Why in the hell does Kelly Pavlik have to beat him convincingly to earn any credit with the boxing public? Williams actually lost to Martinez and everyone thinks he's still the best thing since sliced bread! It's bullshit!
I'll judge the fight on its own merits, but from the outset I'd credit Pavlik a fair bit for a win. Martinez is a handy fighter who was unlucky against williams
Martinez was robbed twice, so Pavlik will have to win big to prove that he actually deserved the win. Martinez has to win big to get a decision or knock Pavlik out. Should be a helluva fight. My pick is Martinez.
Well Williams is only big in the eyes of some. Pavlik came out of nowhere with a heck of a run and became undisputed in 168. But after that he hasn't done anything at all. So now Martinez comes along where some people say was robbed vs Cintron and then vs Williams and is a very live dog. Has the ability to outbox Pavlik and now Pavlik has something to prove.
Maybe it's because Pavlik is made out to be a destroyer and is really a 168lbs guy fighting a tiny guy coming up from 154lbs so you bet your ass Pavlik better destroy Martinez or get no credit
agreed, and also if pavlik WINS* a close decision IN ATLANTIC CITY its really means he lost a close decision or worse..........martinez will have to win 8 rounds or more to get a decision imo
So if Pavlik wins a close decision he gets no credit? But when Williams actually loses to Martinez in many peoples minds, he's supposed to be #2 p4p Hahahaha what a joke.
Maybe it's because Pavlik is made out to be a destroyer and is really a 168lbs guy fighting a tiny guy coming up from 154lbs so you bet your ass Pavlik better destroy Martinez or get no credit
So if Pavlik wins a close decision he gets no credit? But when Williams actually loses to Martinez in many peoples minds, he's supposed to be #2 p4p Hahahaha what a joke.