Eddie Hearn's matchmaking...

Ahh must have personally offended ya. Sorry bout that little fella. Who da fuqq is ceacesu. Go to Kiev University and pick up an education comrade :)

When you duck Rigo and then may duck Wilder...you can’t take Carlton and Anthony serious. Real champions/fighters take on all comers win or lose.

Yeah but 2 of them were weak mandatories that got put on him by the IBF and one was coming back from a career threatening stabbing. So, it's not like he handpicked them, nor was it because of Hearn's matchmaking. The IBF rankings are a joke at times. Spence's next mandatory is really just a guy that has only beaten a load of bums in Mexico. I don't have any problem with a guy having sh1t mandatories, if he takes the good ones too, like he did with Spence. Plenty of fighters would have ducked that one. Frankie Gavin wasn't mandatory though and they tried to fight Diego Chavez before the GGG fight came through, so it's pretty clear to me what their strategy was if they couldn't get a big payday. He does deserve some credit for fighting Spence though. :boxing:

I think Brook's legit, probably only behind Spence (and Crawford now) at 147. But the opponents he faced between Porter and GGG made him look like Sugar Ray Robinson, that's all I'm saying. Yeah but 2 of them were weak mandatories that got put on him by the IBF and one was coming back from a career threatening stabbing. So, it's not like he handpicked them, nor was it because of Hearn's matchmaking. The IBF rankings are a joke at times. Spence's next mandatory is really just a guy that has only beaten a load of bums in Mexico. I don't have any problem with a guy having sh1t mandatories, if he takes the good ones too, like he did with Spence. Plenty of fighters would have ducked that one.

Bit unfair to Brook. He went to USA and took Porter's belt when Porter was being very hyped. Brook can mix it at a high level, he's no joke and never a hype job. He also had some sh1t mandatories given to him when IBF title holder, again, not really his fault. I think Brook's legit, probably only behind Spence (and Crawford now) at 147. But the opponents he faced between Porter and GGG made him look like Sugar Ray Robinson, that's all I'm saying.

Khan was coming off a two year lay off and a couple of hand operations. It was never labelled as anything more than what it was. that however has nothing to do with the examples you gave and you shot yourself in the foot by naming Crolla, WHyte and Smith, all men fighting on or around the world level continuously. Whyte actually has a better claim to fighting for the wbc title than moobzilla, yet your man wilder aint fighting him. Showtime will use fatzeale and promote him as some sort of top contender and a threat. So concentrate on your own son and be a little bit smarter next time. Look, you can fight "around world level" and still choose the fights that are stylistically the easiest for you. And, I talked about those fighters in response to another post btw. WTF? I'm not even a Wilder fan, I've never said that I am. FYI I think Joshua KO's him in 3 rounds. I'm just tired of predictable, risk free fights from Hearn and the over the top hype that follows, that's all I've spoken about. What's annoying is you probably agree in part about that, but you think we're having an argument about something else... Khan was coming off a two year lay off and a couple of hand operations. It was never labelled as anything more than what it was. EDIT: I've just remembered Hearn actually did call Lo Greco "world class/ fringe world class" after the fight: https://twitter.com/UKBoxingHub/status/987837782595907585?s=19

