Page 1 of 1

Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 06 Nov 2017, 21:29
by TheLeprechaun
He was winning tournaments and competing in the olympics. He then turned pro and got starched at British level.

His style was suited to the amateurs. He handled Josh Taylor on several occasions according to reports. You'd have to have been living on Mars for the last couple of years to pick him to beat Taylor in a fight today.

He may not have won the olympics, but he was good enough to compete at world level as an amateur.

It seems like there is a pressure on good amateurs to turn pro. It just feels like they should turn over rather than stay amateur. In this case, I think it wasn't the best move. Financially, he probably would have made more from sponsorship and probably from Team GB salary.

Ogogo is another one. He was going to the opening of an envelope around the time of the Olympics and you couldn't watch a youtube video without seeing the chap talking about a Teryaki Subway.

That's far from the case now - It seems like he went into witness protection since the cunningham loss. Nowhere to be seen.

I'd add Frankie Gavin to the list but he probably wouldn't have had the discipline to have any longevity as an amateur. He already got chucked out of the olympics.

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 06 Nov 2017, 22:35
by KiwiRider
It really is hit and miss who makes it from an Olympic level to a pro title holder. Some of those skilled Am's get blasted through by pro journeymen who have no respect for their jab or skillset. I never thought Loma would make a good pro :doh: he looked set for a 3rd Olympic and retirement :oops:

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 00:29
by Wales
To be fair he was 27/28 when he turned pro and he'd had a good run in the amateur scene competing in every major tournament. It was the right time for him to try his hand in the pro game. Unfortunately it didn't work out for him, as it doesn't for many. Ultimately every boxer wants to win a professional world title and make millions of pounds in the process.

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 04:54
by Manchester Massive
Not got a bad lifestyle though, paid for doing what he loves, based in Marbella, at least he had a go

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 05:23
by stujones
It seems now more than ever that it is easy enough to go back to the amateur ranks should a fighter wish, didn't we have established pros try out for the Olympics last year. I think it was fair enough for him to give it a go. I was quite surprised to see so many promoters clamour for his signature. He was one amateur who style never looked suited to the pros - always looked like he lacked the pop in his punches to make it too the top. He's done okay, has still done better than the majority of pro's. He's probably good enough for a decent belt (such as Commonwealth) if he has the right opponent etc, he's a good honest pro - he's a bit of a strange one where whilst I don't think he is quite good enough to win a British title, he is probably has the style to be competitive and not look leagues below European Level. What I am saying is while I would see 116-112 type defeats at British title level, I could see a similar result at European Level. It's the power that lets him down more than anything.

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 05:35
by littlepug
If he hadn't of turned pro he would of always wished he had, everyone wants to be a champ but it doesn't make you any less of a fighter if you don't make it

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 05:38
by stujones
littlepug wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 05:35 If he hadn't of turned pro he would of always wished he had, everyone wants to be a champ but it doesn't make you any less of a fighter if you don't make it
I agree, and he could always go back now - but not sure he would want to and how he would fit in.

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 06:07
by TheLeprechaun
stujones wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 05:38
littlepug wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 05:35 If he hadn't of turned pro he would of always wished he had, everyone wants to be a champ but it doesn't make you any less of a fighter if you don't make it
I agree, and he could always go back now - but not sure he would want to and how he would fit in.
I thought you can't go back amateur once you've turned pro?

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 06:45
by stujones
TheLeprechaun wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 06:07
stujones wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 05:38
littlepug wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 05:35 If he hadn't of turned pro he would of always wished he had, everyone wants to be a champ but it doesn't make you any less of a fighter if you don't make it
I agree, and he could always go back now - but not sure he would want to and how he would fit in.
I thought you can't go back amateur once you've turned pro?
Didn't N'dam try to fight at the Olympics in Rio?

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 06:46
by littlepug
TheLeprechaun wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 06:07
stujones wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 05:38
littlepug wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 05:35 If he hadn't of turned pro he would of always wished he had, everyone wants to be a champ but it doesn't make you any less of a fighter if you don't make it
I agree, and he could always go back now - but not sure he would want to and how he would fit in.
I thought you can't go back amateur once you've turned pro?
your allowed to go back if you've not had more than about 3 pro fights, Callum D'eath went back after going pro

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 09:32
by Oiky
Isn't much cop as a pro is he

Least he gave it a shot

You never know how people will do in the paid ranks

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 11:02
by TheCobra
He would never have known without trying. I applaud anyone who gives the pro game a go.

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 11:48
by davie
Hindsight is a wonderful thing.

