BoxRec

I don't think that anyones saying that Pavlik is special talent wise. It's his heart and determination which make him special. That's part of what makes him so popular, he has nothing like the natural talent/athleticism of Jermaine but but him the first time mostly on willpower both times. You could probably teach most boxers Pavlik's moves but not his determination. He's a bonafide overachiever.

Let's not underestimate Pavlik's talents though: P4P punching power, good chin (great recuperative powers), potent jab (he outjabbed Taylor a lot of the time) and extraordinary resolve. He might not be a slickster, but that's quite a formidable set of attributes. The way some people describe him, you'd think he was a basic slugger.

Bigger version of Pac-man? Discuss

chesh wrote:Let's not underestimate Pavlik's talents though: P4P punching power, good chin (great recuperative powers), potent jab (he outjabbed Taylor a lot of the time) and extraordinary resolve. He might not be a slickster, but that's quite a formidable set of attributes. The way some people describe him, you'd think he was a basic slugger.

Great accuracy too, imo.

Autobarn wrote:Who are all the guys that have dropped Pavlik? Zuniga, with a left hook early on. Bronco McKart, with a right hook to Pavlik's shoulder (thus, not a real knockdown). Jermain Taylor, in the 1st fight. There isn't anyone else, is there?

I read an article a few years back about Pavlik, where his trainer said that he arrived at the gym as a kid and was crap at boxing and kept getting duffed, he stuck at it and then started winning. I'm not sure what his amatuer career was like, but I got the impression it wasn't amazing...

Mathias Bedburdick also had him on the floor with a beauty shot.

Terry D wrote:I'm looking forward to this fight. People might say Lockett does not deserve but I, for one, am glad to see a contender get a fight with the Champion of his division rather than the Champion immediately seeking a fight with a blown-up fighter from another division, a washed-up member of the Senior circuit or a novelty bout against a reality TV star.

Fair play to Lockett for fighting a proper middleweight title fight right off the bat rather than battering that idiot Mayorga or taking on Tito.

You mean fair play to Pavlik for fighting a proper middleweight title fight?

I aint convinced Lockett batters Mayorga - he could do, he could batter Tito.also... but one round wins over Gilbert Eastman is no form guide to even guess what Lockett could do at European level.

He could be a geniune world class, he could get embarresed, he could be somewhere in between... at least with Mayorga and Tito you know your going to get rounds and you know your going to (at Middleweight for Tito vs a comeforeward puncher like Pavlik) going to get some drama.

So I kinda disagree.... I think Mayorga and Tito are as worthy as Lockett for a shot, cause they are still proven to a certain level - a level Lockett hasn't even fought in.

he has nothing like the natural talent/athleticism of Jermaine

What athleticism? Jermaine was pretty average in every facet of the game. No great hand speed, no great power and horrible footwork. But he's black so he must have athleticism

You could probably teach most boxers Pavlik's moves but not his determination.

Or his vicious knockout power.

I know what you are saying.... and I would generally agree, if it was someone a little more proven than Lockett.

I would love to see Pavlik, or any other champion, fight a geniune contender (even those with an outside chance of winning) as opposed to inactive senior circuit (even if I believed them to have a better chance of upsetting the odds).

However, my main arguement is...... is Lockett worthy of being labelled a geniune contender? Outside of the WBO - is he in any independent top 20? Maybe even top 30.

If this was Duddy (beaten Eastman), Askainen (Proven EBU level), Sylvester (EBU champion), Daniel Geale (undefeated and beaten a highly touted Daniel Dawson last time), Castillejo, Randy Griffin.... I'd even say Paul Smith (who beat David Banks, who has twice beaten Ayala who gave Abraham some problems) are more worthy of being called contenders.... even Darren Barker who has a meaningful belt. Mean Joe Greene has been more active and looked the part also and has an amateur pedigree that betters Lockett.

