Comments Thread For: Bradley-Alexander Winner Best at 140, Regardless of Belts

[wazaa.]

Winner is best at 140... loser goes behind Khan...

who do you consider #2 now?

[Luilun]

Just the facts dude live with it

[Sparked_1985]

Winner is best at 140... loser goes behind Khan...

I'd agree with this.

Though I'd be more comfortable accepting Bradley as the best fighter at 140 if I'm honest. But who knows Alexander might take Timmy apart and look sensational and he'd be top dog then.

[JakeNDaBox]

What does that have to do with his ranking at 140lbs?

Nothing... I'm just saying, one bad night doesn't forever define a career.

Alexander's ONE bad night as a pro was a close, controversial decision win. Plenty have made the argument that Alexander deserved to win (though by the slimmest of margins), whereas others had Kotelnik getting robbed. He's all but dominated everyone else he's faced. Urango was the only other fight in which he somewhat struggled, but he scored a monster knockout.

Honestly, I've heard more people argue that Maidana was handicapped by Cortez' over officiating in the Khan fight than those who claim Kotelnik was robbed against Alexander.

Funny how THAT is left out of the equation in this argument, when in fact that was the dominant point of discussion shortly after the fight.

For what it's worth, I had both Alexander and Khan winning 7 rounds in the aforementioned fights. Alexander won 115-113 on my card, while I had Khan winning 114-111 due to the KD, point deduction and the 10th scored 10-8 despite the presence of a KD.

[wazaa.]

Is this so hard for people to comprehend? Let's face it, most of the people on this board started watching boxing around 2000, at the earliest.

Well, then this whole article was unnecessary. There already is a No.1 and his name is Bradley.

The title of this article gives an impression as if the no.1 and no.2 are going at it.

[dvb]

Salita actually came after Kotenlik, so that would be the one listed in his last three opponents if you're going to break it down that way.

The way I see it is, Khan's last four fights are what have placed him near/at the top of the JWW mountain.

As for your post, again much like I did a play on Dirk Diggler's earlier post, I can do the same to yours. You completely reduce Bradley and Alexander's opponents, yet act as if Khan's trio spent their spare time turning water into wine.

i just think kotelnik,maidana and malignaggi are better more tricky and dangerous(tricky style,and power) boxers than witter,abregu,urango,peterson,and an old campbell.

look at who malignaggi,kotelnik and maidana fought and how they have won,and to what level of opponents they have lost to and how they lost.

also i think khan has been more consistently dominating.

salita was ajoke fight,but he finished that like he should have,less than a round.

i like both alexander and bradley,they have skills,and have faced ok opponents,but i do think they are being over hyped and khan is being underhyped in fact,just cuz people dont like him for some reasons.

[wazaa.]

Nothing... I'm just saying, one bad night doesn't forever define a career.

Alexander's ONE bad night as a pro was a close, controversial decision win. Plenty have made the argument that Alexander deserved to win (though by the slimmest of margins), whereas others had Kotelnik getting robbed. He's all but dominated everyone else he's faced. Urango was the only other fight in which he somewhat struggled, but he scored a monster knockout.

Honestly, I've heard more people argue that Maidana was handicapped by Cortez' over officiating in the Khan fight than those who claim Kotelnik was robbed against Alexander.

Funny how THAT is left out of the equation in this argument, when in fact that was the dominant point of discussion shortly after the fight.

For what it's worth, I had both Alexander and Khan winning 7 rounds in the aforementioned fights. Alexander won 115-113 on my card, while I had Khan winning 114-111 due to the KD, point deduction and the 10th scored 10-8 despite the presence of a KD.

I don't think so:

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=413267&highlight=lederman

http://www.boxingscene.com/forums/showthread.php?t=413722&highlight=lederman

[Chief2ndzOnly!]

