BoxRec

some good discussion here. interested to see Arnie who lets face it should know a thing or two about the lightmiddleweight mix, say Williams was the best. cheers for that mate 8)

btw i think the hatton/ williams comparison is like i think grey fox said, a smokescreen and slightly irrelevant. no offence like, DG ;;-)

my point to add to the mix about Williams and whether he got shots or not.

yes he got martinez twice but as KG says i think rightly, he didn't get that chance at a simon or Tsarenko for a top 4 belt.

and i think there's another point to be made: oliver fennell i agree with you the idea he was an unfortunate world beater in waiting is a bit far fetched, but:

look at the domestic fights wiliams could have ( but didn't) get. No Takaloo (who he'd have schooled IMO) or Alexander (ditto IMO). Had williams had better promotion/ 10,000 fans to add to the mix like Hatton, I am sure he would have got more chances for big domestic fights- which we all know were ripe to be made at 154 and for various reasons almost noe of them did get made. so to me the fact that he didn't at least face an alexander/etc is a sign he 'didn't get the chances' even at british level. if that makes sense.

one point where the hatton comparison may be relevant- and it does take it back to the witter argument, sorry.

if the boot was on the other foot- if Witter had established himself as the Man to beat, and hatton was the up and coming fighter demanding the fight. i don't think there is any way that fight would NOT have been made. the fact that hatton had FW totally with him, and 10,0000 loyal fans, would have made it inconceivable (IMO) that Witter could have 'ducked' him. the preesure and potential finances of the fight would have made it a no-brainer, it's just that with the boot on the other foot Witter didn't/couldn't bring anything like that kind of pressure to bear

Williams, without that kind of support and impetus, didn't get the chance.

maybe KG would agree with me then when I say the fact he didn't get the chance was just part of the business, pure economics and so on.

to me though that doesn't mean no politics were involved as KG suggested though, quite the opposite. had Williams been an SN staple fighter or a hatton-type i am sure he would have got more chances, and to me the lack of economic imperative to force the fight is part of the 'politics' of boxing.

oliverfennell wrote:I know Khaosai Galaxy can be deliberately "anti-establishment", but he often makes a good point, although rubs people up the wrong way in doing so.

He was perfectly correct to counter the argument of "Williams never got the chances he deserved" by pointing out that he lost to Martinez twice. Yes, Martinez is a highly-rated class act, which therefore proves he DID get his shot at the top. What's your beef with that??

You are a prince amongst posters Oliver



There is a tendency to immediately blame "boxing politics" if talented British fighter x doesn't become a world champion. People don't think, they just immediately spout bile about what a disgrace it is that so and so never got what he deserved.

Personally (and i am quite prepared to be proven wrong) i cant think of a fighter who should have been world champ, or a big name or whatever, and never was due to "politics"

Some British fighters, although talented, just didnt quite have what it takes to make it big

The flipside to that is that when we do have a fighter in the big time, we get endless endless angry rantings about how they are a fraud, joke, over-rated, protected, whatever.

Very, very interesting


If this forum were around in 1992 it would be filled with Benn is a fraud, Eubank is over protected etc and how that Gary Stretch was only not getting noticed due to "politics"

KG would you agree tho on 'politics'

Williams had no big fanbase/ massive SN support. doesn't this mean he was less likely to get a shot, and isn't that part of boxing politics? and i don't just mean whether williams got a world title shot, which his ability to deliver on is at best unproven, i mean at least to get him the chance to prove he was best in britain at 154? straight question no aggro. cos to me that's part and parcel fo boxing politics, which I accept exist but still dislike.

Good decision from Richard there, it will be nice to remember his valliant effort vs Eastman as his swansong... given Eastman performances since, I think it a wise move to. I can't see him beating the likes of Barker, McDermott and Elcock at this stage of his career.

Classy of Arnie to contribute to this thread and say those things.