You're a ****ing mong.. not a single example you listed actually fit your accusations lol. Brook got easy meat early in his career with FRANK WARREN... When he signed with Eddie he beat porter..faced poor opposition in MANDATORIES and then fought golovkin and spence back to back Crolla got easy meat and got beaten with FRANK WARREN...when he went with Eddie he fought Farley's Perez twice back to back.. then took on barroso when everyone said he'd lose. Lol. He then lost against Linares twice. .so how is that easy touches?!? When has Callum Smith been fed buns that are well beneath his stature at any point in his career that others haven't? You think it was uncle Eddie that got him his opponents to reach the final of WBSS? Quigg? Wtf are you about? He literally just fought and lost in a title fight and only fought fringe levels after hiatus'. Funnily enough after getting injuries like in his frampton loss. Dillian Whyte signed to matchroom after he fought AJ... Since then he's had shoulder surgery and two fights to ease that injury back in..then fought a known gatekeeper chisora in a FOTY contender... Then fought a multiple time EBU champion who never wanted to throw and a former world champion that people on here thought would be a challenge before they saw his belly. Who else is he supposed to fight in his position when he's now WBC #1 and could fight for mandatory for the IBF? Fair enough youre a Hearn hater.. but at least back it up with solid facts. Frankie Gavin, Diego Chavez (who they tried to fight at one point) and Rabchenko were not mandatories. They were fights at a level and a style to make Brook look good, that's it. Why did you think Barosso and Perez were so dangerous? What have they really done before or since? Of course people thought that they would win because Hearn hyped them up so much. That's my point! Look, you can disagree with me about style matchups but I think Fielding, Mohoumadi, Rebrasse were perfectly made for Smith. And, yes you're right, Hearn probably didn't have a hand in picking the WBSS opponents, but you can't exactly say Smith has looked *good* in those fights can you? So doesn't that just demonstrate my point? I don't know why you wrote that paragraph about Whyte. What I was talking about just comes down to whether you thought Browne was any good before the fight. He could have fought Miller instead which would have been harder fight for him style wise imo. If he fights Pulev next that will be a good fight though. :boxing:

For once I agree with you.. Good post. dont quote me Ceacesu

I'm not just criticising the mismatches though, I criticising the fact that Hearn's mismatches are labelled as credible fights and for some reason fans lap it up. When Haymon puts on bad fights, his fighters get sl*gged off constantly as being cherries ect. F*ck, even when he puts on good fights they called mismatches, sometimes! Can you imagine what the reaction would have been if Haymon put on Khan vs Lo Greco in the US? Or do you think if he knocked him out that would have make him a legit contender at 147? People were called Thurman a cherry picker for Alexander after more than a year out the ring (and he was actually seriously injured, unlike Khan). Khan was coming off a two year lay off and a couple of hand operations. It was never labelled as anything more than what it was. that however has nothing to do with the examples you gave and you shot yourself in the foot by naming Crolla, WHyte and Smith, all men fighting on or around the world level continuously. Whyte actually has a better claim to fighting for the wbc title than moobzilla, yet your man wilder aint fighting him. Showtime will use fatzeale and promote him as some sort of top contender and a threat. So concentrate on your own son and be a little bit smarter next time.

what a c*ck. He just uses the same tactic over and over again: pick the easiest stylistic opponent or most overhyped fighter for his fighters to face, so that he can go: "Look how quickly my guy knocked out X!" Of course all promoters do this, but nobody does this as much a Hearn imo. He did the same thing with Quigg, Callum Smith, Kell Brook and Crolla, who were all hyped up at some point, and I'm sure there are lots more too. Then, when it finally comes time to step up, they get outclassed/ perform way worse than expected, because they're not fighting guys that are tailor made for them. And I bet it's going to be the same with Dillian Whyte too, because his win over Browne was basically the same thing imo. I hope you're looking forward to this, America! Bit unfair to Brook. He went to USA and took Porter's belt when Porter was being very hyped. Brook can mix it at a high level, he's no joke and never a hype job. He also had some sh1t mandatories given to him when IBF title holder, again, not really his fault.

I think Hearn is a clever promoter, he sacrifices average or past prime fighter to give paydays to his top guys. He also puts on very good shows / live events - often with a good, solid card. Not perfect by any means, but smart and cunning. He has also not been caught (yet) wearing womens underwear or sticking a rolling pin up his butt...which is a bonus.

