BoxRec

tonyevs wrote:
Hindsight has made alot of people experts(in their own minds anyway ) .. Prescott didn`t look anything special in the youtube clips I`d watched ... very,very crude and basic..

I wan't impressed with Prescott in the youtube vids but when i saw Prescott hitting those pads just before the actual fight i knew Khan was going to be in trouble

Chuck Gardner - FRank Bruno

Gardner got a payday I guess, but Bruno was ridiculed

MightyWarrior wrote:Marvis Frazier v Larry Holmes.
Then Mike Tyson, just incase he didn't get the message first time round.

You can't beat these 2 shouts IMO.

Marvis was criminally mismanaged by his father IMO.

Joe seemed to want to turn Marvis into a 'mini-me', but Marvis was always more comfortable as 'boxer' & just didn't have the tools to be a pressure fighter like his father was.

Khan vs Prescott reminded me of Naseem Hamed vs Daniel Alicea, in that Alicea was a relative unknown (ok he'd outpointed Peter Judson in the UK prior to Hamed), had a good record (15-0 13 kos) and was extremely keen to take his chance. But like Prescott, had KO'd a lot of nobodies.
The fight went almost perfectly to script, Alicea was dangerous enough to drop Hamed, but Hamed regained his composure and took control of the fight, ending it in round 2.
Since that fight, Alicea has gone on to do nothing of note, a couple of NABF/NABO titles here and there, but generally accepted as below world class. But imagine what people would have thought he was capable of if he'd been able to tag the Prince again and end it in the first?
So regarding Khan, it was a dangerous fight to take but it was generally accepted that Khan would have too much for Prescott. A win would have shown that Khan could defeat fellow title- hungry younger competitors, plus the KO record that Prescott brought to the ring would have silenced the critics that said Khan would only fight feather fisted opponents.
Unless his 53 second experience with Khan transforms Prescotts ability overnight, I would imagine his career will go down the same route as Aliceas did.

Hindsight is a wonderful thing,i thought it was going to be a fairly easy fight for Khan,remember,it was a huge step up in class for Prescott,which he passed with flying colours,unlike Khan.

I can see Prescott looking like another Ricardo Torres, dangerous but severely lacking the talent at the highest level.

The incompetence in that fight was entirely down to Khan, since when would anyone with any sense rush in head first towards somebody who had knocked out all but two of his opponents? Not to mention 15 of those KO's came within the first 4 rounds so does that not immediately make somebody think "this guy is at his most dangerous early on, so I'll keep out of range and not get over eager" it's not Warrens fault. At least Khan now knows that a puncher can do him so shouldn't that be part of his learning curve to try and develop a defensive style so he can avoid or block as much as possible.

Banjo, Khan didn't "rush head first" at Prescott, he kept the distance and the only mistake I thought he made was that he threw that left-hook with no caution and no defence. He wasn't overly aggressive in that fight, he was just chinny.

Yeah Khan kept his guard pretty high but left himself wide open everytime he threw anything, but then after the first knockdown tried to stand and trade as Prescott surged in.

Dioufy wrote:Banjo, Khan didn't "rush head first" at Prescott, he kept the distance and the only mistake I thought he made was that he threw that left-hook with no caution and no defence. He wasn't overly aggressive in that fight, he was just chinny.

Corrected - he LED with a left hook, rather than box properly and set up attacks with a jab he went looking for the money shot and got sparked. You'd have thought that after getting bowled over by two super featherweights that he'd show a bit of respect to somebody with almost as many KO's as he had fights, sure those KO's may have been against South American journeymen but the average South/Central American journeyman is a tougher competitor than a British journeyman.

I'll say it again, it ain't incompetent matchmaking it was a risk that had to be taken because if he wants to be a world champion then he's going to have to fight opponents who are going to take his punches and throw bombs back at him.

He led with the left-hook but it was a mistake more than "rushing head first" at a puncher. Khan threw a few jabs, and the got wobbled himself by one. He made a mistake, but he wasn't headhunting Prescott, he just lost control of the basics.

Prescott looked a BAD match. A few of us where saying it before the fight on here, and got 80/1 on the first 5 rounds thanks v much

With a massive talent like Khan, few and far between in the UK, and an obviously fragile chin, it was a daft risk to take on a unknown potential big power puncher like that. Why bother with the risk, when it's zero reward? FW should ( and usualy would ) go for a known risk in those circumstances...

Prescott looked good to a few people on here before the fight, and the vast majority expected an easy Khan win, myself included. Most of the betting was going on a Khan win in a specific round, whereas not many people plumped for Prescott, and the odds justified that.

the reason prescott was bad is cos none of us had ever heard of him.

u don't put an unproven guy like that in with a prospect.

if prescott had made a bit of a name for himself then fair enuff.

hitman_hatton1 wrote:the reason prescott was bad is cos none of us had ever heard of him.

u don't put an unproven guy like that in with a prospect.

if prescott had made a bit of a name for himself then fair enuff.

What do you mean, that happens all the time. It's just that normally the expected happens and we all moan that the opponant was a pushover with a padded record. Now Prescott had a largely padded record, but turned out not to be a pushover.