Counter-puncher wrote:some good discussion here. interested to see Arnie who lets face it should know a thing or two about the lightmiddleweight mix, say Williams was the best. cheers for that mate 8)

btw i think the hatton/ williams comparison is like i think grey fox said, a smokescreen and slightly irrelevant. no offence like, DG ;;-)

my point to add to the mix about Williams and whether he got shots or not.

yes he got martinez twice but as KG says i think rightly, he didn't get that chance at a simon or Tsarenko for a top 4 belt.

and i think there's another point to be made: oliver fennell i agree with you the idea he was an unfortunate world beater in waiting is a bit far fetched, but:

look at the domestic fights wiliams could have ( but didn't) get. No Takaloo (who he'd have schooled IMO) or Alexander (ditto IMO). Had williams had better promotion/ 10,000 fans to add to the mix like Hatton, I am sure he would have got more chances for big domestic fights- which we all know were ripe to be made at 154 and for various reasons almost noe of them did get made. so to me the fact that he didn't at least face an alexander/etc is a sign he 'didn't get the chances' even at british level. if that makes sense.

one point where the hatton comparison may be relevant- and it does take it back to the witter argument, sorry.

if the boot was on the other foot- if Witter had established himself as the Man to beat, and hatton was the up and coming fighter demanding the fight. i don't think there is any way that fight would NOT have been made. the fact that hatton had FW totally with him, and 10,0000 loyal fans, would have made it inconceivable (IMO) that Witter could have 'ducked' him. the preesure and potential finances of the fight would have made it a no-brainer, it's just that with the boot on the other foot Witter didn't/couldn't bring anything like that kind of pressure to bear

Williams, without that kind of support and impetus, didn't get the chance.

maybe KG would agree with me then when I say the fact he didn't get the chance was just part of the business, pure economics and so on.

to me though that doesn't mean no politics were involved as KG suggested though, quite the opposite. had Williams been an SN staple fighter or a hatton-type i am sure he would have got more chances, and to me the lack of economic imperative to force the fight is part of the 'politics' of boxing.

An excellent post, i find it maddening when people cant understand why fighters like ummmm Howard Eastman, for example had such a hard time forcing big fights.

Its easy just to say "politics" and be done with it.

We all love Benn, Eubank, right? i sure do

And why were they so popular? why did they get however many millions it was to watch them on ITV?

Because they were great fighters?

yeah, right........

Its because they brought a hell of a lot to the table, they could both go on This Morning and Eubank could pretend to be a Country Gent, and Benn could pretend to get all worked up and angry. It was pure theater and all the better for it.


Could Richard Williams, Junior Witter, Howard Eastman go on Johnathon Ross and hold peoples interest for 15 mins?



whats my point again? i forget

Counter-puncher wrote:KG would you agree tho on 'politics'

Williams had no big fanbase/ massive SN support. doesn't this mean he was less likely to get a shot, and isn't that part of boxing politics? and i don't just mean whether williams got a world title shot, which his ability to deliver on is at best unproven, i mean at least to get him the chance to prove he was best in britain at 154? straight question no aggro. cos to me that's part and parcel fo boxing politics, which I accept exist but still dislike.

I agree with you completely, but i dont dislike it at all


Boxing is the entertainment business, you need to go out there and sell the fight, get the people interested. Do that and you can probably fight who you want (De La Hoya) and the people will love it.


I dont think there is anything wrong with that at all

I think they days of boxing being a pure sport, where people will turn up to watch 2 unknowns , even if the are the 2 best fighters in the world had long gone (If it ever existed)

okay cheers, i understand your viewpoint better now 8)

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote: I think they days of boxing being a pure sport, where people will turn up to watch 2 unknowns , even if the are the 2 best fighters in the world had long gone (If it ever existed)

Sorry to drag this thread even further off-topic, but would you agree KG that the problem with the heavies at the mo' is the lack of this for want of a better phrase star power? I mean, they got it sorted in Germany haven't they, with Valuev & the Klits, but over here & in America -- zilch. Or nearly zilch.

