View Full Version : amir khans future?


Nacho_Analstain
11-23-2006, 09:20 PM
how do u think amir khans future is going to turn out as a professional boxer?

Shanus
11-23-2006, 09:26 PM
how do u think amir khans future is going to turn out as a professional boxer?

I think it's going to be a while before he wins a word title, 2-3 years maybe.

I don't know if he can defend it either, but it's early days, if he can work a solid defense I can see him going very far.

Nacho_Analstain
11-23-2006, 09:29 PM
yeh,i think hes a really good prospect,hes confident and has the skills,still abit amateurish,but hes fairly new to the pros,definately got speed,and he aint short of power either

rooq
11-24-2006, 02:15 PM
too much exposure too early.

they are going to have to play it very carefully now, as there could end up being a lot of disillusioned fans who have only got into boxing because of the khan hype machine. if he gets exposed it could be very bad for the popularity of boxing in this country.

as for his potential, there has been visible improvement in each of his fights and if he keeps it up i think he can go far enough to win the WBO belt and may be more...whether he can do this at light-welterweight I don't know.

col Blake
11-28-2006, 07:23 AM
if WANK WARREN has anything to do with it, it will be the WBO for the rest of his life then quite when someone good comes along.

Flagellum Dei
11-28-2006, 10:15 AM
Khan is above average at best! He will go down the same road as Hamed and Calzaghe, fighting chumps and receiving the praise and adulation of millions (idiots)! Not to mention increasing his bank balance!

I said exactly the same thing about Audley Harrison and everyone laughed, ermmm, what happened to him - isn't he now working behind the perfume counter at Boots? If given a decent opponent, Khan's career would also be destroyed, but that will never happen, as all his opponents are very carefully hand-picked!?!

Anyone who believes that Khan is world class, are the idiots who tipped Hamed to beat Barrera; one so-called armchair boxing pundit actually told me that he had watched the Tyson-Hagler fight and had seen Hagler drop Tyson in the 3rd round!!! Khan is targeted at just these types of muppets - who believe anything!

I can't believe just how gullable the British people are!!! I'll bet anyone here, that Khan goes for the WBO title (surprise surprise) and fights substandard opposition!?

Hard Chaw
11-29-2006, 07:40 AM
French fighter lined up for Khan. Amir Khan will face Rachid Drilzane in his 10th professional contest at London's ExCel Arena on December 9.
http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=199167

The 28-year-old Frenchman has won 10 of his 13 fights although he is yet to claim a victory inside the distance.

Khan, who will turn 20 the day before the show, said: "I have had a good look at Drilzane. He is not a bad fighter but I will not let him ruin my birthday."

Khans definitely has talent,hes improving still and has good hand speed. I agree that he will have a world title in 2-3 years.

MickyHatton
11-29-2006, 08:49 AM
Khan is above average at best! He will go down the same road as Hamed and Calzaghe, fighting chumps and receiving the praise and adulation of millions (idiots)! Not to mention increasing his bank balance!

I said exactly the same thing about Audley Harrison and everyone laughed, ermmm, what happened to him - isn't he now working behind the perfume counter at Boots? If given a decent opponent, Khan's career would also be destroyed, but that will never happen, as all his opponents are very carefully hand-picked!?!

Anyone who believes that Khan is world class, are the idiots who tipped Hamed to beat Barrera; one so-called armchair boxing pundit actually told me that he had watched the Tyson-Hagler fight and had seen Hagler drop Tyson in the 3rd round!!! Khan is targeted at just these types of muppets - who believe anything!

I can't believe just how gullable the British people are!!! I'll bet anyone here, that Khan goes for the WBO title (surprise surprise) and fights substandard opposition!?

Wow aren't you insightful, I wonder who's alt you are?

Also anyone knowledgeable will tell you that the WBO title is a genuine title these days and besides the title means **** its the boxer or the champion that counts!

Khan is a good prospect, no more no less at this stage.

Southpaw Stinger
11-29-2006, 09:58 AM
French fighter lined up for Khan. Amir Khan will face Rachid Drilzane in his 10th professional contest at London's ExCel Arena on December 9.
http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=199167

The 28-year-old Frenchman has won 10 of his 13 fights although he is yet to claim a victory inside the distance.

Khan, who will turn 20 the day before the show, said: "I have had a good look at Drilzane. He is not a bad fighter but I will not let him ruin my birthday."

Khans definitely has talent,hes improving still and has good hand speed. I agree that he will have a world title in 2-3 years.


yeah once again fighting a guy who can't break popcorn with his punches.

rooq
11-29-2006, 02:28 PM
it is easy to forget, and i have myself when criticising some of his past opponents is that khan has had 9 fights and has been a pro around 16 months.

look at the first 16 months of any boxers pro career...who were pacmans first ten opponents...what about mayweather? tha difference is that they haven't had tv exposure since their debut and not tha expectation/hype surrounding them.

i have to watch him for another year at least to see how he's progressing and what kind of prospect he is.

Southpaw Stinger
11-29-2006, 05:27 PM
I thought he was meant to be fighting an American? Instead he's fighting a feather fisted french bloke...

Flagellum Dei
11-29-2006, 06:04 PM
Wow aren't you insightful, I wonder who's alt you are?

Also anyone knowledgeable will tell you that the WBO title is a genuine title these days and besides the title means **** its the boxer or the champion that counts!

Khan is a good prospect, no more no less at this stage.


