BoxRec

Carlos-Wigan wrote:

overhand_right wrote: Maybe he's disliked for seeking easy fights whilst ducking Thaxton, Murray and Romanov.

Do you really think Khan is shaking in fear trying to avoid Thaxton, Murray and Romanov? All three Euro class at best.

reggaereggae wrote:Comments on Youtube and Justin TV are not great yardsticks for what the majority of people think.

oliverfennell wrote:

overhand_right wrote:Kevin Mitchell is a numpty - his shambolic puff piece of Khan-Salita was cringeworthy, calling it 'the most convincing comeback in recent memory' - simply laughable.

You actually dispute that? Please name a better comeback from a bigger defeat in a shorter time.

Terry D wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:

Terry D wrote: Murray said he wanted to fight Khan. Amir, wrongly, said he'd already battered John in sparring, even though they hadn't sparred. Ollie, you go a bit postal if someone makes a factual error in a forum post, would you have said nothing if you'd been erroneously dismissed?

Not sure about me going postal?

Well, the point I'm trying to make really is that BOTH sides have called for Khan-Murray or Khan-Thaxton, and NEITHER side could make an agreement, and at the same time BOTH sides have trash-talked each other. Yet it is only Khan who takes the stick for the fights not being made.

Furthermore, it is no secret that Hennessy and/or his fighters repeatedly used the same formula to make their names - i.e. baiting more famous boxers rather than forcing the issue with results. Murray-Khan, Thaxton-Khan, Witter-Hatton, Froch-Calzaghe and even Hide-Harrison.

While Khan was getting dissed for fighting Commonwealth champions and ex-world champions, what was Murray doing? Struggling with al-Hamidi. What was Thaxton doin? Struggling with Dave Stewart. Yes, it would have been nice if those fights had been made, but honestly, Murray and Thaxton did not do anything bigger or better than Khan except being "nice blokes" and "honest pros".

And whoever it was that latched onto Khan facing Scott Lawton when he good have boxed Murray. Yep, fair point, and Lawton was a pretty poor match for Khan. Why then, was it not until recently that Murray himself fought Lawton, and that it remains among his best results?

Ok, postal is perhaps a strong word but you've never corrected anyone factually on this forum? Yet you feel that it is fine and dandy for a fighter to put out in the press that he has already dealt with a guy in sparring even though this is erroneous? Murray was calling for Khan but it was hardly trash talk at the start, you will also find that a lot of the calling was done by Joe Gallagher in the earlier days as Murray tended to stick to discussing his upcoming fights.

Whatever, John never, to my knowledge, made claims that he had dealt with Amir in sparring only to later come out and say that he'd made a mistake and had sparred Amir's brother, ironically if this was the case, and judging by recent events, people would likely have accused Murray of racism (because he'd mistaken one Asian guy for another).

At one point or another, and post-Hamidi, you need to look at a few timelines, both Murray and Thaxton were reigning title holders at lightweight and were legitimate opponents for Amir, a former Commonwealth and Inter-Continental champion. So why not ask for the fight with Amir. Especially Murray who, without labouring the point, was wrongly splashed across the headlines as a guy who Khan had handled in the gym when we know this was not the case.

You seem to be frozen at Murray's fight with Hamidi. Didn't Murray then win the lightweight title in impressive fashion? And wasn't Murray the British holder when Khan was also a lightweight? So calls for them to fight were justified. Ditto for Thaxton.

As for Lawton, you are posting on a forum linked to a boxing database. Surely you could have had a shufty and checked for yourself? Scott was coming off a loss, albeit a title loss to Thaxton, when he took on Khan. Prior to Murray he was on a run of wins, including one over the fabled Hamidi, and had contested the BBBoC English title, which generally leads you onto the British title.

In short: Couldn't you say that Lawton-Amir was a different Lawton to the Lawton-Murray one?

