BoxRec

Amir Khan wants to fight just about any welterweight aside from Kell Brook. Khan has repeatedly called for a return bout with Danny Garcia, he recently topped a fan poll where Manny Pacquiao asked his fans to pick his next opponent, and now Khan is targeting a revenge fight with the man who scored a contentious decision win over him in the most controversial fight of his career: Lamont Peterson.

Last night Peterson won the WBA “world” welterweight belt with a wide points win over David Avanesyan and Khan immediately called him out.


“Peterson beat Avanesyan love that fight at 147lbs #WBAtitle,” Khan wrote on his twitter page.

A rematch would absolutely prove interesting, for a number of reasons. Firstly, the first fight, won by Peterson via 12 round split decision in December of 2011, was a great action fight. Secondly, it was hugely controversial, what with the infamous “man in the hat” who may or may not have been influencing the scoring officials, and the fact that Peterson later tested positive for testosterone; this ending the planned 2012 return fight.

If ever a fighter has the right to feel aggrieved over a loss it is Khan with this fight. Peterson appeared to benefit greatly from fighting at home in Washington DC, the referee coming under fire for being biased in Peterson’s favour. Khan lost his IBF 140 pound belt in a big upset and the Bolton man has rightly been upset about it ever since. But a rematch could put things right – either with Khan, 31-4(19) gaining revenge or with Peterson proving he is the better fighter fair and square.

Totally agree. It needs to be proven who is best, because I saw the first fight and it was a very poor decision.

I'd have no issue with seeing these two go at it again. First fight was very competitive and fun to watch.

I would prefer Broner v Khan.

I bet on Peterson but thought that amir nicked it. Run it back. Lamont reminds me of Jimmy young for some reason. He's not as good defensively and he has more pop, but they both could grind inside without being knockout fighters. Pretty rare.

I remember it was a pretty close, competitive fight with a bit of holding on Amir's part. I'd watch again. Just hope Amir has a better plan than the first time when Peterson gets inside Khan's range.

What I remember about that fight was Lamont beating the crap out of Khan.. and Khan doing little but running, grabbing, pushing, and holding and being warned 100 times by a tolerant referee.. I would have DQ'd the fouling fairy.. He's one of the most obnoxious motor mouths in the History of Boxing..

But I kind loved the finish to the Alvarez-Khan fight... A sweet counter shot... I say put Khan in there with Errol Spence next.

Kalan wrote:What I remember about that fight was Lamont beating the crap out of Khan.. and Khan doing little but running, grabbing, pushing, and holding and being warned 100 times by a tolerant referee.. I would have DQ'd the fouling fairy.. He's one of the most obnoxious motor mouths in the History of Boxing..

It was not a one sided fight. The point deduction was disgusting. Every other boxer pushes with the elbow. No point deduction.

KiwiRider wrote:Totally agree. It needs to be proven who is best, because I saw the first fight and it was a very poor decision.

I thought Khan vs Peterson was a lot closer than Peterson vs Garcia. In saying that I mean I thought Peterson won both.

Khan was just too stupid to quit pushing and holding Peterson's head. Basically he couldn't keep Peterson off of him. The point deduction was warranted according to how many warnings he got.

Tanzio wrote:I would prefer Broner v Khan.

I'd like that fight too. I'd confidently pick Khan to win it.

The problem with that is Khan has always refused to fight one of the dangerous Welterweights: Brook, Thurman, Spence, or Porter, and has cherry-picked guys like the wasted Devon Alexander and the limp wristed thin-man Algieri.. He always has a million excuses.. Then he's presented with a big money fight like Canelo without earning it.. He had a 99% chance to get knocked cold -- and becomes somebody else's cherry-pick in another non-fight.

gilgamesh wrote:

Tanzio wrote:I would prefer Broner v Khan.

I'd like that fight too. I'd confidently pick Khan to win it.

I would favor Khan but Broner could definitely put Bambi on ice.

Fat chance... Broner couldn't even put Malignaggi out so he won't put Khan't out either.. It would be a wrestling match and the worst one ever.

I like Porter vs Khan... HE put Paulie on ice and then some with those big left hooks... That's what Khan gets hit with, and with big right hands.

Kalan wrote:Fat chance... Broner couldn't even put Malignaggi out so he won't put Khan't out either.. It would be a wrestling match and the worst one ever.

I like Porter vs Khan... HE put Paulie on ice and then some with those big left hooks... That's what Khan gets hit with, and with big right hands.

Broner definitely has the power to fell Khan.

Kalan wrote:Fat chance... Broner couldn't even put Malignaggi out so he won't put Khan't out either..

Bit of a strange comment, Paulies chin is infinitely better than khans.

first fight was very good, so why not.

Personally...I think Khan has slipped. It's either him or the new trainer Hunter. I used to think he was the exceptional Olympic/amateur fighter. Could go 3 to 4 rounds brilliantly, his fast feet could dart in and out and he landed fast one twos and then he would carry on down the stretch but at a much less brilliant pace. After his last few fights in particular, Algerie and Canelo, I feel he has lost speed in his feet and with that goes his defense because I have seen nothing new to his defensive arsenal. The defense of grabbing, holding and punching taught by Hunter wouldn't work with his frame imo, Khan doesn't look strong enough to pull a Ward.

