything with your degree in the first two years then it is next to worthless. A lot of kids these days have that entitlement of doing well on their degree but expecting to get into the top tier jobs on the back of it and whilst the employment gap on their CV gets wider and wider.

Myself with my crap degree went and worked everywhere, never been unemployed and now earning decent money. It is all great having a good classification but if it isn't twinned with a bit of work and initative. There won't be many who will want to know.

It all depends what you do with it I guess, but I do know bigger companies can sometimes set the bar at 2:1 for their recruiting processes. I got a 1st in Computing, worked in a couple of companies for a few years, got bored shitless and set up my own company, so essentially anyone could do that i guess, it aint what grade you get it's what you do with it.

Exactly.

Tesco management programme set the bar for graduates with first class degrees, they are flooded with applicants with the said qualifications. A first class degree doesn't mask a lack of guts, initiative or ambition.

Fat Git wrote:

TheCobra wrote:Yeh a 2:2 degree isn't great these days, no disrespect intended but I know a lot of people who got a 2:1 who have struggled to get jobs just because loads of people got degrees at the same time and there aren't the jobs in certain areas to give all those people a job.

My uncle who was management with Cummings engineering and graduated from Imperial College in London says if you don't do anything with your degree in the first two years then it is next to worthless. A lot of kids these days have that entitlement of doing well on their degree but expecting to get into the top tier jobs on the back of it and whilst the employment gap on their CV gets wider and wider.

Myself with my crap degree went and worked everywhere, never been unemployed and now earning decent money. It is all great having a good classification but if it isn't twinned with a bit of work and initative. There won't be many who will want to know.

It all depends what you do with it I guess, but I do know bigger companies can sometimes set the bar at 2:1 for their recruiting processes. I got a 1st in Computing, worked in a couple of companies for a few years, got bored shitless and set up my own company, so essentially anyone could do that i guess, it aint what grade you get it's what you do with it.

Exactly.

Tesco management programme set the bar for graduates with first class degrees, they are flooded with applicants with the said qualifications. A first class degree doesn't mask a lack of guts, initiative or ambition.

Yep, there are some very clever people who have no ambition or guts to do something for themselves, they want it on a plate, so if they don't get in one of these graduate programmes they seem to struggle to find something to do. Then there are people with absolutely no qualifications but a load of business ideas and determination, who make a really good company and become a success. I'd just say though to anyone, getting a degree is definitely worth it, give yourself the tools for the job and go from there. Totally off-topic now, so back to boxing!!

I earn a fair bit more than what a lot of academics dream of earning.

Because unfortunately, a lot of them are next to useless. The lion's share of academics I've worked alongside couldn't change a tyre on their car despite their glittering CV and simply are not very streetwise nor can think on their feet or integrate well. Obviously there are exceptions, but in my experience there aren't many.

My two sons will be prompted to work with water or electricity and invest their 4/5 years in a trade rather than a university which basically saddles them with debt and an addiction to pot noodles.

Then once they have experience in their field, I will urge them to set up their own companies and be their own bosses.

Law, Barbers, Undertakers, Water, Electricity - all bona fide industries that will not be going anywhere.

G0mez wrote:I earn a fair bit more than what a lot of academics dream of earning.

Because unfortunately, a lot of them are next to useless. The lion's share of academics I've worked alongside couldn't change a tyre on their car despite their glittering CV and simply are not very streetwise nor can think on their feet or integrate well. Obviously there are exceptions, but in my experience there aren't many.

My two sons will be prompted to work with water or electricity and invest their 4/5 years in a trade rather than a university which basically saddles them with debt and an addiction to pot noodles.

Then once they have experience in their field, I will urge them to set up their own companies and be their own bosses.

Law, Barbers, Undertakers, Water, Electricity - all bona fide industries that will not be going anywhere.

Oh God - another graduate from 'The University of Life'.

A lot of them are not 'useless' and what is so hard about changing a tyre on a fornicating car? There are loads of people who haven't got an 'O' level to their name who can't fit in a lightbulb. Common sense and being streetwise have nothing to do with qualifications.