I like the way Amir has bounced back from his loss to Prescott but claims that he somehow blazed through the domestic lightweight division are pretty far-fetched. Earl was shot to bits, Gomez also and Limond was a good win. Unfortunately for Murray, and Limond's ESB army, John is going to find it hard to grab a fight, and possible comparison win, over Willie as they could set a date only for Scotsman to pull out of the fight in order to grout a bathroom somewhere in Fife. Hardly Murray's fault.

Yes, the fight is gone, and I also agree that Amir gets a lot of undue stick but he did not clean up domestically at lightweight and you can't make that case in slightest for his light-welterweight career. So the point that Wales and have few others have made sticks.

FLINT ISLAND wrote:Khan dosent help himself when he says comments like

"If I were White I would be a Superstar by now"

A ridiculous big headed comment to make - from a paper champion boxer.

G0mez wrote:Will Khan's opponents demand a blood test before they fight him and other Roach / Ariza trained boxers ?

"We have the blood result back sir and they are quite interesting."

"We have detected the presence of some kind of mineral.. looks like bone china ..or.. ... porcelain? "

(sorry Khan fans i'm just lightening the mood )

banjo wrote:It makes you wonder though doesn't it? Are you better off without the glittering Olympic medal and fighting in small halls developing your talent away from the eyes of the mainstream public.

You can't blame Khan for being the way he is, that's what happens when you throw millions at a teenager, you can't expect them to be sensible with it.

WildWaylon wrote:

banjo wrote:It makes you wonder though doesn't it? Are you better off without the glittering Olympic medal and fighting in small halls developing your talent away from the eyes of the mainstream public.

You can't blame Khan for being the way he is, that's what happens when you throw millions at a teenager, you can't expect them to be sensible with it.

Most people I think see a parallel between Khan and Hamilton. It cant be easy for these young men in the limelight, earning millions in their respective sports.

banjo wrote:I don't know about you but if I'd been given that sort of money in the blink of an eye at a young immature age I'd either be skint or dead by now.

overhand_right wrote:

banjo wrote:I don't know about you but if I'd been given that sort of money in the blink of an eye at a young immature age I'd either be skint or dead by now.

Not sure about skint or dead but I'd definitely have every VD under the sun.

Carlos-Wigan wrote:
I am of the thinking that if a white lad from the north west of England won a silver medal in the olympics at 17 and his surname was
Murray (for example) he would be a superstar - bang on the money!

G0mez wrote:

Carlos-Wigan wrote:
I am of the thinking that if a white lad from the north west of England won a silver medal in the olympics at 17 and his surname was
Murray (for example) he would be a superstar - bang on the money!

Total bollocks.

Tony Jeffries won a bronze and he aint got a multi-million pound sponsorship..

All the media are on Khan like a tramp on chips.

Twinkle Toes wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:.

Just as Benn beating McClellan, Eubank beating Rocchigiani, Bruno beating McCall and Naz beating Kelley meant infinitely more than domestic wins, Khan will already be remembered more for winning and defending a WBA title and beating Barrera than for not fighting Thaxton and Murray.

A thing to consider before stating the above is that the medium we the fans use to discuss boxing wasn't around in the days of those fighters you mention.

Point being, followers have a platform to air a public view and on an international scale.

In ten years time I suspect khan will indeed be remembered for not fighting his domestic rivals, there is just too much opinion that has been posted, for it to be forgotten about.

We're in a different era now, it's not a correct logic to compare the two in my opinion.

overhand_right wrote:

Carlos-Wigan wrote:

overhand_right wrote: Maybe he's disliked for seeking easy fights whilst ducking Thaxton, Murray and Romanov.

Do you really think Khan is shaking in fear trying to avoid Thaxton, Murray and Romanov? All three Euro class at best.

I was referring to his actions at the time - steering around those dangerous opponents, whilst also calling them out of course, but actually fighting soft punching feather Willie Limond and semi-retired Danish bacon Martin Kristwhoareyou.

It has been the recurring theme of his career, however, if he is now fighting Marcos Madaina then finally he is ready to stop ducking dangerous fights.