& d'you think Haye's antics are going to shift that? For the record, I find him hilarious.

datsue i think you're right and haye is trying to parlay what he sees as his 'star power' into one of the factors that gets him the fight(s) he wants

Can you remeber Ali, He didnt make a bad job of it

Counter-puncher wrote:KG would you agree tho on 'politics'

Williams had no big fanbase/ massive SN support. doesn't this mean he was less likely to get a shot, and isn't that part of boxing politics? and i don't just mean whether williams got a world title shot, which his ability to deliver on is at best unproven, i mean at least to get him the chance to prove he was best in britain at 154? straight question no aggro. cos to me that's part and parcel fo boxing politics, which I accept exist but still dislike.

Matchroom while a good firm are more interested in Snooker/Darts/Poker etc imo, not to say they did not do their best, but I would have liked to see more opportunities come RWs way.

Still - IBO Champ - 2 time Comonewealth title holder is still more than most pros achieve.

The Tony Badea win was a world class performance imo

I have no doubt RW was World Class.

Only real loses to Martinez ( World Class) and Howard Eastman (World Class)

Luckily I have many of hs fights on tape so can relive the smoothness and slick skills we don't see much of these days.

Funny the way this thread went and no need imo. Williams was good and i understand the defense of him. But why the hell do some feel the need to bash Hatton....in defense of Williams?

Williams was a classy operator who never got that big opportunity his talent deserved. Lesser talents got their chance on the big stage. Sadly Richard never did. Its certainly possible he could have won a major title at 154 if he'd gotten the right fight. The Williams who was fit, healthy and taking apart men like Badea and Taylor would have given anybody a run for their money.

Hatton is also a bloody good fighter as his career stats and list of victims clearly illustrates.....end of.

lurkyshaka wrote:Funny the way this thread went and no need imo. Williams was good and i understand the defense of him. But why the hell do some feel the need to bash Hatton....in defense of Williams?

Williams was a classy operator who never got that big opportunity his talent deserved. Lesser talents got their chance on the big stage. Sadly Richard never did. Its certainly possible he could have won a major title at 154 if he'd gotten the right fight. The Williams who was fit, healthy and taking apart men like Badea and Taylor would have given anybody a run for their money.

Hatton is also a bloody good fighter as his career stats and list of victims clearly illustrates.....end of.

I think HITMANHATTON1 (as usual) starting off being a little cuunt so his favourite fighter was attacked.

Yes, RW did not get the shot he deserved.

Agree on your take re: Richard, both of them!

DG. wrote:

lurkyshaka wrote:Funny the way this thread went and no need imo. Williams was good and i understand the defense of him. But why the hell do some feel the need to bash Hatton....in defense of Williams?

Williams was a classy operator who never got that big opportunity his talent deserved. Lesser talents got their chance on the big stage. Sadly Richard never did. Its certainly possible he could have won a major title at 154 if he'd gotten the right fight. The Williams who was fit, healthy and taking apart men like Badea and Taylor would have given anybody a run for their money.

Hatton is also a bloody good fighter as his career stats and list of victims clearly illustrates.....end of.

I think HITMANHATTON1 (as usual) starting off being a little cuunt so his favourite fighter was attacked.

Yes, RW did not get the shot he deserved.

uh huh, except when he got beat by Martinez, as discussed 3 pages back

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

DG. wrote:

lurkyshaka wrote:Funny the way this thread went and no need imo. Williams was good and i understand the defense of him. But why the hell do some feel the need to bash Hatton....in defense of Williams?

Williams was a classy operator who never got that big opportunity his talent deserved. Lesser talents got their chance on the big stage. Sadly Richard never did. Its certainly possible he could have won a major title at 154 if he'd gotten the right fight. The Williams who was fit, healthy and taking apart men like Badea and Taylor would have given anybody a run for their money.

Hatton is also a bloody good fighter as his career stats and list of victims clearly illustrates.....end of.

I think HITMANHATTON1 (as usual) starting off being a little cuunt so his favourite fighter was attacked.

Yes, RW did not get the shot he deserved.

uh huh, except when he got beat by Martinez, as discussed 3 pages back

Martinez was an UNKNOWN!!!!

