BoxRec

He's facing 40-year-old Troy Lowry who was KO'ed in 1 in his last fight (against a seven-fight prospect) and who has lost his last five, four of those seeing him failing to last the distance:

http://www.fightnews.com/Boxing/andy-le ... ed-2-61587

oh no what have you done.........

J wrote:oh no what have you done.........

Will I get Slapped, Banged or Whalloped?

its a keep busy fight , he only fought two weeks ago , he should have a decent test after this one though

It's not a disgrace, it's the norm.

G0mez wrote:It's not a disgrace, it's the norm.

Gomez, I'm sorry, but even by boxing standards that is not the norm

moorser wrote:its a keep busy fight , he only fought two weeks ago , he should have a decent test after this one though

How is it even a fight, let alone a 'keep busy' fight?!

Deserter wrote:

J wrote:oh no what have you done.........

Will I get Slapped, Banged or Whalloped?

all three probably and then the others will turn up to do you again..... David Haye styleeee

He hasn't won a fight in 5 years. A very poor opponent even as a keep busy fight.

Troy Lowry: http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

any lee is a joke.

Marvin Hagler fought this guy in his 24th fight.

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

STFU and stop whining. It's better for him to stay active than to become stagnant in the gym. It keeps him motivated and in shape and gives him a few quid in his pocket to boot. I'm sure if they could have got a better guy on such short notice they would have.

Yawn!!

If this was his only fight this year I would be worried.

But its not, he'll have more fights in the space of five months than Darren 'worse than his bite' Barker has had in two years.

Keep threading Andy until the door opens!

slapbangwhallop wrote:Yawn!!

If this was his only fight this year I would be worried.

But its not, he'll have more fights in the space of five months than Darren 'worse than his bite' Barker has had in two years.

Keep threading Andy until the door opens!

How are these fights Slap, given they're not remotely competitive. How will he benefit from this match?

Deserter wrote:

slapbangwhallop wrote:Yawn!!

If this was his only fight this year I would be worried.

But its not, he'll have more fights in the space of five months than Darren 'worse than his bite' Barker has had in two years.

Keep threading Andy until the door opens!

How are these fights Slap, given they're not remotely competitive. How will he benefit from this match?

See my post. It really shouldn't be that difficult to comprehend.

ImElvis666 wrote:Marvin Hagler fought this guy in his 24th fight.

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

STFU and stop whining. It's better for him to stay active than to become stagnant in the gym. It keeps him motivated and in shape and gives him a few quid in his pocket to boot. I'm sure if they could have got a better guy on such short notice they would have.

You utter fool - that's the classic example of two wrongs not making a right. And completely illogical regarding staying active rather than stagnant, as this 'fight' will not be remotely competitive, so all the normal benefits you'd associate with staying active will be noticeable only by their absence.
Are you really trying to argue that he's better off doing this rather than having a slightly longer period between fights and instead facing fighters who are going to at least give him rounds and stretch him a bit?

ImElvis666 wrote:

Deserter wrote:

slapbangwhallop wrote:Yawn!!

If this was his only fight this year I would be worried.

But its not, he'll have more fights in the space of five months than Darren 'worse than his bite' Barker has had in two years.

Keep threading Andy until the door opens!

How are these fights Slap, given they're not remotely competitive. How will he benefit from this match?

See my post. It really shouldn't be that difficult to comprehend.

The only struggle with comprehension is coming from you... remarkable that anyone, even if they are a fan, is trying to justify this career route. I genuinely find it utterly staggering.

Deserter wrote:

ImElvis666 wrote:Marvin Hagler fought this guy in his 24th fight.

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

STFU and stop whining. It's better for him to stay active than to become stagnant in the gym. It keeps him motivated and in shape and gives him a few quid in his pocket to boot. I'm sure if they could have got a better guy on such short notice they would have.

You utter fool - that's the classic example of two wrongs not making a right. And completely illogical regarding staying active rather than stagnant, as this 'fight' will not be remotely competitive, so all the normal benefits you'd associate with staying active will be noticeable only by their absence.
Are you really trying to argue that he's better off doing this rather than having a slightly longer period between fights and instead facing fighters who are going to at least give him rounds and stretch him a bit?

ZZZZZZZ.

He can fight someone better in the same period of time as he would have had he not taken this fight (if he can get someone decent that is) I'm not going to repeat my post regarding the benefits of taking this fight. Staying motivated is very important. Go ask any fighter on here. A good record (even if it's totally padded) always helps marketability also. It's better than being inactive.

Deserter wrote:

ImElvis666 wrote:Marvin Hagler fought this guy in his 24th fight.

http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer

STFU and stop whining. It's better for him to stay active than to become stagnant in the gym. It keeps him motivated and in shape and gives him a few quid in his pocket to boot. I'm sure if they could have got a better guy on such short notice they would have.