However, and this is not intended to be a dig at Lockett, who must be very frustrated at the the opponents he has faced in preperation - but what has he done to even prove he is worthy of top 5 in the UK... Gilbert Eastman? A bulked up Welterweight is about his best Middleweight win!!!! His best career win was at Light Middle vs Kevin Kelly - who is probably most renowned for being the brother of Glenn Kelly!

Lockett could be world class, but he could be lower half of the top ten domestically... we just don't know. So my arguement is how can Lockett be classed as a contender - he's got to have beaten someone first.

I like Pavlik's attitude, getting the mandatory out of the way so he can keep the belts and not have the shitty catchweight debacles. Pavlik has beaten most of the decent middleweight contenders on the way up (Zuniga, Zertuche, Miranda). Kelly's staying busy en route to fighting more tough guys (Rubio). Lockett will land some good shots early I reckon, so it'll be worth watching. Both Pavlik and Lockett hit correctly, and neither are very agile so chances are a lot of har dleather will fly and it could be that neither guy gets out of the way of too many punches (though I expect Pavlik to use his ability to block shots a bit more).

I was one of the ppl who believed in Pavlik when he was on the way up, so I'm glad to see him doing well. He's earned his platform by learning in hard fights. I'm also glad that allegedly got one of his fighters the shot, so that it will be shown in the UK. This seems to have got Warrem and Arum working together, with the implication that if Pavlik does the business he'll fight Calzaghe, who's been Setanta's flagship fighter pre-Haye.

It's just a shame that Pavlik won't be able to make 160-pounds for too long because names like Quillin, Greene, Barker etc should be able to really give good fights when they're ready.

Terry D wrote:I think it is a step in the right direction. Joe Greene and Peter Quillin (if he is still at middle then) may be the future of the division but for now Pavlik just needed a first defence as he has not fought at the weight since September and I daresay wants a highlight KO to settle back into the divison. Lockett gets a mandatory ut of the way and gives Pavlik a little wiggle room with at least one of the governing bodies.

If Pavlik takes 6-months then it would be a disgrace but for now it is the right fight at the right time.

I would like to see him in with AAA or Sturm next. Unfortunately these days contenders consider themselves Champions and that holds divisions up.

I just really want to see a fighter dominate a divison and Pavlik is making the right moves. Even his minor jump in weight removed one potential obstacle in Taylor. Given what happens when a big guy comes down in weight I think this is a solid fight.

I'm actually looking forward to it as I think Lockett might be able to deck Pavlik briefly.

I agree that it is good he is getting his mandatory out of the way.... but I will be a little annoyed if he fights Lockett then moves up two weight devisions to fight Calzaghe - without really proving himself the absolute top dog. If he intends to stick around at Middle, then yep - get the Mandatory out of the way.

However, have to say - I think Tito vs Pavlik still has a bit of intrigue, I think Pavlik has the style to give Tito a chance. While I agree, Tito isn't worthy - I'd give him more of a chance than Lockett and I think he is just as worthy.

ebeneezer wrote:

he has nothing like the natural talent/athleticism of Jermaine

What athleticism? Jermaine was pretty average in every facet of the game. No great hand speed, no great power and horrible footwork. But he's black so he must have athleticism

You could probably teach most boxers Pavlik's moves but not his determination.

Or his vicious knockout power.

You [really] don't think that Jermaine Taylor is more athletic than Pavlik? He was clearly outboxing Kelly in the rematch (in short spurts which he couldn't maintain) due to his superior handspeed & use of combinations which his physical advantages made possible.

I've only seen about half a dozen of Pavlik's fights but i've yet to see a one punch KO which would indicate 'vicious knockout power'. He batters his opponents into submission with a vigoruous non-stop assault. I'd say his chin is probably his greatest natural attribute and i'd put a fair bit of his resilience down to his self belief.

Pavlik reminds me of Mark kaylor, with less skills but a better chin.He's very exciting and likeable, yet hardly a real talent.

Quite amazing that he is the man at middleweight.Really shows how crap the division is right now.

Shirow wrote: You [really] don't think that Jermaine Taylor is more athletic than Pavlik?

