A Good Amatuer Boxer Doesn't Always Make a Good Pro Boxer

He does show some weaknesses and the punchers will be rubbing their hands together but Khan is likely to learn more from this fight than he has in his previous 12.

Khan has never been really hurt by anyone until Limond. Now he has been shown a lesson worth learning. Perhaps he would never have been in with the Commonwealth champ if the Commonwealth champ was a known puncher but the fact remains that he won and he won by knockout. So he's not doing badly. include the fact that he he just fought 13 times. most amercian dont know what is commonwealth or european champion is like. but give them idea it like the USBA and regional titles which is good start for contenders

Yeah, listen which ever way you dress it up, Limond was another nobody set up by warren to get hurt, i dont care that he only lost one fight. and Khan gets tagged clean by nobodies, so far he has shown that he hasnt learnt his lesson. So yes, on paper Khan has done well, but when you look deeper, there are problems. Khan has never been really hurt by anyone until Limond. Now he has been shown a lesson worth learning. Perhaps he would never have been in with the Commonwealth champ if the Commonwealth champ was a known puncher but the fact remains that he won and he won by knockout. So he's not doing badly.

But winning by knockout and becoming Commonwealth champ in his 13th fight is good. I'd hardly say he's a bad professional. Will he ever be a world champion? Oh he may pick up a title but I doubt he'll be anything outstanding. He's still better than awful and he's still very young. He'll probably have a world title tilt before his 20th fight and it's Frank Warren's job to get him there in one piece and keep him learning along the way. That's where his amateur career helped him, by getting him a promoter who will bring him along rather than throwing him away. Yeah, listen which ever way you dress it up, Limond was another nobody set up by warren to get hurt, i dont care that he only lost one fight. and Khan gets tagged clean by nobodies, so far he has shown that he hasnt learnt his lesson. So yes, on paper Khan has done well, but when you look deeper, there are problems.

Your chasing thin air, i meant 'terrible' as in thats terrible to read, i was shocked about what i was told. Fair enough No Getting knocked down by feathfisted willy Limond is not good, he has also been hit clean by nobodies several times in his career, he did show a lot of heart to get up and fight back tho. But winning by knockout and becoming Commonwealth champ in his 13th fight is good. I'd hardly say he's a bad professional. Will he ever be a world champion? Oh he may pick up a title but I doubt he'll be anything outstanding. He's still better than awful and he's still very young. He'll probably have a world title tilt before his 20th fight and it's Frank Warren's job to get him there in one piece and keep him learning along the way. That's where his amateur career helped him, by getting him a promoter who will bring him along rather than throwing him away.

Your chasing thin air, i meant 'terrible' as in thats terrible to read, i was shocked about what i was told. No Getting knocked down by feathfisted willy Limond is not good, he has also been hit clean by nobodies several times in his career, he did show a lot of heart to get up and fight back tho.

Remember Amir Khan on saturday? i bump this thread in honour of him. The idea is to improve on amateur skills and develop them into skills that will help you in the pro game, i dont think he has done this yet. He got up off the floor to knock out a guy with only one prior defeat and won the Commonwealth title in his 13th pro fight. He's not doing badly by any stretch. Terrible, and he became the most dangerous fighter ever imo, i cant understand how anyone could beat tyson in the am's he just hits so hard and there is such an emphasis on head shots in the am's. Terrible? Because he failed to make the Olympic boxing team? A terrible fighter would not even be in contention. The US olympic boxing team is the one with the most competition. To even have a shout of getting to the olympics was quite an achievement. Just for posterity here is Tyson's first fight against Tillman Tyson turned pro with a 24-3 record, by no means a terrible one. Most of the top pros have had a long and successful amateur career. It's obvious that having a successful amateur career is helpful in becoming a top contender at professional level. Not only does it give you a good skill basis and get you used to performing under the lights, a good showing as an amateur and an Olympic medal or Golden Gloves championship means you're likely to attract the attention of good managers or promoters who will be interested in building you as a product and bringing you along at a good pace rather than throwing you in with the next big thing and getting you knocked silly in your first ten fights. I'm not sure how many of the people who are saying that amateur gloves absorb 80% of the impact have ever been punched in the face with a pair of 10ozers.

Thirdly, to succeed in the amateurs, you need to rely entirely on a high punch output, as judges will score even when punches get blocked.QUOTE] Acually, the way the amateur gameis scored THIS is not accurate.The computer only gives credit for very clean and obvious scoring blows..you have to be precise and deliberate in the amateur game..tons of misdirected punches will NOT get counted

on the other hand, you look at a lot of Mexicans who had a ton of pro fights against lower tier opponents, and stepped it up and are fantastic fighters. The amateurs are just that...they are building blocks for a fighter to gain experience and learn the basics, so they can do well in the pros. Or they want to win Olympic gold. You have to learn the craft somewhere...some want to start in the pros and make some money while fighting low rank opponents they can beat and learn from, some have amateur fights, where there is less physical damage but no pay. Its jsut what you make of it. ________ Dodge Ram Van Specifications

"A good amateur doesnt always make a good pro" True enough BUT a guy with a shallow amateur background more often doesnt make a good pro. The list of former top amateurs who made it good in the pros is MUCH longer than those who didnt. Look at recent years... Jones, Tarver, Winky, Taylor, Shane, Forrest, Mayweather, etc etc etc etc

David Diaz

Something you seem to forget in the whole "Tyson was a shitty am" argument is that 27 fights is NOTHING in the ams. 27 fights is still a complete rookie, at an international level. So, taken into consideration that he fought Olympic Trials with 20 to 25 fights, of course he's not gonna make the team. That's like letting a pro with 5 fights get a world title shot. Who's to say Tyson wouldn't have made the next Olympics if he'd stuck around? By that time he could have had the 200 fights Oscar DLH had when he won Olympic gold. BIG difference.

