Abraham, Froch, Taylor, Kessler in Showtime Shocker

[Mugwump]

**** me! This - might, just might - be boxing Nirvana.

Die MMA!

[MJ406]

Taylor's gas milage is too low.

He shouldn't be in the tourney being that he just got his ass KTFO.

that's what im getting at Dave, that "styles making fights" aside

Im under the impression that JT's best is behind him and it remains to be seen if he can handle the best at his current division (Super Middle)

**not saying Taylor will absolutely lose vs the Elite Level Super Middles

just if he is past his best like I believe, I wouldn't like his chances vs Abraham, Dirrell, Kessler or Ward.

and that has nothing to do with styles

I am looking at Taylor and where he is in his career

vs where the other 5 Super Middles are in respects to their careers.

and in the cases of Dirrell, Ward, Abraham, Froch and Kessler .. they have a lot more going for them then Jermain Taylor.

[Deja_Vous]

kessler is coming out of retirement to take part in the tourny?

that's what im getting at Dave, that "styles making fights" aside

Im under the impression that JT's best is behind him and it remains to be seen if he can handle the best at his current division (Super Middle)

**not saying Taylor will absolutely lose vs the Elite Level Super Middles

just if he is past his best like I believe, I wouldn't like his chances vs Abraham, Dirrell, Kessler or Ward.

and that has nothing to do with styles

I am looking at Taylor and where he is in his career

vs where the other 5 Super Middles are in respects to their careers.

and in the cases of Dirrell, Ward, Abraham, Froch and Kessler .. they have a lot more going for them then Jermain Taylor.

Yep..you said it.

[the_blueprint]

Wait...Green has one loss, and suffered a flash knockdown against Miranda, after dropping Miranda two rounds earlier and all the sudden he's CHINNY? The ONLY one on that list that I'd favor over Green would be Kessler.

yeah green is awesome, i reckon he would get far

can someone tell me how many people are in this tournament and is there a list of who it is

cos i wanna see danny jacobs, andre dirrell and andre ward in it to see how well they do. ward vs dirrell i really wanna see that

[Clegg]

Taylor doesn't deserve to be considered the best in the division, but I do think he deserves a fight with the likes of Abraham, Ward, Dirrell.

Look at Abraham's recent comp. Sure, Taylor has suffered defeats, but when is the last time he fought anyone as bad as Lujuan Simon or Oral? Probably about 4 or 5 years ago.

[MJ406]

yeah green is awesome, i reckon he would get far

can someone tell me how many people are in this tournament and is there a list of who it is

cos i wanna see danny jacobs, andre dirrell and andre ward in it to see how well they do. ward vs dirrell i really wanna see that

it's posted in the article, but anyway

Mikkel Kessler, Arthur Abraham, Jermain Taylor, Carl Froch, Andre Ward and Andre Dirrell are in this tourney

[dstew]

Taylor's gas milage is too low.

He shouldn't be in the tourney being that he just got his ass KTFO.

Taylor belongs in the tourney because he's proven time and again that he's a tough fight for anyone, and has only been KO'd by champion level fighters while being ahead on the cards after knocking them down earlier in each fight.

While his potential may seem to fall short of what you'd expect from the winner of this tournament, we at least KNOW what he is capable of and that's more than you can say for Ward and Dirrell who stand a decent chance themselves of being totally outclassed by the best in the division.

[Dave Rado]

and as for the bolded comment, again wasn't Pavlik a huge favorite in this fight?

So are you saying that the favourite always wins and that contrary to the history books, Pavlik actually did beat Hopkins, and Foreman actually did beat Ali? You originally said that if someone in the tournament loses one of his fights there that would mean there would be no point in watching any of his subsequent fights, with the implication that if he lost one fight, that proves he would automatically lose all the others. I have given numerous examples to prove that logic is ******, and all you can do is nitpick the examples without responding at all regarding your flawed logic.

If you can't understand the simple truth that just because someone loses a fight to fighter A, that doesn't always automatically mean he would lose to fighter B, then there's simply no point in continuing the discussion.

as the favorite would be favored for having the better, more effective style, right?

If you really believe that, you know nothing about boxing. You're saying in effect that Taylor's style is better than Hopkins' style and that Pavlik's style must therefore be better than both Taylor's and Hopkins' style, but that Hopkins's style is simultaneously worse that Pavlik's style and better than Pavlik's style.

Certain styles work well against some styles and work badly against others. If you can't understand that basic and simple truth then just forget it. Foreman's style worked well against Frazier's and Norton's styles but didn't work well against Ali's style or Jimmy Young's style. Jimmy Young's overall resume shows that he isn't in the same league as Foreman overall - but Foreman couldn't cope with Young's style. And the fact that they were heavyweights is irrelevant. There are literally thousands of examples at other weights.

And it's true that a journeyman with Young's style couldn't have beaten a prime Foreman, like Young did, obviously. "Styles make fights" doesn't mean that someone who struggles against a given style would struggle against that style even if his opponent was completely useless. But none of the people in the tourney are journeymen, all are good fighters, so that also is irrelevant.

And the fact that you personally had no interest in watching Pavlik get destroyed by Hopkins is also irrelevant to the issue of whether or not their respective styles had anything to do with the result when they fought.