You utter fool - that's the classic example of two wrongs not making a right. And completely illogical regarding staying active rather than stagnant, as this 'fight' will not be remotely competitive, so all the normal benefits you'd associate with staying active will be noticeable only by their absence.
Are you really trying to argue that he's better off doing this rather than having a slightly longer period between fights and instead facing fighters who are going to at least give him rounds and stretch him a bit?

you think it would be better for him to be sitting at home crawling up the wall?

Deserter wrote:

ImElvis666 wrote:

Deserter wrote: How are these fights Slap, given they're not remotely competitive. How will he benefit from this match?

See my post. It really shouldn't be that difficult to comprehend.

The only struggle with comprehension is coming from you... remarkable that anyone, even if they are a fan, is trying to justify this career route. I genuinely find it utterly staggering.

I fully condone staying busy if you can't get a good fight. You'd be a moron to prefer to see someone stay out of the ring for God knows how long until that fight comes.

ImElvis666 wrote:Staying motivated is very important. Go ask any fighter on here. A good record (even if it's totally padded) always helps marketability also. It's better than being inactive.

You're just embarrassing yourself now. I'm more than happy for any fighter on here to tell me how if they were in Andy Lee's position they'd be able to stay "motivated" fighting a 40-year-old on a five-fight losing streak
And you're right, his marketability will go through the roof fighting in off-TV bouts in the prestigious Horseshoe Casino in the boxing mecca that is Hammond, Indiana.
You couldn't make this up...

ImElvis666 wrote:I'm sure if they could have got a better guy on such short notice they would have.

I am quite sure they could have found someone better than this guy if they wanted to.

Deserter wrote:

ImElvis666 wrote:Staying motivated is very important. Go ask any fighter on here. A good record (even if it's totally padded) always helps marketability also. It's better than being inactive.

You're just embarrassing yourself now. I'm more than happy for any fighter on here to tell me how if they were in Andy Lee's position they'd be able to stay "motivated" fighting a 40-year-old on a five-fight losing streak
And you're right, his marketability will go through the roof fighting in off-TV bouts in the prestigious Horseshoe Casino in the boxing mecca that is Hammond, Indiana.
You couldn't make this up...

Christ. You really have no idea about the business of boxing. How many guys with padded records got a big fight because they had an impressive looking record to the casual fan? Check out the guy that recently fought for an interim belt in the very division that Andy Lee is in. His level of opponents were stellar. (I'll let you figure that one out for yourself ;;-) )

And sure, go ask if they would rather rot in the gym for a year or fight four bums instead. I'm pretty confident they'll back up my argument.

Oh and because laughing at you means my opinion is right.

Horse wrote:

ImElvis666 wrote:I'm sure if they could have got a better guy on such short notice they would have.

I am quite sure they could have found someone better than this guy if they wanted to.

If they could then I would criticise him also. I give him the benefit of the doubt, it was only announced about 2 weeks ago.

Deserter wrote:

ImElvis666 wrote:Staying motivated is very important. Go ask any fighter on here. A good record (even if it's totally padded) always helps marketability also. It's better than being inactive.

You're just embarrassing yourself now. I'm more than happy for any fighter on here to tell me how if they were in Andy Lee's position they'd be able to stay "motivated" fighting a 40-year-old on a five-fight losing streak
And you're right, his marketability will go through the roof fighting in off-TV bouts in the prestigious Horseshoe Casino in the boxing mecca that is Hammond, Indiana.
You couldn't make this up...

I think you need to chill out - you seem very aggressive.

Its little more than a glorifed spar for Lee and it keeps him active, in the gym and earning whilst something better comes along.

Chillax, its doesnt bother me to be honest and I doubt it bothers his bank manger either.

Like I said if this was the only fight of the year then you would be justified in your over eager attack - but it aint!

ImElvis666 wrote: Christ. You really have no idea about the business of boxing. How many guys with padded records got a big fight because they had an impressive looking record to the casual fan? Check out the guy that recently fought for an interim belt in the very division that Andy Lee is in. His level of opponents were stellar. (I'll let you figure that one out for yourself ;;-) )
And sure, go ask if they would rather rot in the gym for a year or fight four bums instead. I'm pretty confident they'll back up my argument.
Oh and because laughing at you means my opinion is right.

I'm more than happy to drop the icons but you were the one who opted for a confrontational and ridiculous 'opener' with your teenage texter-style STFU so don't attempt to take the moral high ground now.
With 'Slap', while there might be a bit of good-natured banter, I know I can at least have a decent, reasoned debate.
You on the other hand... and you're at it again with your 'know nothing about the business of boxing' phrase, which only serves to highlight your own lack of knowledge.
I will break it down for you very easily so you can attempt to grasp it. You are saying it is better to fight bums rather than rot in the gym for a year. Where, pray tell me, have I suggested he should do exactly that? I have merely suggested he should be fighting competitive bouts in the public eye for two reasons:
1) Those types of fights will better prepare him for any attempt at honours
2) He is immensely marketable as a fighter, so to have him fighting in tank towns and off TV is utterly illogical and is costing him money in lost earnings
You are acting as if Lee is the most-avoided fighter in history and the only reason he's taking these fights is because he can't get more competitive bouts, which is naive at best and disingenuous at worst.