BoxRec

Dan's right about Dominic - he's the last person to hype anyone up so if he is, there's probably something about the kid.

He looked poor on Saturday night, for sure. The Latvian couldn't miss him. But everyone's due an off night and with his pedigree no doubt he'll do a lot better.

Isn't he 18? Is that the age we start slagging boxers off these days?

Steve is a special talent. I have known him since he was 7.He's always been very good -very focused and single minded too.I'm not too worried by saturday's performance (i did'nt see it actually) at all as he has got years ahead of him to iron it all out.He is several years off his prime. Its like manny Pacquaio, Marco Antonio Bareera and Eric Morales all starting their careers early and getting better as they went along.I can remember years ago, Eric Morales boxing on the de la hoya-chavez I undercard and Barry mcGuigan saying that " he's not got superstar written over him'. Steve Barnes has incredible talent and with the exception of Naz, Mike Tyson and Wilfred Benitez, you just can't expect stella performances consistently from an 18 year old kid with no senior amatuer experience.I am very confident for him.His father is a top guy as well.

big lennox wrote:I can remember years ago, Eric Morales boxing on the de la hoya-chavez I undercard and Barry mcGuigan saying that " he's not got superstar written over him'.

McGuigan was probably still saying this after the Barrera trilogy.

What was the thought process behind going pro and not getting a senior ABA title guys?

I stand by what I said earlier in the thread.
OK it may not even be a reasonable comparison, but take Hatton's early career.
He had awaful problems in 2 fights against Mark Ramsey, and there's a substantial arguement in one of those fights that he should have been stopped - the cut was horrendous, and was caused by a genuine blow.
I assume we could have all posted then and said Hatton is going nowhere.
I do not for one minute believe Barnes is a "gym boxer".
I repeat, the pressure placed upon him by everything other than the fight on Saturday, was the cause of the poor performance.
Yes it was poor, but the time to judge is a few more fights on.
Get him out of the spotlight, starring on the undercards, and slowly making his way through is the right approach for me.
As a Sheffield lad, maybe I'm taking a little too much to heart, but I do think the local lads get an unfair share of slagging on occasions.
Brendan is Brendan - never changed, never will, and rightly so.
However Dominic is also his own man.
Dominic will have taken everything on board from Saturday, from the weigh in to the conclusion of the fight, and he will know exactly what is needed.
I am not a betting man, but if I were, I would punt a few quid Steve has a healthy and prosperous career.

if its the Latvian who boxed to a draw with Bradley Evans, that kid is a bit of a nightmare stylistically, tough and strong and fit with it, and comes to fight.

cracking 'opponent'

I watched his pro debut on an Irish card on YouTube, and I have to say I was impressed. He looked to have power and speed and good footwork.

There were mistakes there, and his punchpicking didn't seem too hot, but that's something that he can learn as an 18 year old.

I have to say that as a 17 year old, which he was when I watched him, he looked the real deal.

That said, some guys just don't get better. They look awesome at 17 or 18 and we think that if they follow the progression curve of a normal athlete, they'll get better and better like a normal athlete would, but from a higher starting point.

Doesn't work like that, I'm afraid. For every Wayne Rooney, there's a Danny Cadamarteri.

Which is a long way of saying "we'll see".

But the kid certainly has potential.

to be a 'naz clone' its got to be in your genes. its not in barnes'

Ok, so going on past history of Ingle boxers, can white guys box that way?

I dont think Thaxton and Rhodes did bad on it, Ian.

rhino222 wrote:to be a 'naz clone' its got to be in your genes. its not in barnes'

stupid comment rhino did he come out dancing did he laugh and mok his opponent no well if he were tryin to be like naz he wud av done that for sure.take your blinkers off

I think we will know a lot more after 5-10 more fights. If he's being given testing opponents, then we can start talking about him as the next big thing.

After the hype Barnes was given it's only natural to expect something decent, and decent we did not get. He pranced around the ring and just heaved the right over with varying degrees of sucess. Without the knockdown (which wasn't a knockdown) a draw would have been fair. I thought Bradley Evans, in comparison, looked better but that's probably a style preference.

Still, he's only 18 and anything can happen in the meantime, but it wasn't enjoyable and it wasn't impressive.

roman09 wrote:For you to say - quote "he rarely switches from head to body, he looks off balance a lot of the time, he does'nt seem to create good angles, doesn't plant his feet and does'nt have real knock-out power or real athleticism", proves to me your too eager to criticise and you don't know, and haven't seen enough of Barnes to have that opinion!

Steve has the technique to go all the way, he was revved up Saturday and did get a little sloppy but that also had a lot to do with the latvian being an ever messier fighter. As i have said previously, this has happened and will continue to happen to the best because the best are the ones who have it all to lose.

When a boxer has got potential, the reason they get so much negativity is because people are envious of success, whether your an armchair boxing fan or ex seasoned pro, if someone is hyped up and they under perform, everyone jumps on the bang wagon to put them down which for me is dissapointing, again to state the fact Steve is only 18 years old, he doesn't deserve the criticism he's received in this thread.

