Kessler: Risk Can Reap Rewards…so Why Not Dawson?

[BattlingNelson]

You clearly know nothing about Glenn Johnson, he lost to Sven Ottke but since then he has changed his style he was not a pressure fighter back then he was a boxer, And to say that Johnson doesnt deserve to be in the same ring is very disrespectful to Johnson. Johnson Has beat Montell Griffin, Clinton Woods, Antonio Tarver, Roy Jones Jr, Thomas Ulrich. and many felt he beat Dawson. Kessler's best fight was a loss, The only reason why Kessler would not want to fight Johnson is because its to much risk for little reward. Give Johnson a break he was the World Light Heavyweight champ where as Kessler was just a paper belt holder. I have nothing against Kessler but there is no need to disrespect an excellent fighter.

You're right about the risk/reward issue. That's why I stated that Kessler was probably more likely to defend his title in Copenhagen rather than trying his luck at 175.

[Davros?]

You're right about the risk/reward issue. That's why I stated that Kessler was probably more likely to defend his title in Copenhagen rather than trying his luck at 175.

The ESB description of the fight Ottke Johnson fight is as follows, but I cant say how true this is i really cant remember the fight well at all.

The next injustice was added to Ottke’s record in his very next outing when he failed to land any meaningful shots on a game Glen Johnson. Johnson, on the other hand, was more productive and assertive. He cleanly outboxed Ottke and somehow ended up losing 115-113 on all three scorecards. Even Johnson himself says of the fight, “I won that fight hands down and they gave it to him.” Johnson is not really the type to cry wolf, and has often given Bernard Hopkins high-praise for beating him so soundly when the two met in the ring.

[Flawless 2]

GOOD QUESTION, WHY NOT DAWSON




Because he is a CW fighter

[Pride Of Arkans]

Dawson cannot destroy anyone he wins decisions
he would not destroy Kessler but he would win a ud.