I wasn't impressed by his performance against Canelo. A lot of people said he won most/all rounds but I saw him winning the first 2. Round 1 was impressive, 2 was closer. Then Canelo, known as stone feet was able to catch him and bang him with hard shots to the body whilst there was little to nothing hard coming back (from memory).

Watching peterson on the weekend, god he looked strong for a welterweight. I'd put my money on Peterson.

Tanzio wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:

Tanzio wrote:I would prefer Broner v Khan.

I'd like that fight too. I'd confidently pick Khan to win it.

I would favor Khan but Broner could definitely put Bambi on ice.

Yeah that's definitely the biggest name that he has a chance of beating, but I still don't think he would.

Fatsam wrote:

Kalan wrote:Fat chance... Broner couldn't even put Malignaggi out so he won't put Khan't out either..

Bit of a strange comment, Paulies chin is infinitely better than khans.

He's a better absorber -- but he's easier to jab.. easier to hook.. easier to stop.. Even Hatton stopped Paulie -- and so did Khan.. Some big bombers stopped Khan, although Danny did a faster job on Khan than he did on Paulie.. Khan-Broner would be an ugly wrestling match that wouldn't go anywhere.. Khan would eke out an ugly win like he did over Algieri.. He doesn't deserve a Pac fight -- but Pac might choose him because he's easy.

A lot of people keep saying Khan is a brilliant boxer or he's super fast with great skills.. He's never dipped under hooks or right swings well.. He never slipped right hands or jabs well.. He freezes against hitters.. He has no inside skills and grabs like a maniac.. His footwork is spastic and he's easy to cut off.. Guys like Floyd, Loma, Ward, Kovalev, Golovkin, Usyk, Crawford, and even Thurman, Russell, Mikey Garcia, Joshua, Luis Ortiz, Rigo, and a lot of others know how to defend well and keep shots off them much better than Khan ever did.. But he's gotten by with not fighting Brook and Thurman for years and just cherry picking around forever.. It's time for him to fight one of the top Welterweights or GTFO.

Kalan wrote:

Fatsam wrote:

Kalan wrote:Fat chance... Broner couldn't even put Malignaggi out so he won't put Khan't out either..

Bit of a strange comment, Paulies chin is infinitely better than khans.

He's a better absorber -- but he's easier to jab.. easier to hook.. easier to stop.. Even Hatton stopped Paulie -- and so did Khan.. Some big bombers stopped Khan, although Danny did a faster job on Khan than he did on Paulie.. Khan-Broner would be an ugly wrestling match that wouldn't go anywhere.. Khan would eke out an ugly win like he did over Algieri.. He doesn't deserve a Pac fight -- but Pac might choose him because he's easy.

A lot of people keep saying Khan is a brilliant boxer or he's super fast with great skills.. He's never dipped under hooks or right swings well.. He never slipped right hands or jabs well.. He freezes against hitters.. He has no inside skills and grabs like a maniac.. His footwork is spastic and he's easy to cut off.. Guys like Floyd, Loma, Ward, Kovalev, Golovkin, Usyk, Crawford, and even Thurman, Russell, Mikey Garcia, Joshua, Luis Ortiz, Rigo, and a lot of others know how to defend well and keep shots off them much better than Khan ever did.. But he's gotten by with not fighting Brook and Thurman for years and just cherry picking around forever.. It's time for him to fight one of the top Welterweights or GTFO.

I'm at the point that I wouldn't favor Khan over anyone with decent power, including Broner. Would Khan outbox Broner? Yes, for at least half the fight. Broner does have the pop to KO Khan...ask Porter.

Look at Khan's last 5 opponents between Garcia and Alvarez. All light hitters. Carlos Molina was a 135lber, Julio Diaz (on his last leg) had to drop back down to 142, Collazo was past it and has been for years now with a lower KO% than Khan; Alexander was already beat down by Porter, Algieri was another 140 lber with no power. I thought both Diaz and Algieri deserved the decisions.

Khan better pick someone easier than Peterson. Peterson gave Danny Garcia probably his worst beating he has had (according to Garcia's face at least)Peterson definitely beat Garcia imo.

Collazo isn't shot now, much less then. He can punch too.

Collazo isn't shot...he's better than ever.. Apparently he's been practicing.. Sometimes boxers learn in their mid 30's that hard work pays off.. They screw around their whole career, and reach 35 or 36 and get desperate.. They know for sure that they're screwed if they don't make something happen right away.

Both of you are full of shitt. Collazo is shot, and has been shot for some time now. I wouldn't even consider him gatekeeper status. He stopped the messed-up-in-the-head Ortiz, and Khan claimed he was this big puncher.....so he is no longer afraid of big punchers. Collazo in his prime lost every big fight he had, and that was 8-10 years ago. Thurman was a puss for ducking Spence to take on Collazo after Khan beat the hell out of him.

Just because he stops guys that are either more shot than him or way over-rated in the first place does not mean he is anywhere near prime, or a big puncher. If he was, he would not have ducked Errol Spence.