Up to the age of 30, I didn't have a qualification to my name, left school with nothing and then I went to university and my life has changed massively for the better as regards life opportunities. I know I would rather have the university education than not have one.

And why can't you let your sons do what they want? I mean, if they show a flair for being an electrician then fine - but if they want to go to university and do say... journalism - why would you stop them?

And you forgot 'health' in your list. My one regret is that I didn't go into nursing when I was 18 (because I had no 'O' levels being expelled from school. ) that is something I would recommend my kids to go into.

G0mez wrote:I earn a fair bit more than what a lot of academics dream of earning.

Because unfortunately, a lot of them are next to useless. The lion's share of academics I've worked alongside couldn't change a tyre on their car despite their glittering CV and simply are not very streetwise nor can think on their feet or integrate well. Obviously there are exceptions, but in my experience there aren't many.

My two sons will be prompted to work with water or electricity and invest their 4/5 years in a trade rather than a university which basically saddles them with debt and an addiction to pot noodles.

Then once they have experience in their field, I will urge them to set up their own companies and be their own bosses.

Law, Barbers, Undertakers, Water, Electricity - all bona fide industries that will not be going anywhere.

You can add working on the roads to that as well, councils are always digging up roads. If you get a job working on water pipes, electric cables, repaving roads, it's more or less a job for life, because we'll always need water and electricity and the roads aren't going anywhere.

Fair play about trades, a trade is a good solid thing to have, they aren't gona disappear anytime soon and if you have the business nous then they can be very good businesses to run.

Coming from a techy/internet business person though:

A plumber can market to people in his local area, an internet-based business can market to the whole country/europe/world depending on your product/marketplace. Without the education behind me that the degree provided though, I wouldn't be able to do what I'm doing now, I could have made a go of it, but the degree has given me the fundamentals underneath it all, rather like learning your trade - you can't go and be a plumber without learning that trade, degrees are the same for many subjects - they give you the fundamentals, I certainly wouldn't discourage anyone from doing a degree - as I said previously, it's what you do with it.

TheCobra wrote:Fair play about trades, a trade is a good solid thing to have, they aren't gona disappear anytime soon and if you have the business nous then they can be very good businesses to run.

Coming from a techy/internet business person though:

A plumber can market to people in his local area, an internet-based business can market to the whole country/europe/world depending on your product/marketplace. Without the education behind me that the degree provided though, I wouldn't be able to do what I'm doing now, I could have made a go of it, but the degree has given me the fundamentals underneath it all, rather like learning your trade - you can't go and be a plumber without learning that trade, degrees are the same for many subjects - they give you the fundamentals, I certainly wouldn't discourage anyone from doing a degree - as I said previously, it's what you do with it.

A double-edged sword. People around the country/europe/world can bid for your customers.

I know people who do websites for pennies from developing nations like India etc. Whereas physical trades aren't going to see Indian plumbers flying over! (although the odd Pole my surface)

But fair play to you mate for starting your own company. What side of the business do you specialise in ?

Fat Git wrote:
Oh God - another graduate from 'The University of Life'.

A lot of them are not 'useless' and what is so hard about changing a tyre on a effing car? There are loads of people who haven't got an 'O' level to their name who can't fit in a lightbulb. Common sense and being streetwise have nothing to do with qualifications.

Up to the age of 30, I didn't have a qualification to my name, left school with nothing and then I went to university and my life has changed massively for the better as regards life opportunities. I know I would rather have the university education than not have one.

And why can't you let your sons do what they want? I mean, if they show a flair for being an electrician then fine - but if they want to go to university and do say... journalism - why would you stop them?

And you forgot 'health' in your list. My one regret is that I didn't go into nursing when I was 18 (because I had no 'O' levels being expelled from school. ) that is something I would recommend my kids to go into.

Don't knock the university of life my friend !

I just know a dozen people that ended up nowhere and 10 years behind everyone else financially because they chose university.

I still got to hang out and nail all their uni chick friends on a weekend too.

The food industry is good, we all need food. My wife was pushed into a career that wasnt right for her and she was never happpy until she did something that she did enjoy. I dont believe in forcing your kids to do what you want them to do. Advice regarding a career is another matter.

