Right well I'm a few hours behind the world as I've just watched last nights fight, And a pretty good fight it was.
With all the respect to Pascal for becoming the new king of the Light Heavies, and taking away the 0 of Bad Chad.
Did he really win that fight, or was Dawson's inactivity in the early rounds giving him too much to do later on?
Personally I think if Dawson fought at a decent rate (I'm not even saying going at it like he did in the 11th), and used the jab, would he not have won that fight. Regardless of the cut, dodgy ref, biased judges.
It seemed to me (and Manny Steward for that matter) that Jean was gasing by about the 4th round, and everytime Chad landed a big shot it seemed to hurt Jean.
I think Chad lost this fight for himself, and I think a rematch (if it were to happen) would only go one way.
Pascal won the fight by throwing punches. Who woulda guessed that was the way to win a boxing match? Dawson is full of talent, but after last nights performance I think he gets beat by Dirrell and Ward.
In the football (soccer to you) world cup, Spain lost to Switzerland (a team of nobodies) in their opening match, which was during the group stages, in a round-robin format - but Spain still went on to win the world cup convincingly. Spain is now ranked the #1 team in the world, while Switzerland, despite that win over Spain, is only ranked #17.
Everyone has off-days. In most sports that's taken for granted, but in boxing people expect fighters to be at the top of their game in every single fight, probably because many of them only fight twice a year. But no one can be at their best all the time. Tiger Woods doesn't win every golf tournament, but he's still regarded as one of the top 3 golfers of all time, and easily the best of his era. When he loses a single tournament, no one claims he was exposed, so why the double standards with boxing?
In the old days when top fighters fought once or twice every month, far less significance was placed on a single defeat. LaMotta beat Ray Robinson in his prime, once, but LaMotta went on to lose five bouts against Robinson, and no one thinks LaMotta was really in Ray Robinson's class. Similarly, IMO, Pascal isn't really in Dawson's class, but time will tell.
And the fact is, Dawson had the tools to win last night, but just didn't use them. He was lethargic, and frequently stood back after a flurry when he could and should have pressed his advantage. IOW, like Spain against Switzerland, and like Ray Robinson in the first LaMotta fight, he had a bad night. For that reason, assuming he can learn from his mistakes, he would be the strong favourite to win a rematch. It's obvious that Dawson has the ability (in terms of talent) to improve on last night's performance, whereas it's doubtful whether Pascal can improve significantly.
Plus styles make fights. It was obvious that Dawson, with his orthodox style would have trouble with a style as unorthodox as Pascal's - just as Vernon Forrest had trouble with Mayorga's style. Yet Forrest's overall resume is far better than Mayorga's, and few would rank Mayorga above Forrest in any rankings list, based on their entire careers.
I see. So your saying Dawson lost on purpose. Interesting, but his reaction to losing would suggest otherwise.
Are you illiterate? Where did the TS say that Dawson lost on purpose???
Dawson lost it for himself in those early rounds because of his lack of work rate, he should have been taking the fight to Pascal as soon as that bell ringed. No excuses for Chad, he was extremely sloppy and laclusture in there. Chad will be back though.
Pascal won the fight by throwing punches. Who woulda guessed that was the way to win a boxing match? Dawson is full of talent, but after last nights performance I think he gets beat by Dirrell and Ward.
Dawson didn't let his hands go because he doesn't have a warrior mentality, and hasn't fought nothing but old and shot fighters for the last two years.
Pascal is quick, has good movement, and punches hard. Dawson couldn't deal with him. He didn't lose because he didn't let his punches go. He lost because Pascal is the better fighter, and didn't allow him to get away with the things that he does against lesser fighters.
Dawson shouldn't have been in the top 10 p4p, let alone the top 5. Pascal is a good boxer, but he is very beatable. Dawson just isn't that great. Another overrated boxer who did little to deserve such high regard.
boxing is a funny sport how Carl Froch took Pascal to hell and back and Dawson could barely land anything of significance despite being by far the better boxer
i know styles make fights and all that but i would've never expected that
i bet the cobra is smiling after last night lol
That was a completely different fight. There was no feeling out process from the beginning. Froch let his hands go from the first bell and Pascal was forced to throw back.
Dawson didn't do anything of real significance. He had a lot of opportunities but after landing clean shots and clearly hurting Pascal he just took two steps back and started all over again from zero instead of just letting his hands go.
Eddie Muhammad did a good job and told everything Chad needed to know. But Chad wasn't up for it tonight.
Well I think some of you missed the point I was trying to make.
I know Pascal won, I just watched it, I wasn't arguing that.
The point I was trying to make was that alot of round Pascal won, he won not because he was landing good clean punches, or bossing the ring. But simply because Dawson wasn't just following him around and watching him, instead of throwing the jab at him.
Now maybe it did just go to show that Dawson isn't ready to be considered in the top p4p rankings, where he wants to be.
Although I still stand by my comment that in a rematch I think Dawson wont make the same mistake again (and if he does he really is as rubbish as alot of you claim).
I see. So your saying Dawson lost on purpose. Interesting, but his reaction to losing would suggest otherwise.
Well I think some of you missed the point I was trying to make.
I know Pascal won, I just watched it, I wasn't arguing that.
The point I was trying to make was that alot of round Pascal won, he won not because he was landing good clean punches, or bossing the ring. But simply because Dawson wasn't just following him around and watching him, instead of throwing the jab at him.
Now maybe it did just go to show that Dawson isn't ready to be considered in the top p4p rankings, where he wants to be.
Although I still stand by my comment that in a rematch I think Dawson wont make the same mistake again (and if he does he really is as rubbish as alot of you claim).
This fight actually reminded me of the first clash between Hopkins and Taylor. Hopkins didn't let his hands go in the early stages of the fight and let Jermaine win too many rounds before he got working and beating Taylor up.
Chad lost and it's his own fault. I don't see Pascal winning the rematch though or winning over Bute.
boxing is a funny sport how Carl Froch took Pascal to hell and back and Dawson could barely land anything of significance despite being by far the better boxer
i know styles make fights and all that but i would've never expected that
i bet the cobra is smiling after last night lol
Right well I'm a few hours behind the world as I've just watched last nights fight, And a pretty good fight it was.
With all the respect to Pascal for becoming the new king of the Light Heavies, and taking away the 0 of Bad Chad.
Did he really win that fight, or was Dawson's inactivity in the early rounds giving him too much to do later on?
Personally I think if Dawson fought at a decent rate (I'm not even saying going at it like he did in the 11th), and used the jab, would he not have won that fight. Regardless of the cut, dodgy ref, biased judges.
It seemed to me (and Manny Steward for that matter) that Jean was gasing by about the 4th round, and everytime Chad landed a big shot it seemed to hurt Jean.
I think Chad lost this fight for himself, and I think a rematch (if it were to happen) would only go one way.
2 in 1. if one wins the other one loses
Not talking about the way the stoppage came about...Both, in different ways, contributed to the result. I think Pascal won it by moderately effective commission, Dawson lost it by glaring omissions.
Pascal fought a great fight,the best on hbo this year in my opinion!!Pascal did his work early & took the rounds he needed to!!Dawson didn't punch enough & Pascal early looked like he wanted it more!!
I think Dawson would have stopped him had the fight continued,but it didn't & he lost!!I actually believe that the loss is the best thing for boxing right now!!This set us up for an amazing rematch & proves that good fights can be made not involving U know who!!
Dawson wasn't owned like some say,but he was sluggish & got out hustled!!His corner gave him good advice,but was a little too late with it,great win for Pascal,great loss for Dawson,a rematch is in the contract & boxing needs more fights like this!!:FlagCanad