Page 1 of 1
NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 07 Feb 2015, 07:09
by amwsnw
Can anyone give me an update regarding Sam Soliman's physical condition or his boxing future?
The IBF have ordered Sturm and Ndam fight for their vacant middleweight belt which was held by Sam until he was beaten by Taylor after injury his leg.
Sturms last fight was at Super Middle and he seems o be chasing some money fights at that weight.
I would have thought Soliman v Ndam would have been the obvious, if Sam is willing and able.
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 07 Feb 2015, 08:17
by AntonS
IBF nor any other organization can ORDER who contests vacant title
In this case title is exactly that, as is #2 spot, which indicates elimination bout is required to fill it & subsequent winner will do battle with #1
Sam is currently rated #7, which may or may not qualify him to contest eliminator.
However, if he's got a promoter to do it, no doubt IBF will come good - Sanction $ is a $ ;;-)
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 07 Feb 2015, 09:32
by Sweet P
I'm pretty sure the top 2 highest ranked fighter's are offered the title shot. If either refuses it gets offered to next in line. And goes on until 2 eligible boxers can contest it.
The 2 highest are Ndam at #1 and Sturm at #3.
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 07 Feb 2015, 18:09
by bogan whisperer
amwsnw wrote:Can anyone give me an update regarding Sam Soliman's physical condition or his boxing future?
The IBF have ordered Sturm and Ndam fight for their vacant middleweight belt which was held by Sam until he was beaten by Taylor after injury his leg.
Sturms last fight was at Super Middle and he seems o be chasing some money fights at that weight.
I would have thought Soliman v Ndam would have been the obvious, if Sam is willing and able.
There are no-nothings here like Da Goose who claim Soliman threw the fight against Taylor by feinting his injury. Perhaps you should ask them

Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 07 Feb 2015, 23:31
by DA GOOSE
Soliman feigned the injury not feinted it

N'Dam and Sturm are the 2 highest ranked contenders.
http://content.usatoday.com/sportsdata/ ... f-rankings
Sam is ranked 7th. Money has a lot to do with it IMO.
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 08 Feb 2015, 07:54
by amwsnw
Im not going to get into an argument regarding the claims Sams injury was BS!! Can anyone tell me how he is recovering.
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 08 Feb 2015, 17:07
by AntonS
Sweet P wrote:I'm pretty sure the top 2 highest ranked fighter's are offered the title shot. If either refuses it gets offered to next in line. And goes on until 2 eligible boxers can contest it.
The 2 highest are Ndam at #1 and Sturm at #3.
Fail to understand vacant contenders spots. e.g. Ganoy vs Angulo - IBF lightweight eliminator for #2 spot in 2008
http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_ ... &cat=boxer Angulo stopped Ganoy in 4th & filled the spot albeit was over the weight limit. In the end it was waste of sanction $$$
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 09 Feb 2015, 02:41
by buster007
da goose is just trolling.
u r wasting your time having a proper discussion with the fool.
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 09 Feb 2015, 17:22
by bogan whisperer
buster007 wrote:da goose is just trolling.
u r wasting your time having a proper discussion with the fool.
He still thinks Soliman threw the Taylor fight
That is an indictment on his sanity ;;-)
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 09 Feb 2015, 19:31
by ClivePatrickLyons
MY GOD YOU REALLY NEED HELP, YOU SHOULD GO TO MELBOURNE SEE SAM AND TELL HIM TO HIS FACE WHAT U THINK
GO ON I DARE U.

Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 09 Feb 2015, 23:00
by buster007
he doesn't think that.
he's just trolling.
he thinks it makes him look cool ffs.
he is a try hard fool, lol.
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 10 Feb 2015, 00:21
by bogan whisperer
buster007 wrote:he doesn't think that.
he's just trolling.
he thinks it makes him look cool ffs.
he is a try hard fool, lol.
Much like you seem to be doing elsewhere today. Not sure why you felt the need to stick your beak in over there? You are only further encouraging the trolls by siding with them.
I'm just stirring up a hornet's nest over there and now I'm just going to walk away and leave them to it

Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 10 Feb 2015, 04:10
by buster007
not siding with anyone. they r grubs.
I put up with u for a while cause u were giving it to the trolls, but now u r as bad as them.
there is too much trolling there and u r helping to keep it festering.
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 10 Feb 2015, 04:27
by bogan whisperer
buster007 wrote:not siding with anyone. they r grubs.
I put up with u for a while cause u were giving it to the trolls, but now u r as bad as them.
there is too much trolling there and u r helping to keep it festering.
That forum is beyond repair. I can't believe you have posted there for years because you just get stomped daily. It's embarrassing to watch.
I tried to discuss boxing there initially. But it was a pointless exercise. Then I decided to give as good as I got for a while. But having decided 'the place is a total waste of time for discussing boxing I just gave them heaps and walked away. They will remain in a frenzy for days. Meanwhile I'll just sit back and laugh at them. Couldn't care whether I post there again or not

Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 10 Feb 2015, 04:43
by buster007
u got banned huh?
lol.
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 10 Feb 2015, 04:51
by bogan whisperer
buster007 wrote:u got banned huh?
lol.

I doubt it. Nobody gets banned from there
The trolls there break every rule of decency known to man and don't get banned. As if they'd ban me

Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 13 Feb 2015, 02:14
by DA GOOSE
Sturm has said no. BJS has said no if David Lemieux says no Sam could get a shot.
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 13 Feb 2015, 02:37
by amwsnw
let's hope that happens. Is Sam back in training yet?
Re: NDAM V STURM'- Why not Sam
Posted: 13 Feb 2015, 05:26
by dberry
amwsnw wrote:let's hope that happens. Is Sam back in training yet?
Yes.