Gomez I'd tell my boys to pick a trade up if all else fails it dont take long to learn a trade & anyone can be taught. I'd rather them go into engineering,project planning,design etc being on the shovel aint no joy or way to go

G0mez wrote:

TheCobra wrote:Fair play about trades, a trade is a good solid thing to have, they aren't gona disappear anytime soon and if you have the business nous then they can be very good businesses to run.

Coming from a techy/internet business person though:

A plumber can market to people in his local area, an internet-based business can market to the whole country/europe/world depending on your product/marketplace. Without the education behind me that the degree provided though, I wouldn't be able to do what I'm doing now, I could have made a go of it, but the degree has given me the fundamentals underneath it all, rather like learning your trade - you can't go and be a plumber without learning that trade, degrees are the same for many subjects - they give you the fundamentals, I certainly wouldn't discourage anyone from doing a degree - as I said previously, it's what you do with it.

A double-edged sword. People around the country/europe/world can bid for your customers.

I know people who do websites for pennies from developing nations like India etc. Whereas physical trades aren't going to see Indian plumbers flying over! (although the odd Pole my surface)

But fair play to you mate for starting your own company. What side of the business do you specialise in ?

Bit of SEO, lot of affiliate marketing. The Indians are a great outsourcing opportunity though.

G0mez wrote:

Fat Git wrote:
Oh God - another graduate from 'The University of Life'.

A lot of them are not 'useless' and what is so hard about changing a tyre on a effing car? There are loads of people who haven't got an 'O' level to their name who can't fit in a lightbulb. Common sense and being streetwise have nothing to do with qualifications.

Up to the age of 30, I didn't have a qualification to my name, left school with nothing and then I went to university and my life has changed massively for the better as regards life opportunities. I know I would rather have the university education than not have one.

And why can't you let your sons do what they want? I mean, if they show a flair for being an electrician then fine - but if they want to go to university and do say... journalism - why would you stop them?

And you forgot 'health' in your list. My one regret is that I didn't go into nursing when I was 18 (because I had no 'O' levels being expelled from school. ) that is something I would recommend my kids to go into.

Don't knock the university of life my friend !

I just know a dozen people that ended up nowhere and 10 years behind everyone else financially because they chose university.

I still got to hang out and nail all their uni chick friends on a weekend too.

I don't, I was a member of it myself.

It is just that there are loads of ways to earn a good living through trades or academia. And that common sense is not restricted to the trades people. If I had my time again I would have certainly gone into nursing.

There are some academics who have never had a proper job and have no common sense but then there are loads of people back home on the dole who I can say the same.

Omerta wrote:He looked almost skinny compared to kovalev physically it looked like a boy versus a man

Or I would say Man verses Food!!!

mcato wrote:

Omerta wrote:He looked almost skinny compared to kovalev physically it looked like a boy versus a man

Or I would say Man verses Food!!!

He's taller and longer than Kovalev though aswell so I think it just gave that appearance.

IRLangmaid25 wrote:Because he always seemed to be matched very carefully by allegedly when you look at Krasniqi, Hawk and Tommy Karpency on his slat, none of them could really bang or were really that quick on their feet or with the hands.

I don't blame Cleverly for fighting those guys, he had to defend his title and those guys all had very good records and were in the top 20 of the division. I realise that might sound hollow now, but let's not forget that Clev has had a very difficult time in fighting top cotenders because they keep pulling out of fights against him... At my last count, I think that Jurgen Braehmer has pulled out of a fight with Clev three times now. I would not blame Clev for that.

Regarding Nathan as a man, I always thought he came across as a pleasant well-spoken gentleman. The only thing that ever irked me about him was when he tried to build up this rivallry with Carl froch, he stoked the fire trying to get that fight.

Whereas Froch never once expressed any desire in moving up in thr weight divisions, ever since beating Bute, the only fights that he said he was interested in was the Bute rematch, the second Kessler fight (now apparently he wants a third) and another fight against Andre Ward.

Getting back on track for a moment, Clev career aint over. I believe that he could still go on and win another world title. Maybe he should be looking at a rematch against Bellew or a European title fight against Braehmer.