That is all.

overhand_right wrote:

oliverfennell wrote:

overhand_right wrote:Kevin Mitchell is a numpty - his shambolic puff piece of Khan-Salita was cringeworthy, calling it 'the most convincing comeback in recent memory' - simply laughable.

You actually dispute that? Please name a better comeback from a bigger defeat in a shorter time.

Floyd Patterson coming back within 12 months to ice the man who destroyed him, Ingo Johansson in ultra violent fashion.

Sugar Ray Leonard turning the tables on Roberto Duran within months.

Lennox Lewis splattering Hasim Rahman over the canvas when the American rags were writing he was old & finished and Rahman had somehow exposed him. Again, within months.

Honestly Oliver, I could go on, Amir dropping a punchbag (Fagan), technical decision winning over an old, finished feather (Barrera), outscoring the ultra pedestrian Kotelnik in a snoozefest then capping the sh*t blizzard with an 1st rd kayo over simply one of the worst championship opponents in history doesn't add up to much. Rematching & beating Prescott would have been hugely impressive, as that would be genuinely dangerous, such as the route the greats above took. Amir took the usual media friendly con job fights, and it worked a treat on you and Kevin Mitchell it seems. Hoo ha!

Terry D wrote:Ok, postal is perhaps a strong word but you've never corrected anyone factually on this forum? Yet you feel that it is fine and dandy for a fighter to put out in the press that he has already dealt with a guy in sparring even though this is erroneous?

Terry D wrote:At one point or another, and post-Hamidi, you need to look at a few timelines, both Murray and Thaxton were reigning title holders at lightweight and were legitimate opponents for Amir, a former Commonwealth and Inter-Continental champion. So why not ask for the fight with Amir.

Terry D wrote:You seem to be frozen at Murray's fight with Hamidi.

Terry D wrote:Didn't Murray then win the lightweight title in impressive fashion?

Terry D wrote:As for Lawton, you are posting on a forum linked to a boxing database. Surely you could have had a shufty and checked for yourself? Scott was coming off a loss, albeit a title loss to Thaxton, when he took on Khan. Prior to Murray he was on a run of wins, including one over the fabled Hamidi, and had contested the BBBoC English title, which generally leads you onto the British title. In short: Couldn't you say that Lawton-Amir was a different Lawton to the Lawton-Murray one?

Terry D wrote:I like the way Amir has bounced back from his loss to Prescott but claims that he somehow blazed through the domestic lightweight division are pretty far-fetched. ... he did not clean up domestically at lightweight and you can't make that case in slightest for his light-welterweight career.

Terry D wrote:So the point that Wales and have few others have made sticks. He's not going to be particularly arsed though. His legacy will be in the fights he wins. People will remember Hatton for Tszyu and even Floyd, not for Witter.

Carlos-Wigan wrote:

FLINT ISLAND wrote:Khan dosent help himself when he says comments like

"If I were White I would be a Superstar by now"

A ridiculous big headed comment to make - from a paper champion boxer.

Its true though Flint-Brain.

What must Oscar de la Hoya have thought when Amir Khan was introduced to his fellow countrymen and he was booed off the
stage in Las Vegas - one of the most disgraceful things I have ever seen from so called British fans. De la Hoya must have thought
the fans present were absolute idiots.

I am of the thinking that if a white lad from the north west of England won a silver medal in the olympics at 17 and his surname was
Murray (for example) he would be a superstar - bang on the money!

FLINT ISLAND wrote:

Carlos-Wigan wrote:

FLINT ISLAND wrote:Khan dosent help himself when he says comments like

"If I were White I would be a Superstar by now"

A ridiculous big headed comment to make - from a paper champion boxer.

Its true though Flint-Brain.

What must Oscar de la Hoya have thought when Amir Khan was introduced to his fellow countrymen and he was booed off the
stage in Las Vegas - one of the most disgraceful things I have ever seen from so called British fans. De la Hoya must have thought
the fans present were absolute idiots.

