BoxRec

I know it happened a while ago, but I just can't believe that Fwank put Amir Khan in with an unbeaten knockout artist in a fight that wasn't even an eliminator. Surely there cannot be a worse piece of matchmaking ever?

It made no sense at all. In terms of the talent and marketability of Khan.

Surely it must have been the most costly bit of incompetence ever? Any others?

Rod Douglas v Herol Graham

Maurice Hope vs Mike Baker

Floyd Patterson vs Pete Rademacher, Tom McNeeley, Roy Harris

There's been hundreds of thousands of mismatches throughout ring history. Several of Archie Moore's fights were with pro wrestlers making boxing debuts and he easily chewed them up and spit them out.

Rafael Marquez in his DEBUT getting KO'd by ex world champ Vic Rabanales, takes some beating.

How about Dawson vs Tarver 2 - scheduled for early 2009.

Pele Reid v Orlin Norris

stujones wrote:How about Dawson vs Tarver 2 - scheduled for early 2009.

In what way is that bad matchmaking? Dawson gets what looks like another easy win, and Tarver gets a shot at a World title and a pay day.

stujones wrote:How about Dawson vs Tarver 2 - scheduled for early 2009.

This is a thread from the point of view of the manager/promoter, not the fans. We'd be exhausted thinking of bad matches that way.

Punchy Joe wrote:Pele Reid v Orlin Norris

Reid had such a brittle chin that it would have been impossible to protect it forever. Norris was hardly a monster.

Marvis Frazier v Larry Holmes.
Then Mike Tyson, just incase he didn't get the message first time round.

Horse wrote:

stujones wrote:How about Dawson vs Tarver 2 - scheduled for early 2009.

In what way is that bad matchmaking? Dawson gets what looks like another easy win, and Tarver gets a shot at a World title and a pay day.

Well doesn't that apply to all fights then that are mis matche

Patterson vs Radamecher, Ali vs Dunn - all the same then?

Herol wrote:

Punchy Joe wrote:Pele Reid v Orlin Norris

Reid had such a brittle chin that it would have been impossible to protect it forever. Norris was hardly a monster.

Norris may not have been a big heavy or a puncher of any note but the gulf in experience was staggering - remember Pele had no amateur fights!

IMO (only mine mind)

Culprit: A Booth

Fight: Thompson Vs Haye.

Synopsis: Disaster on cards / walk before run etc.

Result: A clubbing for Haye!!

Incompetent piece of matchmaking?

I'd say it's a risk that had to be taken, same with Haye v Thompson you don't learn anything from beating on bums.

MightyWarrior wrote:Marvis Frazier v Larry Holmes.
Then Mike Tyson, just incase he didn't get the message first time round.

Good call.

Dawson V Tarver 2

Who the frig decided they wanted to see that one again? Lunacy

steve689 wrote:Dawson V Tarver 2

Who the frig decided they wanted to see that one again? Lunacy

Certainly not a geniune contender for most incompetent - but clearly daft. A one sided fight in which Dawson was taking the piss in a few rounds completely and utterly pointless for both fans and fighters.

Maskaev vs Oliver McCall in his 8th fight.

Terry Downes - Dick Tiger.

MR UNTOUCHABLE wrote:IMO (only mine mind)

Culprit: A Booth

Fight: Thompson Vs Haye.

Synopsis: Disaster on cards / walk before run etc.

Result: A clubbing for Haye!!

And the end result was? Undisputed Cruiserweight world champion within 10 more fights.

I totally disagree. While Maca was bullying journeymen and getting starched by the Lee Swabys of the world, Haye was learning from Thompson, Arthur Williams, Fragomeni and co.

At the time: David Walker v Roman Karmazin

Totally diabolical. As the old saying goes, Walker had two hopes, bob hope and no hope, and bob hope is dead. Dude who is about English title class with avrerage power at domestic level against a bonafide European/fringe World Class operator who at the time had neevr been stopped/dropped

I wish I was into box betting back then as I would have cleaned up so nicely covering the first three rounds, stoppage win, etc


In hindsight: Prescott v Khan

banjo wrote:Incompetent piece of matchmaking?

I'd say it's a risk that had to be taken, same with Haye v Thompson you don't learn anything from beating on bums.

If you're talking about Khan then I'm really surprised.

Surely he could have stepped up above Gomez but still fought somebody with more known limitations? Just generally well known. What if Prescott turns out to be an all time great, would it no have meant that Khan was put in with him too early.

They all acknowledged afterwards that it was a mistake, but then I guess they had to for damage limitation.

lefthook82 wrote:At the time: David Walker v Roman Karmazin

Totally diabolical. As the old saying goes, Walker had two hopes, bob hope and no hope, and bob hope is dead. Dude who is about English title class with avrerage power at domestic level against a bonafide European/fringe World Class operator who at the time had neevr been stopped/dropped

I wish I was into box betting back then as I would have cleaned up so nicely covering the first three rounds, stoppage win, etc


In hindsight: Prescott v Khan

Surely without hindsight, it didn't make much sense either. I know Fwank gets abuse for milking people like Hatton against journeymen, but surely there is a huge middle ground between that and what happened to Khan?

David Walker was completely out of his league there.

Herol wrote:

banjo wrote:Incompetent piece of matchmaking?

I'd say it's a risk that had to be taken, same with Haye v Thompson you don't learn anything from beating on bums.

If you're talking about Khan then I'm really surprised.

Surely he could have stepped up above Gomez but still fought somebody with more known limitations? Just generally well known. What if Prescott turns out to be an all time great, would it no have meant that Khan was put in with him too early.

They all acknowledged afterwards that it was a mistake, but then I guess they had to for damage limitation.

Well that depends really, the way I look at it his record looked worse than Khans but then again these south americans are usually tough little buggers. But at the end of the day if you want to be a great boxer like Khan has been telling us he wants to be then you have to take risks, Prescott had a fearsome looking record but no one knew much about him which is where the risk lay, the question everyone was asking before the bout was "is Prescott just another knock over with an padded unbeaten record or somebody who is genuinely a threat?" and it turned out to be the latter.

Whether Prescott goes on to achieve anything remains to be seen but at the moment he's just another prospect, I might sound old fashioned here but I like to see prospects take risks because I think losing the way Khan did will really test his character ie. "make him or break him" Haye took on a two former belt holders in his 10th and 11th bouts one of which he lost, now following that defeat he was either going to come back stronger having learnt from a hardened veteran or he was going to end up on the scrap heap like many other prospects do, fortunately he has come back stronger.

There is different levels though Herol - who knew about Prescott's opponent - he might have been facing the lightweight Herbie Hides, and Khan is a pretty accomplished boxer - he did go in as an over whelming favourite and indeed, Glenn McCory thinks Khan can beat Prescott in his next fight.

I'm sure the fact that alot of US pundits were cursing when DLH was scheduled to fight, then Sports Network promoted Karmarzin, calling it a mismatch was part of the reason why Hennessey was so keen to get that fight on. But it was a terrible mismatch