RW was the Champion.

A shot imo would have been against a Big 4 Title Holder as discussed 2 pages back.

Wake up!

Very funny - Diddly!

I do like a good debate!

DG. wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:Its kind of odd that the boxrec forum reveres fighters like Richard Williams (decent enough fighter, got his chance, didnt happen but frankly never good enough for the top, or anywhere near) and when they finally retire its all "respect" "talented" "politics" "thanks" etc


But, say, Ricky Hatton its all "fraud" "ducking" "Witter" "Joke" etc

A psychologist would have a lot to say about that.....

Shut up!

RW is like most hardworking Pros who fight ANYONE put in front of him.

Hatton is in the small percentage that get to pick and choose who is easy and avoids who is tough while banking Millions!

Politics were at work but you are too Kackhole Buttboy to understand.

Now piss off and go and praise Hatton and Khan(t).

KG brought Hatton into it. I should have known!

scurlaruntings wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:Its kind of odd that the boxrec forum reveres fighters like Richard Williams (decent enough fighter, got his chance, didnt happen but frankly never good enough for the top, or anywhere near) and when they finally retire its all "respect" "talented" "politics" "thanks" etc


But, say, Ricky Hatton its all "fraud" "ducking" "Witter" "Joke" etc

A psychologist would have a lot to say about that.....

You seem to casually forget the massive and glaring diffrence in OPPORTUNITY! Richard Williams STILL had a job and was doing meals on wheels to make the ends meet. Ricky was fed the silver spoon made millions off defences of the WBU under the auspices of WORLD TITLE action - bearing in mind the WBU was an organisation run from a cottage in Norwich that had as much credibility as George Bush`s tenure as president -

Ricky has NEVER had to fight for anything. It was handed to him on a plate. When he was supposed to fight Witter he made up a plethora of excuses and 10 years later the fight STILL hasnt happened and now has no meaning. Thus he denied the hardcore British fans the fight we truly wanted as well as making a nice buck of us at the gate.

You also conviniently forget that Martinez has had a VERY succesful career and apart from 1 loss to Margarito is treading the exact same path Ricky trod.

Boxing is a tough game. The WORKING man will ALWAYS get respect. Ricky beats the drum repeatedly that he`s "one of the lads" but how can he be considering his whole career has been wrapped in cotton woll and is entirely hinged on a win over a fighter who had one foot in retirement.

I'd hate to labour the point, but i would just like to re highlight what has to be the most one eyed, poorly thought out, boorish excuse for a post that has ever been posted on this forum

DG. wrote:

Khaosai-Galaxy wrote:

lurkyshaka wrote:Funny the way this thread went and no need imo. Williams was good and i understand the defense of him. But why the hell do some feel the need to bash Hatton....in defense of Williams?

Williams was a classy operator who never got that big opportunity his talent deserved. Lesser talents got their chance on the big stage. Sadly Richard never did. Its certainly possible he could have won a major title at 154 if he'd gotten the right fight. The Williams who was fit, healthy and taking apart men like Badea and Taylor would have given anybody a run for their money.

Hatton is also a bloody good fighter as his career stats and list of victims clearly illustrates.....end of.

I think HITMANHATTON1 (as usual) starting off being a little cuunt so his favourite fighter was attacked.

Yes, RW did not get the shot he deserved.

uh huh, except when he got beat by Martinez, as discussed 3 pages back

Martinez was an UNKNOWN!!!!

RW was the Champion.

A shot imo would have been against a Big 4 Title Holder as discussed 2 pages back.

Wake up!

well that proves my point even furthur, he couldnt get past a fringe contender (who hasnt exactly been ripping up trees since then, either) so why in gods name should he get a shot at the top 4?

DG. wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:I know Khaosai Galaxy can be deliberately "anti-establishment", but he often makes a good point, although rubs people up the wrong way in doing so.

He was perfectly correct to counter the argument of "Williams never got the chances he deserved" by pointing out that he lost to Martinez twice. Yes, Martinez is a highly-rated class act, which therefore proves he DID get his shot at the top. What's your beef with that??

