BoxRec

Listen world title fights are not about how well we know a fighter or how many tickets he sells, it's supposed to be the best fighting the best. What's the point of defending your world title against someone who would not even beat your sparring partners. Someone mentioned it previously, this is exactly why a new boxing TV channel was created. They will accept ANY challenger ,because there's nobody to argue against .
I'll say it again, this is allowed to happen because people are making off the fans. As long as we pay the money they'll continue with disgraces like this.

dalcumly wrote:Listen world title fights are not about how well we know a fighter or how many tickets he sells, it's supposed to be the best fighting the best. What's the point of defending your world title against someone who would not even beat your sparring partners. Someone mentioned it previously, this is exactly why a new boxing TV channel was created. They will accept ANY challenger ,because there's nobody to argue against .
I'll say it again, this is allowed to happen because people are making off the fans. As long as we pay the money they'll continue with disgraces like this.

Boxing is a commercial business as well. Of the others available who have not got fights on WBO rankings Walsh is the best option.
Who would you rather Ricky face on that list?

leforge wrote:

dalcumly wrote:Listen world title fights are not about how well we know a fighter or how many tickets he sells, it's supposed to be the best fighting the best. What's the point of defending your world title against someone who would not even beat your sparring partners. Someone mentioned it previously, this is exactly why a new boxing TV channel was created. They will accept ANY challenger ,because there's nobody to argue against .
I'll say it again, this is allowed to happen because people are making off the fans. As long as we pay the money they'll continue with disgraces like this.

Boxing is a commercial business as well. Of the others available who have not got fights on WBO rankings Walsh is the best option.
Who would you rather Ricky face on that list?

Someone who deserves a shot, even from another list, as the WBO would add it to theirs anyway.

Funnily enough, Walsh can fight. But now we've got to the stage where the SIXTH best lightweight in Britain is getting a 'world' title shot? Mind you, I think Matthew Hatton getting a shot at Alvarez was almost as bad.

Someone who deserves a shot, even from another list, as the WBO would add it to theirs anyway.

Funnily enough, Walsh can fight. But now we've got to the stage where the SIXTH best lightweight in Britain is getting a 'world' title shot? Mind you, I think Matthew Hatton getting a shot at Alvarez was almost as bad.[/quote]

I wish their was just one world governing body. How many of our current fighters would have been world champs if only one per division?

dondada wrote:

leforge wrote:

dalcumly wrote:Listen world title fights are not about how well we know a fighter or how many tickets he sells, it's supposed to be the best fighting the best. What's the point of defending your world title against someone who would not even beat your sparring partners. Someone mentioned it previously, this is exactly why a new boxing TV channel was created. They will accept ANY challenger ,because there's nobody to argue against .
I'll say it again, this is allowed to happen because people are making off the fans. As long as we pay the money they'll continue with disgraces like this.

Boxing is a commercial business as well. Of the others available who have not got fights on WBO rankings Walsh is the best option.
Who would you rather Ricky face on that list?

Someone who deserves a shot, even from another list, as the WBO would add it to theirs anyway.

Funnily enough, Walsh can fight. But now we've got to the stage where the SIXTH best lightweight in Britain is getting a 'world' title shot? Mind you, I think Matthew Hatton getting a shot at Alvarez was almost as bad.

Hatton was an undefeated European champion though. Certainly alot more deserving than the WBO Euro champion or whatever they call it.

ShadrachSimmo wrote:
Hatton was an undefeated European champion though. Certainly alot more deserving than the WBO Euro champion or whatever they call it.

Hatton was certainly not undefeated, he got totally schooled by Craig Watson. and has, i think, 3 more defeats on his ledger.

Counter-puncher wrote:

ShadrachSimmo wrote:
Hatton was an undefeated European champion though. Certainly alot more deserving than the WBO Euro champion or whatever they call it.

Hatton was certainly not undefeated, he got totally schooled by Craig Watson. and has, i think, 3 more defeats on his ledger.

Undefeated as European champion I was implying.

fair enough. he was undefeated over a whole 2 fight reign, yes.

i'd rather see ricky take on LOUIS WALSH.

Liam Walsh barely scraps the UK top 5

ShadrachSimmo wrote:

Counter-puncher wrote:

ShadrachSimmo wrote:
Hatton was an undefeated European champion though. Certainly alot more deserving than the WBO Euro champion or whatever they call it.

Hatton was certainly not undefeated, he got totally schooled by Craig Watson. and has, i think, 3 more defeats on his ledger.

Undefeated as European champion I was implying.

I don't think he'd ever fought in the weight class though, had he?

just waiting for hagler 2002 to pop up with another free money thread. without actually being a fix , its the closest thing to a boxing certainty that exists....warren owns two fighters, needs one to mark time , yet not threaten the big money opportunity....et etc.
whatever the price is , its worth taking if you are a gambling fool.

]
I don't think he'd ever fought in the weight class though, had he?[/quote]

That's true he did step up a division.

Mr W arren strikes again like them both but are in different leagues at the min surly burns should be thinking of big names no disrespect to Liam but he's not world class at the min he should keep learning his trade knocking up wins then give it a go. A big Ko loss could spell the end of a great talent IMO

Liam Walsh is not a good enough opponent for Burns, there should not even be a discussion on it, not enough experience yet and Burns is on fire, surely Burns should be looking for the big money unification bouts now.

