Re: Matt Skelton vs John McDermott this weekend
Posted: 18 Mar 2013, 21:16
Tom Dallas is a 13 stone man who's been stretched to 6'6". He'll do nowt at HW.
Get John in with Audley Harrison and put Matt in with Lewison on the same card. Two closely matched fights again IMO.ThereByTheGrace wrote:FtmPress wrote:What should be John next move and Matt's like to hear you the fan's thinking on these 2
I has to be a mega fight to be open air show, cannot remember the last 1 I attended, maybe wembley with Bruno v McCall,Darcy Delaney wrote:Get John in with Audley Harrison and put Matt in with Lewison on the same card. Two closely matched fights again IMO.ThereByTheGrace wrote:FtmPress wrote:What should be John next move and Matt's like to hear you the fan's thinking on these 2
great call mate and what about chisora topping the bill for a title say (commonwealth/european) and they could have it at barry hearns leyton orient ground in the summer with frank warrens Allegedly channel screening it that way you get 3 promoters working TOGETHER just a thought
Yeah. That's exactly the way boxing works these days.Darcy Delaney wrote:Get John in with Audley Harrison and put Matt in with Lewison on the same card. Two closely matched fights again IMO.ThereByTheGrace wrote:FtmPress wrote:What should be John next move and Matt's like to hear you the fan's thinking on these 2
great call mate and what about chisora topping the bill for a title say (commonwealth/european) and they could have it at barry hearns leyton orient ground in the summer with frank warrens Allegedly channel screening it that way you get 3 promoters working TOGETHER just a thought
Not sure what losing fat and gaining a lot of muscle would of done for big John McDermott ? In fact gaining muscle would just use more oxygen than all his fat anyway. Since when did muscle mass or physic become a massive factor for boxing ? The only big muscle bound hevyweight really was Larry Olumbiawo and he was Sh#t so it done nothing for him. Granted Big John would benefit from being at around 16st 10lb - 17st for his mobility and speed but that's it really. Congratulations to him, he's a good honest pro and deserves a bit of a break.Wa1nuts wrote:Am confused how people, inlcuding one of the commentators, thought McDermott was in "good shape"?!
The 12 lbs hes put on is all fat, doesnt look to me like he has an ounze of muscle on his whole body, all fat. Just cos he was slimmer than when he fought Price (he was a disgrace in that, over 19st of pure fat), doesnt mean hes in good shape for a professional sportsman.
I dont understand how being overweight can help him, he isnt a bad boxer, but if he lost a good few stone of fat and put some muscle on, surely he could be a fitter and better fighter.
I'm gutted Skelton lost, just didn't look like he had quite enough in him any more. Wasnt as bad as I thought the fight was going to be to be fair I quite enjoyed it.
I still don't believe that story.Karl Jade wrote:The scales added over a stone for McDermott's fight with Price. They were fixed and we still don't know who fixed them or why. McDermott's true weight was publically shown a few weeks later in his next fight.
Believe what you want. You're free to believe he lost 2 stones in under 5 weeks, but you should know better.Horse wrote:I still don't believe that story.Karl Jade wrote:The scales added over a stone for McDermott's fight with Price. They were fixed and we still don't know who fixed them or why. McDermott's true weight was publically shown a few weeks later in his next fight.
So were the scales rigged for Price as well?Karl Jade wrote:Believe what you want. You're free to believe he lost 2 stones in under 5 weeks, but you should know better.
Price went on the scales straight after. Why would they be rigged to make McDermott look bad?Karl Jade wrote:No, or I would've said that.