It's a totally different sport. Those who says otherwise doesn't know what they are talking about. Firstly, the scoring system in amateur is utter crap. Mere touches with the white part of the glove score just as much as a knockdown. Secondly, the gloves (Green Hill) stops 80% of the punch impact, according to tests. Thirdly, to succeed in the amateurs, you need to rely entirely on a high punch output, as judges will score even when punches get blocked. Have you ever tried being hit with a pro glove? Feels like being hit in the head with a brick. You can push your finger right through the glove and feel the knuckles. In the pro's, you need to have some kind of strategy, because the other guy can and will knock you out if you don't. They know how you fight, your weaknesses, all that shit. You can't compare the two sports, it's totally different. The reason good amateurs become good professionals is technique and level of opposition. They constantly fight and train with the best, so they are among the best... Good post. I agree that they are vastly different, amatuer boxing reminds me more of olympic fencing very stop start. Being a very good amatuer is obviously a good start, a good indication that you possess SOME of the tools to make it in boxing, technique, speed, reactions, but don't really tell you much about someones punching power, chin or heart. Plus most of the fighting is done on the outside so its not really that suprising that tyson didn't do that well as an amatuer, its not really suited to someone who looks to slip punches and get inside with power shots. Most of the examples used of succesful conversions from amatuer to pro have enjoyed fighting at distance and have a handy jab.

Because lots of pitty-pat punches are worth a LOT more than a few hard shots. A light jag counts the same as a knockdown. Also it's not easy at all to get a KO in the amatuers with the over-sized gloves and the huge padded headgear. Poet Guess so, i have seen him knock people out in the am's but i get what u mean, Another example of amatuer style boxing being changed to fit the pro game is lennox lewis, people seem to forget that he was more of a brawler type fighter in the beggining of his pro career, then he re-invented himself to use his height better and hide behind a jab.

Terrible, and he became the most dangerous fighter ever imo, i cant understand how anyone could beat tyson in the am's he just hits so hard and there is such an emphasis on head shots in the am's. Tyson had a record of 24-3 in the amateurs, me think. As I stated earlier, the gloves in amateur protect alot more than in the pro's, so it's impossible to KO all opponents in the non-paid ranks...

Tyson didn't even make the Olympic team. His two losses to Henry Tillman eliminated him. Poet Terrible, and he became the most dangerous fighter ever imo, i cant understand how anyone could beat tyson in the am's he just hits so hard and there is such an emphasis on head shots in the am's.

This is correct, a good amateur will not always make a good pro. But I would also say it is true that a poor amateur is almost assured to never be a good pro fighter either. I would put my money on a good amateur to have a good pro career rather than someone who wasn’t. So while it's not an automatic indication of possible success, I still think it is a good one.

I think the amatuers are a great place for a young fighter to learn the basics and get in-ring experience. I just don't think success there is a bench mark for how well a fighter will do in the pros: The sports are just too different for that. Tyson was a crappy amatuer but a very good pro, but I think he was better for the experience of having spent some time in the amatuers learning. Poet Was tyson crap? i had a mate who used to say he won olympic gold in seoul lol, i dont think thats true, lol, but i seen some footage of him in the am's knocking people out stone cold. What was his record?

But amatuer boxing have couple of idea and headstart in his career. yes it does not mean that he is going to be good pro because some people burn out when from boxing when they reach to the pro stage. Imagine amatuer boxing as highschool and pro as college. If you do good at highschool then probably that you will do good at college that does not mean that you wont it a 100% to successed. Some peopel in this posting saying that amatuer boxing does not help pro, yes it does but if you look closely some people have different trainers, chrisma and goals when they where in amateur then they are in pro

It's a totally different sport. Those who says otherwise doesn't know what they are talking about. Firstly, the scoring system in amateur is utter crap. Mere touches with the white part of the glove score just as much as a knockdown. Secondly, the gloves (Green Hill) stops 80% of the punch impact, according to tests. Thirdly, to succeed in the amateurs, you need to rely entirely on a high punch output, as judges will score even when punches get blocked. Have you ever tried being hit with a pro glove? Feels like being hit in the head with a brick. You can push your finger right through the glove and feel the knuckles. In the pro's, you need to have some kind of strategy, because the other guy can and will knock you out if you don't. They know how you fight, your weaknesses, all that shit. You can't compare the two sports, it's totally different. The reason good amateurs become good professionals is technique and level of opposition. They constantly fight and train with the best, so they are among the best...