I'm not going to continue to bang about how good Barnes is, i'll let him do all my talking in his next 3 bouts.

I enjoyed this guys, i'll be back again soon to chat some more.

I'm not eager to criticise at all. I say what i see and i have seen two out of the three fights that Barnes has had. You say i'm eager to criticise and i say that your too eager to make this kid out as the next big thing from the Wincobank stables, that can go all the way. I would say that, from what i have seen, that my comments hold water and are'nt wide of the mark. He may not portray these weaknesses in the gym, but as with other fledgling boxers, we the public don't get the opportunity to see fighters sparring against quality opposition, we only get to see what really matters, which is in the ring at a fight event. That's how most people will judge a fighter and on the showings so far, i would say that my comments are fair and reasonable one's to make. If you knew a little more about me as a poster, you will find that i'm quite objective when it comes to appraising fighters and of course, like anyone else, i can get it wrong. Steve is from Sheffield and i would love him to do well and will support the kid and want him to win every bout he takes part in, but that should'nt make him immune from recieving constructive criticism.

No. I thought he was poor.

My work here is done, you've all seen the light ( well most of you )!

work in progress...maybe needs to rebuild ,start with the basics...where was his jab.
who trains him...Dominic or Brendan?

Steve is trained by his dad and Dom

The-Undisputed wrote:I was looking forward to seeing this kid after reading and hearing good reports about him.

After seeing him saturday night he looked absolutely horrendous! Rushing in, no jab, swinging for the fences with every shot, no set up work, footwork looked crude, no defence what so ever!

Time will tell and i will give him the benefit of the doubt but he looked like a wild Lee Haskins and that is British level at best!

Absolutely, you have hit the nail right on the head. His style is definately the same as Lee Haskins and I too think he is British level at best but only if he can be more accurate. Love him or hate him only Naz could get away with that arms down style because he was special and had cat like reflexes. No other boxer could use that style and be as successful. Carl Froch another who trys to copy his heroe Naz, worries me because he is taking too many heavy shots. OK he does have a good chin but the damage is being done every time he fights. The first rule of boxing is defend yourself at all times and by employing this style you are not doing that. It wont happen but if a ref was to disqualify a fighter who fought with his arms down fighters who did it would have to think again. After all a major part of refs job is to see fighters dont get seriously injured and many of them do say before the fight "defend yourself at all times"

steelcity 65 wrote:

rhino222 wrote:to be a 'naz clone' its got to be in your genes. its not in barnes'

stupid comment rhino did he come out dancing did he laugh and mok his opponent no well if he were tryin to be like naz he wud av done that for sure.take your blinkers off

sorry dad !! im interested in what he does inside the ring not on his way to it !!

what i saw was a naz wannabe with poor timing, poor reflexes, no or little defence and poor balance, ok, a bad day at the office maybe, but his dismal tv showing will make it even harder to 'learn his trade' as people will be looking for the faults to be ironed out next time.

i wish the fella well, i had heard of him before and potentially he is a decent ticket seller, but he fell victim of his own hype. he needs to knuckle down, and, if you want to box in that style, all based on footwork and reflexes, throwing punches from unusual angles etc......then you need to be bloody good at it, otherwise you look ugly and silly.

i only give him 3/10 for the other nights showing, i am looking for improvement. hardly the opinion of a man with blinkers on, i know what i saw....and i was not impressed, in the future i maybe, but not at moment, but i do appreciate it was only after one outing.

twenty six wrote:I dont think Thaxton and Rhodes did bad on it, Ian.

Jon Thaxton has proven he is a very good boxer but when he gets desperate and frustrated he goes for the big one and things seem to go very wrong for him when he does. Rhodes does drop his hands a bit but nevertheless still has good defense when it counts. He is also better composed and sticks to his gameplan better than Thaxton. I agree we have to wait a while before judging Barnes and maybe Saturdays fight was poor due to, pressure, inexperiance, and an opponent who is awkward and difficult to look good against. Maybe he is far better than many give him credit for but I think its far too early for anyone to say he is going all the way. OK Dominic Ingle has vast knowledge of boxing and therefore he has to be listened to so lets wait and see if his faith in the lad is justified. If we do have someone who can rise up through the levels to the top that will be fantastic and we should all get behind him. You mention Ryan Rhodes and I think you are a friend of his. I believe Ryan turned pro quite early and IMO you could tell he had a lot of talent very early on. Didnt they call him the Spice Boy because he was a young star. Sorry mate but I didnt see even a tiny bit of star quality in Barnes. What I saw was a bit of Thaxton having a bad night mixed with a lot of Lee Haskins punching air. That said he is only 18 and we shall have to watch his progress without being too critical.

Give the Kid a break, having said that 10 years in the gym his motorisation wont be changing to much.

terrible balances ,the lad was on the floor about 6 times....its a well known fact that the ingles only body spar ...why dont there fighters throw body shots in a fight?

madmick wrote:...its a well known fact that the ingles only body spar ...

Well known, but not true.