But some guys at amateur it will be apparent if they are well suited to the pros or not.
I don't watch much amateur boxing but from his first pro fight it was obvious to myself and a few others on here that he wouldn't go that far as a pro. He just didn't look that good.
But as usual, the sky PR team were talking about the route to world honours as if it was a foregone conclusion for the Olympic team captain

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 14:40
by jamamb
its interesting how some top ams just cant cut it as pros. i watched some of stalker in the ams and while he wasnt amazing it also wasnt like 'wow, this guy wont make it at all or even be brit level as a pro'. if i went under a rock for 5 years and someone told me he won british and euro titles and challenged for a wba secondary belt i wouldn't have really been surprised.

what are the things to look for to see pro potential?

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 15:22
by Coco
He hasn't exactly been starched but it is apparent he is domestic level.
At 28 I doubt he would have kept in the amateur squad for too much longer.
What options did he have? He has given it a go and hardly disgraced himself, he dared to dream.

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 16:33
by stujones
Coco wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 15:22 He hasn't exactly been starched but it is apparent he is domestic level.
At 28 I doubt he would have kept in the amateur squad for too much longer.
What options did he have? He has given it a go and hardly disgraced himself, he dared to dream.
Yes, couldn't he give the Olympics another go if he wanted to - or was I dream that pro's are allowed to fight at Olympics.

He reminds me a bit of Peter McDonagh - a solid pro, capable of giving anyone a fight at European Level, but probably not quite good enough to win a British title.

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 18:49
by Boxing Prospect
stujones wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 06:45
TheLeprechaun wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 06:07
stujones wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 05:38

I agree, and he could always go back now - but not sure he would want to and how he would fit in.
I thought you can't go back amateur once you've turned pro?
Didn't N'dam try to fight at the Olympics in Rio?
N'Dam and Amnat, among others, both competed at Rio.

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 07 Nov 2017, 19:00
by leejonesjnr
Nah. Why would he?

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 08 Nov 2017, 02:05
by Taansend
TheLeprechaun wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 06:07
stujones wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 05:38
littlepug wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 05:35 If he hadn't of turned pro he would of always wished he had, everyone wants to be a champ but it doesn't make you any less of a fighter if you don't make it
I agree, and he could always go back now - but not sure he would want to and how he would fit in.
I thought you can't go back amateur once you've turned pro?
Rocky Marciano turned pro, his trainer didn't like what he saw so he went back to the amateurs, won and lost a few then had his 2nd pro fight.

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 08 Nov 2017, 16:45
by Vincent stevenson
Interesting one this. When tom was thinking about turning over my brother paul and me sat him down and gave him all the pros and cons about professional boxing. Baring in mind that he had a fantastic offer on the table off gb to go and coach up in sheffield. But tom decided to chase his dreams and it was a brave decision to be fair. He could have chosen the easy option and gone to gb on very very good wages but he was and always will be super brave.
7 fights later we parted company on very good terms and tom went to spain . His career im sure tom will admit has not lived up to his unbelievable amateur one. But he can still be super proud of himself. If tom had the time over again i know for a fact he would have made the same decision because thats what type of man he is

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 08 Nov 2017, 17:57
by Oiky
Vincent stevenson wrote: 08 Nov 2017, 16:45 Interesting one this. When tom was thinking about turning over my brother paul and me sat him down and gave him all the pros and cons about professional boxing. Baring in mind that he had a fantastic offer on the table off gb to go and coach up in sheffield. But tom decided to chase his dreams and it was a brave decision to be fair. He could have chosen the easy option and gone to gb on very very good wages but he was and always will be super brave.
7 fights later we parted company on very good terms and tom went to spain . His career im sure tom will admit has not lived up to his unbelievable amateur one. But he can still be super proud of himself. If tom had the time over again i know for a fact he would have made the same decision because thats what type of man he is
Fair play to him

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 02:54
by Wales
stujones wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 16:33

He reminds me a bit of Peter McDonagh
Says it all. Such a shame .

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 07:35
by BitPlayer
littlepug wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 05:35 If he hadn't of turned pro he would of always wished he had, everyone wants to be a champ but it doesn't make you any less of a fighter if you don't make it
I think that's true, it might not always work out but you have to try.

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 08:28
by littlepug
Wales wrote: 12 Nov 2017, 02:54
stujones wrote: 07 Nov 2017, 16:33

He reminds me a bit of Peter McDonagh
Says it all. Such a shame .
I wouldn't say its a shame, a good amateur pedigree guarantees absolutely nothing in the pros, he gave his best and was better than some and not as good as others but at the very least he has embedded himself into part of boxings history, and being able to say "I was a professional boxer" is something he can hold onto forever.

Re: Should Tom Stalker have stayed amateur?

Posted: 12 Nov 2017, 17:48
by In the know 85
Defo shouldn't have turned pro, of all that made the transition my opinion was that he's the worst of them all, just because he was the gb captain his ability was blown out of all proportion he can't punch himself out of a wet paper bag, the same comments apply to frankie gavin, everybody was saying how good he was going to be I myself could never see it.