BoxRec

Ricky is a nice guy and if he can't compete on a fair level playing field with other boxers then he should ply his trade as a nice man on the talk shows etc. I reckon Beltran would be a nice fella as well if his family lived in a decent house and things were more secure and he knew his kids would be ok. There are thousands of lovely people but not many top boxers, when we pay to watch boxing we want to watch boxing - not a nice fella having another off night and a gift off the judges.

palooka wrote:I reckon Beltran would be a nice fella as well if his family lived in a decent house and things were more secure and he knew his kids would be ok.

Beltran seemed like a nice enough fella anyway.

iamasadlittleboy wrote:Keep hearing this "Burns is better" line, when's he going to show it? Beating a shadow of Michael Katsidis, an over-hyped Mitchell, a faded Moses, taking a victory over Gonzalez and now a flat out gift with Beltran. Can we stop the whole "Burns is better" and ask, is he?

Lets not drag all burns' opponents through the mud, katsidis, martinez and moses were impressive victories, gonzalez was 22 and 0, burns may not be the greatest champion the world has ever produced but he has been a deserved one.

Is burns better than this fight? Yes. He was careless in this fight and he paid for it. WSas he better than the gonzalez fight? Skill wise probably not, but he won none the less.

palooka wrote:Ricky is a nice guy and if he can't compete on a fair level playing field with other boxers then he should ply his trade as a nice man on the talk shows etc. I reckon Beltran would be a nice fella as well if his family lived in a decent house and things were more secure and he knew his kids would be ok. There are thousands of lovely people but not many top boxers, when we pay to watch boxing we want to watch boxing - not a nice fella having another off night and a gift off the judges.

Beltran does seem like a nice guy to me.

Finn wrote:

iamasadlittleboy wrote:Keep hearing this "Burns is better" line, when's he going to show it? Beating a shadow of Michael Katsidis, an over-hyped Mitchell, a faded Moses, taking a victory over Gonzalez and now a flat out gift with Beltran. Can we stop the whole "Burns is better" and ask, is he?

Lets not drag all burns' opponents through the mud, katsidis, martinez and moses were impressive victories, gonzalez was 22 and 0, burns may not be the greatest champion the world has ever produced but he has been a deserved one.

Is burns better than this fight? Yes. He was careless in this fight and he paid for it. WSas he better than the gonzalez fight? Skill wise probably not, but he won none the less.

Yeah but that's like the expression if my auntie had a pair of bollocks she'd be my uncle. How many fighters could say well im better than that but i just had an off night? Tons but that's boxing. You're making excuses for him mate.

Horse wrote:

palooka wrote:I reckon Beltran would be a nice fella as well if his family lived in a decent house and things were more secure and he knew his kids would be ok.

Beltran seemed like a nice enough fella anyway.

yes you're right, he did seem nice though he'd been robbed; he'd have seemed very personable indeed if he knew his efforts had been rewarded fairly and his family were now secure.

columbo wrote:

Finn wrote:

iamasadlittleboy wrote:Keep hearing this "Burns is better" line, when's he going to show it? Beating a shadow of Michael Katsidis, an over-hyped Mitchell, a faded Moses, taking a victory over Gonzalez and now a flat out gift with Beltran. Can we stop the whole "Burns is better" and ask, is he?

Lets not drag all burns' opponents through the mud, katsidis, martinez and moses were impressive victories, gonzalez was 22 and 0, burns may not be the greatest champion the world has ever produced but he has been a deserved one.

Is burns better than this fight? Yes. He was careless in this fight and he paid for it. WSas he better than the gonzalez fight? Skill wise probably not, but he won none the less.

Yeah but that's like the expression if my auntie had a pair of bollocks she'd be my uncle. How many fighters could say well im better than that but i just had an off night? Tons but that's boxing. You're making excuses for him mate.

You've been waiting for a chance to use that one

columbo wrote: Beltran was also knocked out in 4 rounds by Ameth Diaz though who Vasquez beat pretty easily.