Shot at the top?
Remind me - who was the Champion in the first fight? Williams was and Martinez was a voluntary.

KG just likes to act the idiot. I would class shot at the top as a shot at a TOP 4 World Title.

Williams never did get that shot.

Lockett lost to Tsarenko - yes he won the rematch but he got his shot against Pavlik.

Takalooo lost to Jawaid Khaliq and others yet got a shot at Santos.

Wayne Alexander got his shot at Harry Simon.

Who had....
Lockett beaten?
Takaloo?
Wayne Alexander?

I would say that RWs record more than matches up against those guys. He battered Shannon Taylor who had only lost to Shane Mosley and some other guy 6 months earlier. Shannon Taylor went on to take Abrahams 12 for the World Title years later.

Life is not fair, we all now that - but I think RW had 1 REAL opportunity and that was against HOWARD EASTMAN

AND I GUARANTEE YOU THAT WAYNE ALEXANDER TURNED DOWN £100K TO FIGHT HOWARD.

LOCKETT SAID HE WANTS NO PART OF HOWARD

and I am sure Takaloo would know better than to risk 1 round with Howard.

Richard fought him.

Case closed.


:D

I was ringside for the Shannon Taylor fight, and if memory serves, Taylor was coming up a division to face a big Light-Middle, had been inactive and later banned for substance abuse. It isn't a closet classic performance by Williams. He beat Taylor, but wasn't as fluid as you recall until the finish.

I liked Williams a lot, he was just a likeable sort of fella. The 2001 Light-Middles was the ultimate manifestation of all that was wrong with the promoter/sanctioning body/television politics that went on.

1 - Williams - IBO
2 - Alexander - EBU
3 - Lockett - WBO Inter
4 - Roberts - WBF
5 - Takaloo - WBU?
6 - Rhodes
7 - Samuels
8 - Farnell - WBU?
9 - Jones - Commonwealth
10- Stone - IBO?

and Jamie Moore emerging.

A great time but while all suggested they were one win away from Vernon Forest and Golden Boy the truth is, they never were.

Williams was a very good fighter, he did everything well but he was inactive at crucial times, and staying fit and able is an important factor in a fighter's success.

He had two chances versus and under-sold top 10 Light-Middleweight, showed courage and bravery but lost, twice.

He then had another shot against an ageing former world-title challenger, maybe a top-10 middleweight at the time, and lost, gamely, but lost.

Williams would have been a handful for all the contemporaries, a poor man's Watson to Alexander's poor man's Benn, Samuels poor man's Wharton, Farnell's poor man's Collins and Roberts poor man's Rob Reid.

Would have been fascinating round-robin and with better vision coudl have made ALL wealthy men.

Unfortunately, they're all foot-notes except Rhodes and Alexander, who won British and European belts respectively.

All the other trinkets were meaningless, except for the extra few quid it brought at the time.

Also, remember, Takaloo - from memory - and Alexander, both got their shots on short notice.

DavidPayne wrote:He had two chances versus an under-sold top 10 Light-Middleweight, showed courage and bravery but lost, twice.

He then had another shot against an ageing former world-title challenger, maybe a top-10 middleweight at the time, and lost, gamely, but lost.

Williams would have been a handful for all the contemporaries, a poor man's Watson to Alexander's poor man's Benn, Samuels poor man's Wharton, Farnell's poor man's Collins and Roberts poor man's Rob Reid.

Nail, meet head. To suggest that there was some kind of travesty of justice involved for these guys is a bit silly, innit? They got as far as they got. If the inter-galactic planetary belts didn't exist, they'd've all done it for the Commonwealth or British or European, & probably earnt a bit less.

DG. wrote: Martinez was an UNKNOWN!!!!

RW was the Champion.

A shot imo would have been against a Big 4 Title Holder as discussed 2 pages back.

Wake up!

So he should have got such a shot on the basis of LOSING TWICE to an "unknown"? (your own words)

HitmanHatton1 is a git.