Page 1 of 4
Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 13:35
by WildWaylon
OK he had an awkward opponent but he didnt look that good to me. Talking about titles and going all the way by MH just doesnt work for me at all. It was a bad match to watch and the KD IMO was just a slip. Barnes went over a couple of times himself and they too were slips. That slip given as a KD helped to give Barnes the win. A draw would have been a fairer result and with Barnes faling to connect most of the time he did nothing to pick up the win. Yet another fighter with no defence, Barnes is supposed to be a big prospect, and 3-0 is a bit early for making pedictions anyway IMO. I like to see fighters who work off the jab not people who look for the big finisher and punch air most of the time. He may be a tough lad but I can see him being outboxed if he cant stop people with a big punch. What do you think about him.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 13:56
by whicker
WildWaylon wrote:A draw would have been a fairer result and with Barnes faling to connect most of the time he did nothing to pick up the win.
I agree- I thought the Latvian looked decent enough, Barnes just looked to be mucking around.
But clearly being the home fighter he was going to get the benefit of the doubt.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 14:01
by Quixall
He will go nowhere at all.......
I don't think he will make it to a British title. He tries to fight like Naz, but has'nt got any of the natural attributes that Naz had. I thought Brendan was talking Shite to be honest and i think the kid is very average.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 14:11
by tonyevs
I guess its way too early to make realistic predictions for him - but..
The hype Ingle was giving him(then again he gives it to all his guys) clearly looked to have given the kid a false worth of himself .. looked to have over done the weights as well as the Naz routine
Also think, if he was given the chance - Jevgenijs Kirillovs could develop into something pretty good also, he has more than held his own with his last two `hot prospect` opponents .. and even begun to take over in the last couple rounds against them.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 14:15
by WildWaylon
Quixall wrote:He will go nowhere at all.......
I don't think he will make it to a British title. He tries to fight like Naz, but has'nt got any of the natural attributes that Naz had. I thought Brendan was talking Shite to be honest and i think the kid is very average.
Sorry you are right it was Ingle NOT meaty Mick.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 14:21
by leeharding
WildWaylon wrote:Quixall wrote:He will go nowhere at all.......
I don't think he will make it to a British title. He tries to fight like Naz, but has'nt got any of the natural attributes that Naz had. I thought Brendan was talking Shite to be honest and i think the kid is very average.
Sorry you are right it was Ingle NOT meaty Mick.
i dont think he will be world champ when hiss opposition steps up hell get out boxed i rekkon he was falling over his ownn feet i do think hes super bad a superbad boxer.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 14:23
by alexpaterson
I wasnt that impressed he carried his hands low which would be ok if he dodged the punches but he got caught with them he looked really lacklustar think the KD won him the fight otherwise I had it a draw but that Latvian guy is good he comes to win he fought Bradley Evans and held him to a draw I think we've found another Youssef Al-Hamidi in this guy akward really hard to look good against and comes to win but all in all i was disappointed in Barnes was expecting him to be unstoppable but he looked very average
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 14:26
by whicker
tonyevs wrote:
Also think, if he was given the chance - Jevgenijs Kirillovs could develop into something pretty good also, he has more than held his own with his last two `hot prospect` opponents .. and even begun to take over in the last couple rounds against them.
I think he will get a decent number of fights as a good, testing opponent- James Tucker for example is similar.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 16:03
by danfoster
I think you're all being very harsh.
The kid has only just turned 18. Yeah, he boxed crap last night but trust me - and anyone who has seen him in the gym or sparred with him - the kid is a bit special. If you don't believe me ask Junior Witter or Kell Brook. I've also seen him absolutely paste very respectable, title level pros in open sparring and in doing show he showed the lot - movement, speed, accuracy, aggression and power.
Got a long way to go but Dominic Ingle does not talk up kids who aren't seriously good. Give him time and watch him develop.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 16:20
by whicker
danfoster wrote:I think you're all being very harsh.
The kid has only just turned 18. Yeah, he boxed crap last night but trust me - and anyone who has seen him in the gym or sparred with him - the kid is a bit special.
Fair point, but then as fans we can really only go off what we see in the ring.
What is his chin like?
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 16:56
by Old bones Ian
The Latvian lad is a tough guy, but i wasn't impressed with Barnes last night. Needs to work on his timing if he going to try and be the Ingle type fighter.
Maybe he was trying too hard last night instead of keep trying to land the 1 punch KO.
A jab wouldn't of gone amiss
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 17:02
by Quixall
danfoster wrote:I think you're all being very harsh.
The kid has only just turned 18. Yeah, he boxed crap last night but trust me - and anyone who has seen him in the gym or sparred with him - the kid is a bit special. If you don't believe me ask Junior Witter or Kell Brook. I've also seen him absolutely paste very respectable, title level pros in open sparring and in doing show he showed the lot - movement, speed, accuracy, aggression and power.