Funilly enough it lookes like theres a rematch for that fight at the end of the month. I get what you are saying but i didnt say Burns could beat vasquez i said i think he is good enough to beat beltran cleanly.

columbo wrote:

Finn wrote:

iamasadlittleboy wrote:Keep hearing this "Burns is better" line, when's he going to show it? Beating a shadow of Michael Katsidis, an over-hyped Mitchell, a faded Moses, taking a victory over Gonzalez and now a flat out gift with Beltran. Can we stop the whole "Burns is better" and ask, is he?

Lets not drag all burns' opponents through the mud, katsidis, martinez and moses were impressive victories, gonzalez was 22 and 0, burns may not be the greatest champion the world has ever produced but he has been a deserved one.

Is burns better than this fight? Yes. He was careless in this fight and he paid for it. WSas he better than the gonzalez fight? Skill wise probably not, but he won none the less.

Yeah but that's like the expression if my auntie had a pair of bollocks she'd be my uncle. How many fighters could say well im better than that but i just had an off night? Tons but that's boxing. You're making excuses for him mate.

you've used that out of context i have to say IF in there for you to use that one.

Finn wrote:

columbo wrote: Beltran was also knocked out in 4 rounds by Ameth Diaz though who Vasquez beat pretty easily.

Funilly enough it lookes like theres a rematch for that fight at the end of the month. I get what you are saying but i didnt say Burns could beat vasquez i said i think he is good enough to beat beltran cleanly.

He had the chance tonight and got beat hands down the eyes of millions watching who now have the impression that British boxing is more corrupt than many other countries.

The Martinez win was good and Martinez regaining a title proves his worth, Katsidis though was on the downward, and it's foolish to suggest otherwise.

How many "bad performances" do we give him before we do say "maybe he is only this good?"

Beating the likes of Nicky Cook and Kevin Mitchell doesn't make him world class, draw with Beltran doesn't make him world class either. To be world class you must beat world class fighters, been a while since Ricky did that on merit.

palooka wrote:

Finn wrote:

columbo wrote: Beltran was also knocked out in 4 rounds by Ameth Diaz though who Vasquez beat pretty easily.

Funilly enough it lookes like theres a rematch for that fight at the end of the month. I get what you are saying but i didnt say Burns could beat vasquez i said i think he is good enough to beat beltran cleanly.

He had the chance tonight and got beat hands down the eyes of millions watching who now have the impression that British boxing is more corrupt than many other countries.

Yes but he has got the decision so he has the chance to put it right with a rematch. If every fight had the same outcome we wouldnt have rematches.

Broner, although overrated, would've destroyed Burns and stopped this whole hypetrain

"]Michael Katsidis, an over-hyped Mitchell, a faded Moses, taking a victory over Gonzalez and now a flat out gift with Beltran. Can we stop the whole "Burns is better" and ask, is he?[/quote]

Lets not drag all burns' opponents through the mud, katsidis, martinez and moses were impressive victories, gonzalez was 22 and 0, burns may not be the greatest champion the world has ever produced but he has been a deserved one.

Is burns better than this fight? Yes. He was careless in this fight and he paid for it. WSas he better than the gonzalez fight? Skill wise probably not, but he won none the less.[/quote]
Yeah but that's like the expression if my auntie had a pair of bollocks she'd be my uncle. How many fighters could say well im better than that but i just had an off night? Tons but that's boxing. You're making excuses for him mate.[/quote]

you've used that out of context i have to say IF in there for you to use that one. [/quote]


Ok, maybe i exploited the situation

iamasadlittleboy wrote:The Martinez win was good and Martinez regaining a title proves his worth, Katsidis though was on the downward, and it's foolish to suggest otherwise.

How many "bad performances" do we give him before we do say "maybe he is only this good?"

Beating the likes of Nicky Cook and Kevin Mitchell doesn't make him world class, draw with Beltran doesn't make him world class either. To be world class you must beat world class fighters, been a while since Ricky did that on merit.

Yeah you have to look at who Beltran had beaten and who he has lost to. He beat Hank lundy who himself lost to John Molina who himself was knocked out in a round by Demarco. I think Beltran is a good fighter but I dont see him beating a lot of the other guys out there.

iamasadlittleboy wrote:The Martinez win was good and Martinez regaining a title proves his worth, Katsidis though was on the downward, and it's foolish to suggest otherwise.

