BoxRec

Still ticked about this David Lemieux debacle.


In a way it is a topic for this forum.
Having a great appreciation of how the old masters brought along and nurtured a fighter. Cardinal rule BEND BUT DON'T BREAK!
Im sure the respective ghosts of Cus Damato-Deacon Jack Hurley-Pop Foster are rolling over in their respective graves.
Here you gotta blue chip kid. Hes 22 years old!! He hasn't got any rounds in in 14 freekin months!! Caked with rust!
And his thrown into an 12 round acid test deluxe. Its almost a mathematical formula to get yer kid in BIG TROUBLE come round seven.
It never wouldda happed if he had real managers.

slakka wrote:Still ticked about this David Lemieux debacle.


In a way it is a topic for this forum.
Having a great appreciation of how the old masters brought along and nurtured a fighter. Cardinal rule BEND BUT DON'T BREAK!
Im sure the respective ghosts of Cus Damato-Deacon Jack Hurley-Pop Foster are rolling over in their respective graves.
Here you gotta blue chip kid. Hes 22 years old!! He hasn't got any rounds in in 14 freekin months!! Caked with rust!
And his thrown into an 12 round acid test deluxe. Its almost a mathematical formula to get yer kid in BIG TROUBLE come round seven.
It never wouldda happed if he had real managers.

He was in trouble from the first round when shots that had been flattening the guys he'd built his record on just bounced off Rubio's chin.

I knew I'd done my dough right then...

Yup, always the danger with hyped 'punchers'. Which he was, make no mistake.

Sooner or later, they have to fight someone who can take their punches without flinching, its just the way it works.

In these circumstances, the quality will always rise to the top. Too easy nowadays to build someone up, fighting pretty non-descript opponents, impressive KO resume, public beginning to buy into the hype, only to be found out.

Its not about older boxing managers, its about promoters/managers trying to milk what they can, early on and hope they luck out with these kids proving that they can fight.

If not, move onto building another meal ticket, with an impressive record as stupid TV, because they dont know any better, will always go for it and pay.

Until they lose.

Brunson, Lemieux, Kirkland....all the same....those that have gone before and those that will inevitably come.

Lemieux is only 22 and he was easily shutting out a very tough opponent for 5 rounds. He might have been hyped too much, but I still think there is a good chance he comes back to find success. To give a current example, David Haye was knocked out in 4 by Carl Thompson but look where he is now.

I take your point, although Haye was going all out to KO Thompson and had him on the verge of KO on quite a few occasions.

A little different to Rubio - Lemieux, but I can see why you used that example.

He might come back. After a defeat like this, it will interesting to see how both Kirkland and Lemieux fight.

Haye retained his self confidence, he is a genuine fighter at heart. Maybe these 2 will prove the same?

This is an abrasive post but if your not troubled by 14 months ring inactivity then before that five rounds back in 09
somethings lacking in your knowledge of the game

I don't think its about lacking anything, to be honest.

Time to step up after, quite frankly, piss poor opposition (1 or 2 were ok, nothing more).

Just how long, how many more pointless KO's are needed?

It wasn't the 14 month layoff that was the problem, it was the level of opponent.

He lost, now is the time to step up and prove his ability, not bitch about 'excuses' and 14 months.

They could have said no to the match, but felt confident (with no justification - KO'ing some stiffs and a couple of C level wins obviously can do that).

slakka wrote:This is an abrasive post but if your not troubled by 14 months ring inactivity then before that five rounds back in 09
somethings lacking in your knowledge of the game

Not sure what you are trying to say that is different to what others are saying.

Anyway, he wasn't inactive for 14 months.

He had 5 fights in the previous 14 months.

Sure, he blew them away early but that can happen when you are very heavy handed and fighting guys outside the top 30.

I think prior to the fights, Smichet and Camacho Jnr would have been expected to go more than a round or two. Ayala also.

Matchmaking is a hard thing to do successfully; and anyone can be wise after the event.

Good point.