Not by any great length, no.

Arbachakov wrote:Pavlik reminds me of Mark kaylor, with less skills but a better chin.He's very exciting and likeable, yet hardly a real talent.

Quite amazing that he is the man at middleweight.Really shows how crap the division is right now.

He is very likeable due to his style and honest approach.

Amazing? Maybe, burt he beat the man that beat THE man. Lets be fair, theMW division hasnt been the best fora long long time.

That's true.Even for most of Hopkins reign it was poor.

Almost all of it, credible top (top) class challengers during his 10 years?

Wales wrote:Almost all of it, credible top (top) class challengers during his 10 years?

Hopkins' comp wasn't the greatest - but, Harry Simon aside, he beat every meaningful geniune challenger during his reign. You cannot really fault it. It was a much more thorough cleaning out of a devision than Joe Calzaghe did at Super Middle.

Lockett, unfortunately will fall into the Morrade Haakar bracket, for the Pavlik eras - mandatory, but hardly consisdered in the top 30 independently.

my issue wasnt with his (nards) opposition, it was with the statement that it was "amazing" pavlik was the man. How many from hopkins' era (his defences), trinidad aside, wouldve started strong fav against kelly?

my issue wasnt with his (nards) opposition, it was with the statement that it was "amazing" pavlik was the man. How many from hopkins' era (his defences), trinidad aside, wouldve started strong fav against kelly?

Wales wrote:my issue wasnt with his (nards) opposition, it was with the statement that it was "amazing" pavlik was the man. How many from hopkins' era (his defences), trinidad aside, wouldve started strong fav against kelly?

Its a little hard to assess, untill Kelly proves himself a little more. He could be the next big thing, or he could be the next Jeff Lacy.

But I see what you are saying and I agree.

Hardly comparable with Lacy Stu, Pavlik has already beaten the perceived top man at Middleweight twice. And he's clearly not as one dimensional.

i relate pavlik to tito trinidad, very hurtable but not too beatable !!!

ask kevin leushing !!

rhino222 wrote:i relate pavlik to tito trinidad, very hurtable but not too beatable !!!

ask kevin leushing !!

I see the similarity. One difference I'd like to point out is that Pavlik far surpasses Trinidad for in-ring intelligence.

nickd wrote:Hardly comparable with Lacy Stu, Pavlik has already beaten the perceived top man at Middleweight twice. And he's clearly not as one dimensional.

Yes he had beaten the percieved top man in the devision, but lets not forget 1) Should Taylor have got the decision vs Hopkins, Should Taylor have got the decision vs Wright, Should Taylor have got the decision vs Spinks. He was hardly a dominanting champion.... the lineal champion yes, but then so was Shannon Briggs.

Okay, I am purposely going OTT there - but my point is.... Taylor vs Abraham and even Taylor vs Sturm would have been very tough fights to call. He might have been #1, but he was hardly convincing - kinda like Ricardo Mayorga at Welter a few years back.... I confidently picked Pavlik to beat him first time, and was DISSAPOINTED in how Pavlik looked outclassed for large periods of the first fight.

As for Kelly's ability - sorry I disagree, untill I see Pavlik freely throwing body shots - then no, I think he is very one dimensional. There is no head movement, he stand up tall and wings away with head shots. Nobody questioned Lacy before the Calzaghe fight, yes he was slow and he didn't have a jab - but he had nice head movement and was quite an elusive target (albeit against slow, old fighters).

I could be wrong, but I think he needs to prove himself first.

He's fit, strong, fairly quick and can whack - he's not an Edison Miranda.... but he looks decidely beatable, there is no variety. He comes forward throwing usually one two's to the head, occasional uppercut. He's very predicable. I think Kessler and Calzaghe wipe the floor with him. Unless he develops.

Pavlik reminds of a faster, more enthusiastic, Howard Eastman.... Eastman was one dimensional also.

That's all well and good Terry but can you answer how Fitz did his shift?