How many "bad performances" do we give him before we do say "maybe he is only this good?"

Beating the likes of Nicky Cook and Kevin Mitchell doesn't make him world class, draw with Beltran doesn't make him world class either. To be world class you must beat world class fighters, been a while since Ricky did that on merit.

Yeah you have to look at who Beltran had beaten and who he has lost to. He beat Hank lundy who himself lost to John Molina who himself was knocked out in a round by Demarco. I think Beltran is a good fighter but I dont see him beating a lot of the other guys out there.

If we are being completely honest, and was from the start. Beltran is 26-6 and although that's may not reflect entirely the boxer he is, it's not great at world level, especially considering the boxers he's lost to and his last 3 fights were 10 rounders. A lot of boxers are 26-0 before they get a shot, and that's after 12 rounders at British/euro level and others in between. Imagine what someone like broner or rios could've done to 'world champion' burns tonight

columbo wrote:He beat Hank lundy who himself lost to John Molina who himself was knocked out in a round by Demarco. I think Beltran is a good fighter but I dont see him beating a lot of the other guys out there.

Lundy beat Abril, so he's not too bad.

iamasadlittleboy wrote:The Martinez win was good and Martinez regaining a title proves his worth, Katsidis though was on the downward, and it's foolish to suggest otherwise.

How many "bad performances" do we give him before we do say "maybe he is only this good?"

Beating the likes of Nicky Cook and Kevin Mitchell doesn't make him world class, draw with Beltran doesn't make him world class either. To be world class you must beat world class fighters, been a while since Ricky did that on merit.

I didnt suggest he wasnt on the slide im saying writing off a man who had fought JMM and Guerrero within the year previous to fighting burns as an unimpressive victory is nonsense. How shot do you have to be to go the distance with guerrero (6 months before)?

Horse wrote:

columbo wrote:He beat Hank lundy who himself lost to John Molina who himself was knocked out in a round by Demarco. I think Beltran is a good fighter but I dont see him beating a lot of the other guys out there.

Lundy beat Abril, so he's not too bad.

A split decision victory in a fight Lundy was down in. Abril has been on the end of some unfair decisions in his career.

Finn wrote:

iamasadlittleboy wrote:The Martinez win was good and Martinez regaining a title proves his worth, Katsidis though was on the downward, and it's foolish to suggest otherwise.

How many "bad performances" do we give him before we do say "maybe he is only this good?"

Beating the likes of Nicky Cook and Kevin Mitchell doesn't make him world class, draw with Beltran doesn't make him world class either. To be world class you must beat world class fighters, been a while since Ricky did that on merit.

I didnt suggest he wasnt on the slide im saying writing off a man who had fought JMM and Guerrero within the year previous to fighting burns as an unimpressive victory is nonsense. How shot do you have to be to go the distance with guerrero (6 months before)?

He got beaten up in both of those fights though. He dropped Marquez with a good shot but then got a beating after that and Guerrero pretty much dominated him. Also, those are two very tough fights that probably took a lot out of him! Well nearly every fight with him probably did as he was a face first fight! Ha.

danconnollyeire wrote:If we are being completely honest, and was from the start. Beltran is 26-6 and although that's may not reflect entirely the boxer he is, it's not great at world level, especially considering the boxers he's lost to and his last 3 fights were 10 rounders. A lot of boxers are 26-0 before they get a shot, and that's after 12 rounders at British/euro level and others in between. Imagine what someone like broner or rios could've done to 'world champion' burns tonight

They would have took the absolute piss and destroyed Ricky in front of his home fans.

columbo wrote:A split decision victory in a fight Lundy was down in. Abril has been on the end of some unfair decisions in his career.

So what? Lundy is a good fighter and so is Beltran.

Horse wrote:

columbo wrote:A split decision victory in a fight Lundy was down in. Abril has been on the end of some unfair decisions in his career.

So what? Lundy is a good fighter and so is Beltran.

I never said he wasnt a good fighter. However I think he's a little short at the top level of the division.

palooka wrote:They would have took the absolute piss and destroyed Ricky in front of his home fans.

Burns would have probably beaten Broner.