I agree, Mr ArtOfWar.

I really cannot understand why on earth the Amir Khan and Bredis Prescott fight is being mentioned in the same thread as the most incompetent piece of matchmaking ever - the only thing that happened that night was Amir Khan was exposed big time - and if anyone thinks it wont happen again when he steps into a world class fight they are mistaken.

Spud wrote:I really cannot understand why on earth the Amir Khan and Bredis Prescott fight is being mentioned in the same thread as the most incompetent piece of matchmaking ever - the only thing that happened that night was Amir Khan was exposed big time - and if anyone thinks it wont happen again when he steps into a world class fight they are mistaken.

And Khan and Fwank lost a shit load of money in the process.

KO Artist wrote: What about Paul Hodkinson v Gregorio Vargas

Bad call - this was a mandatory.

Nigel Benn had a lot of trouble with Sugar Boy Malinga the first time, so to fight him when Benn was a superstar was a ridiculous decision.

KO Artist wrote:

MightyWarrior wrote:Marvis Frazier v Larry Holmes.
Then Mike Tyson, just incase he didn't get the message first time round.

I agree to an extent, but Marvis got $750,000 to fight Larry and $400,000 to fight Tyson.

Watched the Holmes fight on youtube last night. Holmes had all the tools and then some. What a great fighter he was.

What about Paul Hodkinson v Gregorio Vargas

That's not bad money, but poor old Marvis was brutaly exposed on prime time to earn it. Lovely guy Marvis, far too nice for the pro game really. His Dad genuinely thought he was going to win those two fights as well!

Larry was a helluva fighter, funnily enough you've reminded me as I was going to look it up on youtube as well. Remember Larry waving the ref in to rescue Marvis, who he'd known since he was a small kid.

banjo wrote:the average South/Central American journeyman is a tougher competitor than a British journeyman.

What makes you say that?

Just check out Prescott's opponents on boxrec. A lot of them seem to end their fights in defeat by KO on a regular basic, like this chap whom Prescott fought less than a year ago - http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hu ... &cat=boxer 10 losses, no wins, all losses by knockout ( 80% of them in the first 2 rounds).

I get the impression that many of these foriegn opponent/journeymen types are knocked out and stopped on a regular basis.

Sure, British journeymen don't win very often, in fact they make their living out of regular fights in which they are easily outpointed. However, they are TOUGH as hell- most of them going the distance 9 times out of 10.


Or put directly- if Prescott had built his record against the likes of Peter Buckley, Jonny Greaves, James Tucker etc then he would be much less likley to have so many KOs on his record!

whicker wrote:

banjo wrote:the average South/Central American journeyman is a tougher competitor than a British journeyman.

What makes you say that?

The talent pool for Latino lightweights is huge, there's fecking loads of them, which is why the average boxer tend to be a step up from the norm. Who'd you think's going to be harder, the average bloke out of four blokes from Scotland, or the average bloke who's climbed his way out of a barrio or favela & lived in crippling poverty & fought amongst dozens & dozens of fighters all trying to make it out like that?

Stupid remark.

EDIT: Whicker's remark, I'm agreeing with Banjo!

Datsue wrote:

whicker wrote:

banjo wrote:the average South/Central American journeyman is a tougher competitor than a British journeyman.

What makes you say that?

The talent pool for Latino lightweights is huge, there's fecking loads of them, which is why the average boxer tend to be a step up from the norm. Who'd you think's going to be harder, the average bloke out of four blokes from Scotland, or the average bloke who's climbed his way out of a barrio or favela & lived in crippling poverty & fought amongst dozens & dozens of fighters all trying to make it out like that?

Stupid remark.

EDIT: Whicker's remark, I'm agreeing with Banjo!

As I said, take a look at the records of some of the fighters Precott beat, they tend to get knocked out on a regular basis. Is this a "step up from the norm?"

Just go to Precott's record, and work the way through the records iof his opponents- http://www.boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?hu ... &cat=boxer

His opponents are typically guys that lose most, sometimes ALL their fights, by early knockouts.

But yeah- there may (or may not) be a massive wealth of talent in Colombia (39 pros, 4 less than Britain) at Lightweight - but the guys Prescott has knocked out don't exactly seem great examples of that talent.

Must be the best line Joe ever came up with - that Frank matched Khan with a...'crazy hungry Colombian who'll probably kill you for 10 grand and has a 90 per cent knockout record'. Hilarious

frank bruno vs jesse ferguson,i went to the bog came back down the stairs and it was all over

On paper Khan/Prescott looked a bad one for Khan to take but when you looked at Prescotts record he had KOd several bums who hadnt even won a fight. Khan knew Prescott could bang so had he boxed him and used his skills he could have got a points win. Arrogance lost him the fight, thinking he could blast Prescott out early. Prescott thought it might take 4 rounds to catch Khan, but Khan played right into his hands and the opportunty for Prescott came within seconds of the fight starting. Actually it wasnt incompetant matchmaking at all, its a fight that Khan should have won. He shouldnt have even thought about stopping Prescott, clever defensive boxing was what was needed.