And this thread in the wake of one of the most one sided cards in recent times over on Haymon world. Charlo, since facing Trout has had 3 cake walks, one against a disable man. Davis just fought a man coming out of retirement...the top dogs at welter are yet to fight each other and the claim is Hearn is the worst at cherry picking opponents? cmon man I'm not just criticising the mismatches though, I criticising the fact that Hearn's mismatches are labelled as credible fights and for some reason fans lap it up. When Haymon puts on bad fights, his fighters get sl*gged off constantly as being cherries ect. F*ck, even when he puts on good fights they called mismatches, sometimes! Can you imagine what the reaction would have been if Haymon put on Khan vs Lo Greco in the US? Or do you think if he knocked him out that would have make him a legit contender at 147? People were called Thurman a cherry picker for Alexander after more than a year out the ring (and he was actually seriously injured, unlike Khan).

I think you're in danger of criticising him for doing his job! He has to perform a balancing act like any promoter. He has to give his boxers fights that will help them progress and not damage their marketability, or more importantly their health. He also has to deliver fights that boxing fans want to see, which inevitably involve risk. The two are not neccesarily aligned but he has to please both if he's to be a lasting success. On the whole as the list posted above suggests he's doing a good job of providing some very entertaining, high profile matchups. The price that the fan pays is the occasional stinker like that London beef rubbish or feeding that guy to Conor benn. Although having said all that, this weekend Frank warren delivered a far stronger nights entertainment, so although I think you're a little harsh on EH he's definitely not beyond criticism... This is fair, things are the way they are in boxing and he's very good at making the most out of it for him/ his top fighters. I just get bored of the predictable cycle of poor mismatches followed by ridiculous hype that surrounds all his fighters. And I dread to think what will happen if he gets more influence.

And this thread in the wake of one of the most one sided cards in recent times over on Haymon world. Charlo, since facing Trout has had 3 cake walks, one against a disable man. Davis just fought a man coming out of retirement...the top dogs at welter are yet to fight each other and the claim is Hearn is the worst at cherry picking opponents? cmon man

what a c*ck. He just uses the same tactic over and over again: pick the easiest stylistic opponent or most overhyped fighter for his fighters to face, so that he can go: "Look how quickly my guy knocked out X!" Of course all promoters do this, but nobody does this as much a Hearn imo. He did the same thing with Quigg, Callum Smith, Kell Brook and Crolla, who were all hyped up at some point, and I'm sure there are lots more too. Then, when it finally comes time to step up, they get outclassed/ perform way worse than expected, because they're not fighting guys that are tailor made for them. And I bet it's going to be the same with Dillian Whyte too, because his win over Browne was basically the same thing imo. I hope you're looking forward to this, America! You use some terrible examples. Quigg was a legitimate world champion at super bantam, beat a very game Munroe for the interim title and then fought guys like Salinas and Kiko before fighting Frampton, a fight between the two best super bantams out there (rigo can go fuk himself with his inactivity and inability to fight anyone of note). When exactly did Quigg have an easy string of fights? Callum Smith is currently in the final of the super middle tourney, beaten some good fighters, had to tough it out and outside of Groves, DeGale, probably the best super middle around. Crolla fought in a unification, toughed it out in a close first fight with LInares (the best in the division) and hasnt had an easy fight in years, I think his easiest fight was probably Rees way way back, and even then Rees was a decent domestic pro. You could say that about brook who wasted his IBF title reign but alas, it is what it is. And Whyte currently has one of the best heavyweight resumes going, a loss to AJ (who wilder avoids like the plague) a win over a then still world level chisora and will likely fight Pulev, a world level heavyweight. no idea what rubbish you're spouting.