Lol!?! Those comments have shot your credibility!? The WBO is STILL a minor title, MOST professional boxers will tell you that. If the WBO is a major title why do Americans avoid it and go for the WBC; WBA and IBF! Christ, i thought this was a forum for people who actually knew something about boxing! How can the title mean **** - if it's the champion that counts? He wouldn't be champion unless he held a title d'uh!?!?!?

kerrminator
11-30-2006, 02:45 AM
Khan needs to stop his mouthing off and get hismself away from his "celeb" status.

I hope he knuckles down and gets into it but he seems to have an ego the size of the planet.

We cant tell how good he is until he fights someone who actually fights back.

Andre Berto was competing in the samr games as Khan and imo he has been diong it properly.....keeping busy and getting on with it in the Gym.(He's one to watch for sure)

Khan was on TV a couple of weeks ago saying he was ready for a world title now!!! come on Amir, your not even ready for the british title.

MickyHatton
11-30-2006, 03:37 AM
Lol!?! Those comments have shot your credibility!? The WBO is STILL a minor title, MOST professional boxers will tell you that. If the WBO is a major title why do Americans avoid it and go for the WBC; WBA and IBF! Christ, i thought this was a forum for people who actually knew something about boxing! How can the title mean **** - if it's the champion that counts? He wouldn't be champion unless he held a title d'uh!?!?!?

Ok, lol, I will explain it simply for you.

Boxing is about politics, lets pick a organisation that in your opinion is more credible, like say the WBC. (This is hypothetical) They because of politics class a fighter as a top ten fighter but all the other organisations do not.
Then this fighter becomes the champion of the WBC but due to his poor record he is still not rated by the other organisations.
Now you have say a fighter who has reigned for years and beaten everyone but decides for political reasons to take a lesser title fight (Still hypothetical)
Everyone in that weight division knows that he is the man to beat, this includes the boxers, trainers and the money i.e. the promoters and the tv stations.

Therefore the boxer is the important component these days not the title, when Hopkins reigned if he had decided for some reason to give up his titles, his successor would never have received credibility until he beat Hopkins in the ring!

This is the reality of the sport in 2006.

As for your statement about the WBO??? Do you read anything about this sport that does not come from websites, forums or tabloids. Try reading the likes of Boxing News or The Ring occasionally and you will see that the WBO has become an established organisation for several reasons including their organisational skills and most importantly integrity in trying to bring the sport back into line.

Flagellum Dei
11-30-2006, 06:13 AM
Ok, lol, I will explain it simply for you.

Boxing is about politics, lets pick a organisation that in your opinion is more credible, like say the WBC. (This is hypothetical) They because of politics class a fighter as a top ten fighter but all the other organisations do not.
Then this fighter becomes the champion of the WBC but due to his poor record he is still not rated by the other organisations.
Now you have say a fighter who has reigned for years and beaten everyone but decides for political reasons to take a lesser title fight (Still hypothetical)
Everyone in that weight division knows that he is the man to beat, this includes the boxers, trainers and the money i.e. the promoters and the tv stations.

Therefore the boxer is the important component these days not the title, when Hopkins reigned if he had decided for some reason to give up his titles, his successor would never have received credibility until he beat Hopkins in the ring!

This is the reality of the sport in 2006.

As for your statement about the WBO??? Do you read anything about this sport that does not come from websites, forums or tabloids. Try reading the likes of Boxing News or The Ring occasionally and you will see that the WBO has become an established organisation for several reasons including their organisational skills and most importantly integrity in trying to bring the sport back into line.


I understand what you're saying, and agree about the politics in boxing. However, you're arguing that the boxer is the important element, not the championship, title or rankings. Therefore, why have a title or rankings at all, we could simply do away with them right - thats what you're saying! If that was the scenario then boxing would cease as a sport! A boxer doesn't really recieve recognition until he has been champion - which wouldn't happen if there was no ranking/title system initially! And to become champion you have to beat the current champion (vacancies aside)

You judge a fighter on his status and his world rankings, thus the title is much more important than you think! Also, you're saying that a good boxer doesn't need to win a title to win recognition, not to mention an increase in his bank balance! Bottom line is, the public are only interested in title fights, and very few are interested in non-title bouts! Therefore titles are much more important than you would have us believe

MickyHatton
11-30-2006, 03:10 PM
I understand what you're saying, and agree about the politics in boxing. However, you're arguing that the boxer is the important element, not the championship, title or rankings. Therefore, why have a title or rankings at all, we could simply do away with them right - thats what you're saying! If that was the scenario then boxing would cease as a sport! A boxer doesn't really recieve recognition until he has been champion - which wouldn't happen if there was no ranking/title system initially! And to become champion you have to beat the current champion (vacancies aside)

You judge a fighter on his status and his world rankings, thus the title is much more important than you think! Also, you're saying that a good boxer doesn't need to win a title to win recognition, not to mention an increase in his bank balance! Bottom line is, the public are only interested in title fights, and very few are interested in non-title bouts! Therefore titles are much more important than you would have us believe


To be honest I wish they would do away with titles and just have one champion as they did in the past.

I can see your point due to the way boxing has evolved and the importance of titles however I still believe the fans and the money follows the boxer and not title.
This has become prevelant in recent years in the poor following in comparison to years gone by of the Heavyweight title. Many fans would pay more to see Hatton or Mayweather rather than a Briggs or Klitschko.
The former 'flagship' weight of boxing has flagged due to the lack of talent (and a personality)

Nacho_Analstain
11-30-2006, 03:12 PM
i dont think khan is ****y? on all the interviews i have seen him in he is very calm and collected and just talks about the fights,usually gives praise to his opponents aswell,wouldnt say he is ****y?

maybe just abit star struck