You sound like a Khan nuthugger,Khan would never fight Abregu..Oh and since your most likely a casual fan(ya have to be if you don't know who Abregu is)let me let you in on a lil something,Abregu is a big puncher who has KO'd and knock down big WW's..That was a very impressive win for Bradley's first fight at the weight..Bradley also beat Witter when Witter was ranked behind Hatton,which means he beat the num 1 Jr WW(what was Paulie and Kottie ranked when Khan beat them??)he also beat Holt who was ranked four or five when losing to Bradley..Campbell just came off a big win at LW not to mention was unified at LW and nobody at the weight wanted to fight him..Let's look at Khan shall we..He beat MAB to make his debut at the weight I believe,I also believe MAB is a natural featherweight(I think JMM is too make sense now why Khan want to fight him lol)he beat Salita and unproven nobody..He went on to beat Kottie,which with his physical attributes he had better won that fight,oh and Kottie not a big puncher but this was a solid victory..He then moves on to fight Paulie who just lost to Hatton(a natural 140lb fighter)Paulie then moved on to beat Diaz(not that impressive Diaz was a blown up LW who got his ass beat by Nate Campbell lol)this was not a good win but he did beat a ranked 140lb so kudo's..Maidana his best win at the weight..I think Khan is right were he belongs behind Bradley..Bradley has the best resume at the weight no denying that,but the winner of Bradley/Alexander has to fight Khan..

Dont forget Rome homie. Nate could no longer make LW, so it was a fair fight at 140, as Nate was moving to 140 anyway.

I agree Tim has the best resume at 140, and if he wins against Devon, it solidifies him as #1 at JWW.

[JakeNDaBox]

i just think kotelnik,maidana and malignaggi are better more tricky and dangerous(tricky style,and power) boxers than witter,abregu,urango,peterson,and an old campbell.

look at who malignaggi,kotelnik and maidana fought and how they have won,and to what level of opponents they have lost to and how they lost.

also i think khan has been more consistently dominating.

salita was ajoke fight,but he finished that like he should have,less than a round.

i like both alexander and bradley,they have skills,and have faced ok opponents,but i do think they are being over hyped and khan is being underhyped in fact, just cuz people dont like him for some reasons.

I'm actually a Khan fan, believe it or not (and a fan of all three mentioned in this discussion).

My problem in this discussion is, for example your post references "an old Campbell", while praising Malignaggi. Paulie's worst two losses had people calling for his retirement on both occasions, or at least dismissing his chances to ever again fight at the title level. I'm not sure he won more than one round combined in his fights w/ Hatton and Khan.

Malignaggi's saving grace going into the Khan fight was catching Juan Diaz at the perfect time - on the downside, and having to fatten up to JWW. It made everyone forget that:
- he was dominated by Hatton
- looked pathetic against N'Dou in their unbe-weave-able rematch.
- struggled against Ngoudjo

That said, I see the argument where Khan could be rated higher than Alexander right now. I never dismissed that theory.

What I am arguing is that an Alexander win over Bradley (especially one sans controversy) would trump Khan's best wins (Kotelnik, Maidana) and position him back ahead of Khan in a manner of ranking fighters from 1-10.

IMO, Bradley is already #1. A win next win further cements that claim to where Khan would have to beat him to prove otherwise.

Regardless of the outcome next Saturday, nothing that Khan does on April 16 - short of facing next Saturday's winner - will strengthen his case of rating any higher than he is at present moment.

One thing I will admit that a large portion of my article was written on the premise that Bradley wins (which is what I think will happen).

[wazaa.]

I'm actually a Khan fan, believe it or not (and a fan of all three mentioned in this discussion).

My problem in this discussion is, for example your post references "an old Campbell", while praising Malignaggi. Paulie's worst two losses had people calling for his retirement on both occasions, or at least dismissing his chances to ever again fight at the title level. I'm not sure he won more than one round combined in his fights w/ Hatton and Khan.

Malignaggi's saving grace going into the Khan fight was catching Juan Diaz at the perfect time - on the downside, and having to fatten up to JWW. It made everyone forget that:
- he was dominated by Hatton
- looked pathetic against N'Dou in their unbe-weave-able rematch.
- struggled against Ngoudjo

That said, I see the argument where Khan could be rated higher than Alexander right now. I never dismissed that theory.

What I am arguing is that an Alexander win over Bradley (especially one sans controversy) would trump Khan's best wins (Kotelnik, Maidana) and position him back ahead of Khan in a manner of ranking fighters from 1-10.

IMO, Bradley is already #1. A win next win further cements that claim to where Khan would have to beat him to prove otherwise.

Regardless of the outcome next Saturday, nothing that Khan does on April 16 - short of facing next Saturday's winner - will strengthen his case of rating any higher than he is at present moment.

One thing I will admit that a large portion of my article was written on the premise that Bradley wins (which is what I think will happen).

Let's say Alexander beats Bradley. How will you rank Bradley, Alexander and Khan then?