I am of the thinking that if a white lad from the north west of England won a silver medal in the olympics at 17 and his surname was
Murray (for example) he would be a superstar - bang on the money!

Well - he was given a prime ITV saturday night main event slot for a AMATEUR fight - where he was presented his Olympic Conquerer on a plate in his own country - to regain revenge - (so he could claim to be the Olympic Champ really kind of thing)

He was a millionaire before he turned professional at 17/18 years old.

He had autobiographys released when he was a teenager

He had DVDS released charting his career to date when he was still a novice

He had Reebook signing him up in £2 million deals to waer their clothes and advertise their products in glossy magazines.

He had a big house for the family before he had even won a belt as a professional.

He was driving around in super cars worth £100,000 that the vast majority of British pro boxers could never afford.

And he had the top lawyers to get him off lightly on a serious incident where he mowed someone over in his car.

He was barely a Commonwealth Champion and they already started him as a pay per view fighter.

Then only a couple of fights after being KO'd in the 1st round - he was handed a World title fight on a platter.

I cant think of any British Boxer - White or Black or Asian - who has been handed such super star treatment.

Wales wrote:Who is anyone to tell me who I must, and must not support?

Im sorry but I couldnt give a hoot if Khan was black, white or pink with yellow spots I stopped supporting him during the bust up with Oliver Harrison and the treatment of a man Ive met many times, and a man who welcomed me into his gym to watch and interview the guys he was training. The way "team khan" treated and sacked Oliver was disgraceful and I'll boo the fecker if I want to - my choice.

"He's your countryman" - Is this reverse racism now? I must support Khan over barrera because barrera isnt british... errr... no... I'll support the fighter I want to support for my own personal reasons.

As it happens im now back on the Khan bandwagon, why?, because I effing well want to be.

Carlos-Wigan wrote:

Wales wrote:Who is anyone to tell me who I must, and must not support?

Im sorry but I couldnt give a hoot if Khan was black, white or pink with yellow spots I stopped supporting him during the bust up with Oliver Harrison and the treatment of a man Ive met many times, and a man who welcomed me into his gym to watch and interview the guys he was training. The way "team khan" treated and sacked Oliver was disgraceful and I'll boo the fecker if I want to - my choice.

"He's your countryman" - Is this reverse racism now? I must support Khan over barrera because barrera isnt british... errr... no... I'll support the fighter I want to support for my own personal reasons.

As it happens im now back on the Khan bandwagon, why?, because I effing well want to be.

God - you sound like a petulant child - how old are you? 14?

Why did you not just mention the treatment Oliver Harrison copped from Khan 5 pages ago instead of coming out with all this effing guff about Khan ducking fighters and having an easy route to the top? You know - trainers get fired - sometimes for just and not so just reasons. I don't know what really went on as both sides have their story and I doubt you know too much either. All I can say is Oliver Harrison is doing really well at this moment isn't he?

As for the booing is Vegas - we know that in 90% of the case - we both know it has everything to do with that lads colour and religion - you know it, I know it - we all know it.

Wales wrote: Olivers not doing very well at all, no. Although Martin Murray and Mark Thompson may disagree with british title shots coming up. Also, he guided Jamie Moore to within one fight of a world title eliminator. He has a thriving gym and is now promoting his own shows accross the North West too.

oliverfennell wrote:
That's an interesting take and time will tell if you're right or not.

However I'd say the only difference really is that we now have a record of these arguments. Definitely among boxing fans there was just as much of a clamour for Benn/Eubank-Graham, if not more, than there has been for Khan-Murray/Thaxton, just we don't have fan forum evidence from the time.

To look at something more timely - do you think in 5-10 years' time, people will denigrate Hatton's wins over Tszyu, Castillo, Malignaggi et al because he didn't fight Witter? Of course people will remember this, but I don't think it will harm his legacy any more than Eubank's or Benn's were harmed by not fighting Graham. And Hatton is of the internet era.