G0mez wrote:
It's like Froch fighting Rocky Fielding next.

Bang on

it is a bit too convenient. maybe however burns will fight down to the level of the opponent (talented super feather/lightweight with few fights to his name). walsh isn't exactly in boring fights. hopefully he can show a few things and remind us what a great division (135) we have here in the UK. i don't see how this keeps burns razor sharp for the bigger tests - but he has been fighting top 10 guys in his last 3 fights. it is unusual though, as the last fight was the battle of britain, proved to be a mismatch & then they bring in someone below mitchell...

danconnollyeire wrote:

G0mez wrote:
It's like Froch fighting Rocky Fielding next.

Bang on

Or Yusuf Mack.....

I'm a bit lost here as to what people want. Ricky Burns is fighting a fellow up and coming brit in a world title fight prior to taking on what is argubaly going to be a massive fight against Broner. He could quite easily hand pick a poor Eastern European or may be some would like to see him in a 6 rounder with Sid Razak?

Surely you can see why this fight makes sense, or am i missing some thing obvious like a 13th ranked Russian that we'll all rush to purchase our tickets for?

Jeff Thomas wrote:I like Ricky and billy ... I don't blame them at all but this is a terrible fight for burns. Not to mention potentially dangerous.

yes marking time fight and we have seen over the years hwo they can go if the favoured champ isnt up for it.

wadey wrote:I'm a bit lost here as to what people want. Ricky Burns is fighting a fellow up and coming brit in a world title fight prior to taking on what is argubaly going to be a massive fight against Broner. He could quite easily hand pick a poor Eastern European or may be some would like to see him in a 6 rounder with Sid Razak?

Surely you can see why this fight makes sense, or am i missing some thing obvious like a 13th ranked Russian that we'll all rush to purchase our tickets for?

Maybe people are a bit skeptical about Frank using a top fighters name to excuse the current opponent.
Although I'm sure Cleverly will definitely be fighting Hopkins next...

i've said for a while, as long as ricky takes some hard fights he can be forgiven the easy defences

roman martinez was a huge fight against the best at the time, in the division, i said afterwards he could get away with one or two easy defences
he then went on to have 3 very easy defences against evensen, laryea and cook, possibly a stretch in his credibility there
then he stepped up and fought a tough and reputable katsidis
the paulus moses fight perhaps wasn't a top named opponent, but it was a good match up, then no one complained at mitchell, despite it turning out to be easier than everyone (except billy nelson) predicted

so even though this is a sham, mismatched, joke of a fight, against a guy who has absolutely zero right to be in a world title match in his 14th professional contest. i'm going to give ricky some slack again, provided his next contest is broner or a unification earlyish next year.
although this will be sold as a battle of britain, i know as well as many on here that it is little more than a money spinning warm up fight for ricky

but as long as he keeps on delivering fights like martinez, katsidis, mitchell in among the easy ones then he gets more credit than the likes of cleverly who has done nothing, fought no one and didn't even win the strap he's clinging on to

davie wrote:i've said for a while, as long as ricky takes some hard fights he can be forgiven the easy defences

roman martinez was a huge fight against the best at the time, in the division, i said afterwards he could get away with one or two easy defences
he then went on to have 3 very easy defences against evensen, laryea and cook, possibly a stretch in his credibility there
then he stepped up and fought a tough and reputable katsidis
the paulus moses fight perhaps wasn't a top named opponent, but it was a good match up, then no one complained at mitchell, despite it turning out to be easier than everyone (except billy nelson) predicted

so even though this is a sham, mismatched, joke of a fight, against a guy who has absolutely zero right to be in a world title match in his 14th professional contest. i'm going to give ricky some slack again, provided his next contest is broner or a unification earlyish next year.
although this will be sold as a battle of britain, i know as well as many on here that it is little more than a money spinning warm up fight for ricky

but as long as he keeps on delivering fights like martinez, katsidis, mitchell in among the easy ones then he gets more credit than the likes of cleverly who has done nothing, fought no one and didn't even win the strap he's clinging on to

Good post and to add many people, particularly those not fully aware of the extend of his problems, considered Cook to be a credible opponent for Burns.

I actually think it is short sighted of FW to place Walsh in with Burns at this stage. Unless of course Warren feels that Walsh will not be longer on his books (which maybe the case as his brothers have jumped shipped). What I don't like about this fight is that Walsh is a good prospect, with some potential. He might even be a legitmate threat to someone like Burns when his time is right - I would hate for him to take this fight so soon and eff him up for the rest of his career. Its quite ironic given their battle, but when I heard this match was being made I immediately thought of how the bad match making seems to have damaged Paul Appleby somewhat.

Does this choice of opponent for Burns not come down to money too? I'm assuming the biggest earners on the bill will be Burns, George Groves and Glen Johnson.....and that probably doesn't leave £10,000's spilling over to pay a top ranked opponent for Ricky.
There are several British lightweights I'd prefer to see Burns in with but Walsh probably isn't any worse a level of opponent than Burns' super feather defences vs Espensen and Laryea.