Got a long way to go but Dominic Ingle does not talk up kids who aren't seriously good. Give him time and watch him develop.
I'll give him the benefit of the doubt and it's only his 3rd fight, but frm what i saw last nigh, he has'nt a prayer of even being succesfull at domestic level. Maybe he was so intent on knocking the other kid out, that it made him look like he was lacking basic technique. If what you say is true, then it will be interesting to see how he develops.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 17:10
by whicker
Could just be a little bit of over-confidence. Hard to say at this stage. But the fact remains that , without the knockdown (which wasn't legit) that fight could well have been considered a draw. On the ref's scorecard, it wouldn't have been a draw even without the knockdown, but it was hardly the typical one-sided domination that so many undercard fights are.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 17:20
by STRATHMAN
He is a young lad but no way was that fight 39-36.
It must be murder being a boxer fighting well away from home and getting stitched up by officials. It happens everywhere.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 17:37
by whicker
STRATHMAN wrote:
It must be murder being a boxer fighting well away from home and getting stitched up by officials. It happens everywhere.
At the end of the day, its paid work for him- and probably he can expect more in the future.
I'M NOT saying this is fair- or that he was "Playing to lose" - but that IS the reality of boxing.
That said, I'd like to see Barnes V a British Journeyman who "goes for it" a bit.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 17:44
by emma
danfoster wrote:I think you're all being very harsh.
The kid has only just turned 18. Yeah, he boxed crap last night but trust me - and anyone who has seen him in the gym or sparred with him - the kid is a bit special. If you don't believe me ask Junior Witter or Kell Brook. I've also seen him absolutely paste very respectable, title level pros in open sparring and in doing show he showed the lot - movement, speed, accuracy, aggression and power.
Got a long way to go but Dominic Ingle does not talk up kids who aren't seriously good. Give him time and watch him develop.
Wasnt that what Barry and Duke were saying.. he looks great in the gym but needs to bring it to the ring.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 14 Jun 2009, 18:16
by Abbo
He can't pick a shot, he's inaccurate, he doesnt seem to dig and can be hit easily.
Not for me.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 15 Jun 2009, 04:53
by The-Undisputed
I was looking forward to seeing this kid after reading and hearing good reports about him.
After seeing him saturday night he looked absolutely horrendous! Rushing in, no jab, swinging for the fences with every shot, no set up work, footwork looked crude, no defence what so ever!
Time will tell and i will give him the benefit of the doubt but he looked like a wild Lee Haskins and that is British level at best!
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 15 Jun 2009, 04:54
by Wales
Very dissapointed, although at just 18 allowances can be made.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 15 Jun 2009, 05:44
by teddy007
That was without doubt the WORST fight I have ever seen, he will not make all the time he is with the Ingles and tries to copy that rediculous style, it just doesn't work for him.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 15 Jun 2009, 05:51
by Wales
On the plus side, he can survive in a woods with a canvas bag and a flint.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 15 Jun 2009, 05:52
by My T Sharp
He reminded me of Charles Shephard doing a Naz impression.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 15 Jun 2009, 05:57
by teddy007
Wales wrote:On the plus side, he can survive in a woods with a canvas bag and a flint.

Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 15 Jun 2009, 07:38
by twenty six
I think everyone needs to take a step back.
In hindsight, maybe too much pressure has been put on the kid to perform at his peak from the off.
He turned pro early because he simply couldn't get opponents at the ams resulting in him having to make his debut in Ireland due to the rules.
Fact is he's just turned 18, is very raw, but maybe isn't wise enough yet to be able to absorb the focus on him.
I haven't seen the kid in the gym, but know enough who have, and whose opinion I trust.
Cut him some slack, let him get back in the gym, and hopefully next time out the spotlight wont be so bright on the kid.
The time to judge is after half a dozen fights.
Dominic has put his head above the parapet about this kid, which isn't normally his style, and he doesn't do that without having faith in the fighter.
I wouldn't fancy all that attention at his tender years, aside from getting in the ring and doing the business.
Good luck to the kid.
Re: Is super bad Barnes that good?
Posted: 15 Jun 2009, 07:49
by lurkyshaka
On the basis of his fight at the weekend a resounding NO. He looked sloppy and his balance was pitiful. But its unfair to judge him fully on one poor outing so lets see him fight some more....and lets see him keep his mouth shut until he's beaten anyone of any note. Hard not to root against him when he comes with all that cr*p before the fight and then fights so p*ss poorly in the actual event.
To be fair his opponent the other night was a decent fighter with a very solid chin. With the right guidance he could be something imo. I hope the right people now take him under their wing. Very, very raw, but he has something to work with if the right coaches are found.