[Dave Rado]

Im under the impression that JT's best is behind him and it remains to be seen if he can handle the best at his current division (Super Middle)

Maybe it is behind him (in fact most people would say that it probably is); but nevertheless, losing one fight to someone who may possibly just have had a style he couldn't cope with still wouldn't prove that he couldn't beat some of the other fighters in the tourney. I actually don't think that Taylor was ever on Kessler's level. I think he has a good chance against most of the others in the tourney, though, including against Froch if they fought again. I could turn out to be wrong about that, but if he loses his first fight in the tourney, then that on its own would prove nothing in that respect.

[MJ406]

can you read?

So are you saying that the favourite always wins and that contrary to the history books, Pavlik actually did beat Hopkins, and Foreman actually did beat Ali? You originally said that if someone in the tournament loses one of his fights there that would mean there would be no point in watching any of his subsequent fights, with the implication that if he lost one fight, that proves he would automatically lose all the others. I have given numerous examples to prove that logic is ******, and all you can do is nitpick the examples without responding at all regarding your flawed logic.

If you can't understand the simple truth that just because someone loses a fight to fighter A, that doesn't always automatically mean he would lose to fighter B, then there's simply no point in continuing the discussion.




If you really believe that, you know nothing about boxing. You're saying in effect that Taylor's style is better than Hopkins' style and that Pavlik's style must therefore be better than both Taylor's and Hopkins' style, but that Hopkins's style is simultaneously worse that Pavlik's style and better than Pavlik's style.

Certain styles work well against some styles and work badly against others. If you can't understand that basic and simple truth then just forget it. Foreman's style worked well against Frazier's and Norton's styles but didn't work well against Ali's style or Jimmy Young's style. Jimmy Young's overall resume shows that he isn't in the same league as Foreman overall - but Foreman couldn't cope with Young's style. And the fact that they were heavyweights is irrelevant. There are literally thousands of examples at other weights.

And it's true that a journeyman with Young's style couldn't have beaten a prime Foreman, like Young did, obviously. "Styles make fights" doesn't mean that someone who struggles against a given style would struggle against that style even if his opponent was completely useless. But none of the people in the tourney are journeymen, all are good fighters, so that also is irrelevant.

And the fact that you personally had no interest in watching Pavlik get destroyed by Hopkins is also irrelevant to the issue of whether or not their respective styles had anything to do with the result when they fought.

I think my brain is on the verge of bleeding with all the above ******ity of yours

when did I ever say the favorite always wins? where the hell did you come up with that one?

**what's the ****ing point of people betting on fights if the favorite won all the time? can you riddle me that one

the fact that your pulling stuff up out of nowhere really shows your sheer ******ity ... can you rip me for something I can say?

this is bordering on Yellow Journalism

again didn't I say for a fact that Foreman never beat Ali? why are you acting like I said the opposite? I know George didn't beat Ali ... that was Frazier.

and your bolded is dead wrong, I just said the interest level in seeing Taylor vs Froch, Taylor etc if he lost to Abraham would be limited

I didn't say it was "automatic" that if Taylor loses to Abraham, he's definitely for sure, 100% going to lose to whomever they put in front of him.

go back and read that, cuz your reading comprehension is seriously lacking
and it proves because you come up with new stuff I allegedly said, when I didn't.

and again, my logic is this .. if Taylor cannot beat Abraham, I don't like his chances vs Froch, Ward, or Dirrell

I never said "put it in the banks JT would lose to all of them"

just i don't like his chances vs the others if he loses to Abe.

yet you somehow interpret it as a "oh well if JT loses to A, he'll obviously lose to B, C and D"

again your the one throwing out the word automatic, I don't recall ever saying that.

but I do recall saying "not a forgone conclusion" again I'll quote my own post but please for the love of christ read

"**not saying Taylor will absolutely lose vs the Elite Level Super Middles

just if he is past his best like I believe, I wouldn't like his chances vs Abraham, Dirrell, Kessler or Ward."

how does that say Taylor "automatically" loses to the top Middles, I don't see automatic anywhere from me

I think im gonna go get a Q-tip to clean out my ears

and don't put words in my mouth

I never said automatic, and the fact that you are going on like I did is annoying.

why lie?

and don't you realize almost 70% of your post is dedicated to this "automatic" comment I never said?

and regarding the "Jermain's style, Pavlik's style, B-Hops style"

can it already you tool. I know who won the fights and why, ya gave me the 411 so shut up about it and stop rambling into the wind.

**but wasn't "Pavlik's style" a reason people favored him to win vs Hopkins? the experts thought he'd throw too many punches and be too big and strong

obviously they were wrong, but going into the fight Pavlik's "style" was said to be why he'd beat Hopkins

it didn't work out that way and he won 1 or 2 rounds total, but im just saying "styles make fights" on paper had Kelly Pavlik winning the fight

now that it's set and done, it's pretty easy to say Hopkins had the better style.

last bit about B-Hop/Pavlik and why I didn't care

because it's a catchweight bout.

Kelly Pavlik fights most of his fights @ Middleweight and is a beltholder at 160

Bernard Hopkins at the moment is a light Heavyweight (175).. 2 divisions above

**let me explain that ^ because you probably won't understand

Middleweight is 160 as you hopefully know, if Pavlik jumped one weight class, that would be 168, or Super Middleweight (the weight class after Middleweight)

since he's (Pavlik) fighting Hopkins @ 170 it is 2 more pounds than Super Middle, thus the 2 weight classes from Middleweight to Light Heavyweight

160 + 8 = Super Middle, + another 2 lbs = 170 .. 2 weight classes above Middleweight (160)

so they fight on PPV at 170.

big names aside, what does it prove? if Pavlik wins, he beat a 43 year old

and if Hop wins, well he beat a natural Middleweight.

reading comprehension would be appreciated.