Lemieux has had 6 (SIX) fights in the last 14 months.

Four months prior to the Rubio fight was his last fight, which makes the OP's points even less significant.

Excuse me but why is this in BOTP? Did Lemiuex decide to retire on his "massive fortunes" from prizefighting because Rubio "exposed" him as "shot"?

bengulnaci1 wrote:Good point.

Lemieux has had 6 (SIX) fights in the last 14 months.

Four months prior to the Rubio fight was his last fight, which makes the OP's points even less significant.

I was assuming u wouldn't count any one or two round meaningless quickies=a fighter getting some very badly needed rounds in.
Sigh!

slakka wrote:I was assuming u wouldn't count any one or two round meaningless quickies=a fighter getting some very badly needed rounds in.
Sigh!

So because, he has had blow outs pretty much throughout his career, that has got him noticed, stirred up interest, got him some hype, a fan base, tv deals, magazine covers / interviews, good purses, world rankings, all of which influenced him and his team he was ready; how is this is his managements fault?

Not sure what your arguing. He shouldn't had all those easy blowouts? If so, then yes, totally agree. They proved nothing.

And as for ring rust, I dont accept that at all, he has been constantly training, sparring and fighting for the past 14 months, so where's this ring rust come from?

I could understand your point, if, he had genuinely been inactive ie not fought, not trained or engaged in any activity.

This was not the case. So again, where is the problem? At the moment, the guy isn't good enough, no shame in that and thats not saying that he won't be better because of it.

This can't go on and on but it will. .Theres no substitute for a young prospect getting rounds in.
There was the early part of Hollyfields career where he was collapsing after 5 or 6 rounds. He got managed through it very skillfully.
I just watched the Lemieux-Naugler battle from Feb of last year. 10 tough rounds, good matchmaking!
If he were my kid I woudda had him remached with same. Thats what the old timers woudda done.

No disputing that mate

Today's 'winning' formula:

Part 1

- Get a guy who has some skill.
- Pad him out with meaningless 1 or 2 KO's.
- Get local exposure, local fanbase, progress to nation fanbase, catching the eye of the TV Execs, who just look at records (Unbeaten & KO's!!)
- Some more padding against C / B level and washed up former contenders in lighter divisions.
- Get a good ranking
- Select a 'beatable' foe in the top 15 ('Rubio, he was pulled out against Pavlik, we can take him!')
- Now switch to 'winnable' title or bide your time until one becomes available (maybe even go up or down in divisions to do so).
- Win it
- Defend it against non punchers / aging champs / contenders with flattering rankings .
- Do this 2-3 time, making everyone, the TV Execs, the promoter and the fighter money.
- Lose it to one of the above mentioned fighters, who still show some ambition or are young, in their prime but have actually learned lessons by losing fights (Except TV Execs and promoters / matchmakers nowadays, are too stupid to see anything other than ratings, the big '0' and £££'s).

Part 2

- Return again, probably in a higher weight class (as it was 'probably' down weight issues, why he lost )
- Win a few more, fanbase and TV ratings ensures another possible shot at a title and lose that brutally and never be the same.
- Become a written off opponent, for other 'up and comers', the next meal ticket.
- Maybe cause a surprise here and there, but with confidence shot to sh!t, suffer some more stoppages and then slip away.

F Warren, over in the UK, is a master of this.

Tip - If you want an unbiased, informed opinion, go with what you see. Commentators won't be negative, the Promoter definately won't be negative, ditto to the panel of 'experts'. the fighters management and usually the fighter, himself.

I learned a long, long time ago to just ignore what anyone says, as its never in their interests to say otherwise.

slakka wrote:This can't go on and on but it will. .Theres no substitute for a young prospect getting rounds in.
There was the early part of Hollyfields career where he was collapsing after 5 or 6 rounds. He got managed through it very skillfully.
I just watched the Lemieux-Naugler battle from Feb of last year. 10 tough rounds, good matchmaking!
If he were my kid I woudda had him remached with same. Thats what the old timers woudda done.