BoxRec

12x3 lightweight
Ricky Burns 36(11)-3-1
vs
Dejan Zlaticanin 18(13)-0-0
vacant WBC International lightweight title



Burns down 20 seconds in the fight, Hls here:
http://www.the13thround.com/phpBB2/view ... 7#p1480637

Dejan wins SD. Sky cut out for several rounds, but DZ was landing better shots in every round that I saw.

DZ showed Burns up with wild left hooks, very predictable but surprisingly effective.

And to those that say the UK (and Glasgow) is corrupt, apologise right now!

diddy wrote:Lol at anyone who thinks this traveler is going there and getting a decision. He's not gonna win 11 rounds like Crawford.

So now are you taking that back?

Tarkus wrote:

diddy wrote:Lol at anyone who thinks this traveler is going there and getting a decision. He's not gonna win 11 rounds like Crawford.

So now are you taking that back?

Burns is even worse than I originally expected. Needs to retire.

Ha I called it.

Diddy learn not to be a jack ass

why does every fighter lose should retire

Crease wrote:

polecateddy wrote:Burns has actually won hardly any rounds in his last 3 fights. He could well be shot. Still this guy is totally unknown. Definite upset potential.

Well that's just not true.

Ended then! Lol

im telling you all the time hahah :)

Barry Washington wrote:Ha I called it.

Diddy learn not to be a jack ass

But did you bet it? Because you could've gotten 6-1 odds.

ThereByTheGrace wrote:DZ showed Burns up with wild left hooks, very predictable but surprisingly effective.

And to those that say the UK (and Glasgow) is corrupt, apologise right now!

...erm...you realise the British judge was the only reason it was a split decision, right?

diddy wrote:

Barry Washington wrote:Ha I called it.

Diddy learn not to be a jack ass

But did you bet it? Because you could've gotten 6-1 odds.

That's nice

Boxing Prospect wrote:

ThereByTheGrace wrote:DZ showed Burns up with wild left hooks, very predictable but surprisingly effective.

And to those that say the UK (and Glasgow) is corrupt, apologise right now!

...erm...you realise the British judge was the only reason it was a split decision, right?

corect!

polecateddy wrote:

Crease wrote:

polecateddy wrote:Burns has actually won hardly any rounds in his last 3 fights. He could well be shot. Still this guy is totally unknown. Definite upset potential.

Well that's just not true.

Ended then! Lol

I have not watched the fight yet, so I'll reserve judgement regarding Burns being shot or not until I see if for myself, but certainly this does not look good.

Regarding Zlaticanin's record, it wasn't unreasonable to predict a Burns victory, up until last night the Montenegrin hadn't defeated anyone of Ricky's calibre.

Dejan had a win over Petr Petrov, his record wasnt completely obscure

stevekrazy wrote:Dejan had a win over Petr Petrov, his record wasnt completely obscure

How many World titles has Petrov won? None. Exactly.

Crease wrote:

stevekrazy wrote:Dejan had a win over Petr Petrov, his record wasnt completely obscure

How many World titles has Petrov won? None. Exactly.

Why does it matter that Petrov hasn't won world titles? He's still a good fighter who is reasonably well known among hardcore boxing fans, so it's not like DZ only beat obscure opponents.

We continue to discredit fighters because we don't know them.

crusader wrote:Why does it matter that Petrov hasn't won world titles? He's still a good fighter who is reasonably well known among hardcore boxing fans, so it's not like DZ only beat obscure opponents.

World Titles emphasize that a fighter is up to a certain standard and they add credibility to a boxer's professional record. I though that much was obvious.

Ok............but why must a fighter have won a world title in order not to be considered obscure? If you're implying that Petrov is obscure because he hasn't won a world title, I think that's laughable; is Anthony Joshua obscure because he hasn't won a major belt? Is Wilder obscure? Was Herol Graham obscure? There are many ways to be a respected and known fighter without winning a world title, whether through marketing or impressive performances in which the fighter doesn't capture a major title.

Dejan's record largely comprised fighters most knew nothing about, true, but Petrov added a bit of quality and a name that many hardcore fans recognize, due to his fight with Maidana and winning the ESPN tournament, irrespective of him not holding some ABC belt. While I favored Burns by a significant margin, that win alone suggested to me that DZ was capable of giving him problems.

Oh, and

I'm kicking myself I didn't bet in the fight. How many faded former champs lose there first proper fight of a comeback. Quite a few!

diddy wrote:

davor1 wrote:

diddy wrote:Lol at anyone who thinks this traveler is going there and getting a decision. He's not gonna win 11 rounds like Crawford.

No he will not got a decision but he will KO Burns

THIS is going to be the guy that stops Burns?

Really?

yes :)

crusader wrote:

Crease wrote:

stevekrazy wrote:Dejan had a win over Petr Petrov, his record wasnt completely obscure

How many World titles has Petrov won? None. Exactly.

Why does it matter that Petrov hasn't won world titles? He's still a good fighter who is reasonably well known among hardcore boxing fans, so it's not like DZ only beat obscure opponents.

so who is better now DZ or Petrov?