The way to beat Pavlik!

[kayjay]

I think AA is very untested. Calzaghe and Kessler are both good boxers, but the ***in jab pavlik had last night was murderous. I could see Calzaghe and Kessler both not likeing that kinda jab in their face a whole lot.


Pavlik is not the second comming but you know what? The kid is a serious threat to any p4p champion near his division. I wouldn't count him out against anyone!

A big punch is an equalizer; but Kessler is both bigger and faster. And what good is a jab against a southpaw who is faster than you?

I'd give Pavlik a puncher's chance against Kessler, next to none against JC. Hopefully he'll knock out a Duddy or so, rematch Taylor then fight Kessler for supremacy at 168 (joe moving to LHW)

[shawn_]

His jabs are veryy effective. Best i have seen in a long time!

I agree with that. His jab is HARD. He messes peoples faces up bad with his jab. Nobody comes out of a Pavlik fight without the right side of their face looking like the elephant man.

[Easton Assassin]

A big punch is an equalizer; but Kessler is both bigger and faster. And what good is a jab against a southpaw who is faster than you?

I'd give Pavlik a puncher's chance against Kessler, next to none against JC. Hopefully he'll knock out a Duddy or so, rematch Taylor then fight Kessler for supremacy at 168 (joe moving to LHW)

well, I'm of the opinion that Kessler will outbox and Maybe stop Calzaghe. Kessler has a very serious right hand aswell.

Kessler and Pavlik would be very interesting!

[shawn_]

Kessler wouldn't stand a chance in hell of beating Pavlik. You are not going to beat Pavlik without great head movment, or a chin like James Toney.

[Kball15]

A big punch is an equalizer; but Kessler is both bigger and faster. And what good is a jab against a southpaw who is faster than you?

I'd give Pavlik a puncher's chance against Kessler, next to none against JC. Hopefully he'll knock out a Duddy or so, rematch Taylor then fight Kessler for supremacy at 168 (joe moving to LHW)

You would HAVE to give him more then a PUNCHERS chance, cause he showed great boxing ability, and a very good defense (outside of round 2 of coarse)

Id agree with the JC part if JC had shown better defense, but since he hasnt and because he struggled with Bika, i definetly give Pavlik a shot at winning, alhtough at this point its JC by decision.

And KESSLER-PAVLIK is one of the great fights of the decade! maybe the CENTURY!!!!!

I mean, 2 sluggers, 2 MASSIVE punchers, 2 highly skilled fighters... It has all the makings of a FOTY SHOE IN, unless somebody gets caught badly early or something like that

[kayjay]

Kessler doesn't have the heavy hands Pavlik does. But he's better on his feet and has faster hands. That would be an outstanding matchup.

[Zerwas1]

Did the guy who said, that Pavlik's D is good, looked at the percentage at which Taylor landed? He landed about 20% against Hopkins and about 45% against Pavlik, 65% at power punches. You call that a good D ?

[shawn_]

Watch the fight in slow motion, and count the punches for yourself. The compubox operators are borderline incompetent. Do your own counting.

Pavliks defense is good. Better than Taylors by a mile.

[Wiley Hyena]

Kessler doesn't have the heavy hands Pavlik does. But he's better on his feet and has faster hands. That would be an outstanding matchup.

Pavlik blasts Kessler just like he blasted Taylor. Joe Cal would be a better fight, but I see Pavlik eventually getting to Cal with that viscious jab...it's only a matter of time after that.

Winky would be a closer fight. If the peek a boo holds up under the Pavlik bombs, then I could see Winky frustrating Pavlik and possibly winning UD. But, Winky's lost a step and I think it's a bad fight for him to take (outside the money, of course).

Then of course there's B-Hop. That could be a difficult fight for Pavlik, assuming B-Hop comes in with vitality. B-Hop always finds a way.

[Azteca]

One punch? One punch is never going to beat a fighter. So what your saying is for whoever Pavlik's next opponent is to load up on the left hook?? Is that how I'm understanding it? If so, that's looking at boxing a little narrowly. Wouldn't you agree?