what a c*ck. He just uses the same tactic over and over again: pick the easiest stylistic opponent or most overhyped fighter for his fighters to face, so that he can go: "Look how quickly my guy knocked out X!" Of course all promoters do this, but nobody does this as much a Hearn imo. He did the same thing with Quigg, Callum Smith, Kell Brook and Crolla, who were all hyped up at some point, and I'm sure there are lots more too. Then, when it finally comes time to step up, they get outclassed/ perform way worse than expected, because they're not fighting guys that are tailor made for them. And I bet it's going to be the same with Dillian Whyte too, because his win over Browne was basically the same thing imo. I hope you're looking forward to this, America! You're a ****ing mong.. not a single example you listed actually fit your accusations lol. Brook got easy meat early in his career with FRANK WARREN... When he signed with Eddie he beat porter..faced poor opposition in MANDATORIES and then fought golovkin and spence back to back Crolla got easy meat and got beaten with FRANK WARREN...when he went with Eddie he fought Farley's Perez twice back to back.. then took on barroso when everyone said he'd lose. Lol. He then lost against Linares twice. .so how is that easy touches?!? When has Callum Smith been fed buns that are well beneath his stature at any point in his career that others haven't? You think it was uncle Eddie that got him his opponents to reach the final of WBSS? Quigg? Wtf are you about? He literally just fought and lost in a title fight and only fought fringe levels after hiatus'. Funnily enough after getting injuries like in his frampton loss. Dillian Whyte signed to matchroom after he fought AJ... Since then he's had shoulder surgery and two fights to ease that injury back in..then fought a known gatekeeper chisora in a FOTY contender... Then fought a multiple time EBU champion who never wanted to throw and a former world champion that people on here thought would be a challenge before they saw his belly. Who else is he supposed to fight in his position when he's now WBC #1 and could fight for mandatory for the IBF? Fair enough youre a Hearn hater.. but at least back it up with solid facts.

I'm not saying he doesn't put on good fights. Of course he does, he has to because those are usually the ones where he gets paid. The problem is all the cr*ppy fights he uses to build up those fights. e.g every Brook fight (except for Spence/ Golovkin) are against mostly the same style of sh*t come forward Eastern Europeans who can't box. I'm not hating on him, he does have a lot of restrictions on who he can get over here, so that makes it hard. But it's just so boring when the sport is so formulaic and predictable. I agree with the bit in bold btw, my point was just that his fighters mostly don't live up to the hype that he manages to create in some people. I think you're in danger of criticising him for doing his job! He has to perform a balancing act like any promoter. He has to give his boxers fights that will help them progress and not damage their marketability, or more importantly their health. He also has to deliver fights that boxing fans want to see, which inevitably involve risk. The two are not neccesarily aligned but he has to please both if he's to be a lasting success. On the whole as the list posted above suggests he's doing a good job of providing some very entertaining, high profile matchups. The price that the fan pays is the occasional stinker like that London beef rubbish or feeding that guy to Conor benn. Although having said all that, this weekend Frank warren delivered a far stronger nights entertainment, so although I think you're a little harsh on EH he's definitely not beyond criticism...

Khan and Brook look like monsters right now. That fight is marketable again. Good job, Eddie! Smoke and mirrors, that's all!

David Haye v Tony Bellew John Ryder v Jamie Cox Paul Butler v Emmanuel Rodriguez (IBF World Title) Martin Ward v James Tennyson (EBU, WBA International) Joe Joyce v Lenroy Thomas (Commonwealth title) Joshua Buatsi v TBA Willy Hutchinson v TBA Jordan Gill v TBA Michael 'Venom' Page v TBA

Personally most of he time I look forward to eddie hearns cards the most as usually he has several decent fights. It doesn’t always materialise and sometimes you have big names (Ortiz for example) do real dud fights. That can happen to any card if we are honest though. But just take joshuas undercwrds as an example, there are usually 6-7 fights on and 2-3 people are keen to see. Sometimes they are on paper one sided (e.g povetkin price) sometimes they are really close (eg. Whyte chisora) but probably with the exception of klitschko Joshua (which I wasn’t that impressed with) generally there has always been good stuff. David Haye has limited number of fighters but all have a bit of intrigue so worth noting that the Bellew Haye card is likely to have some real good action - I haven’t actually looked/heard who is on it yet though.