Didn't like Hamed and his gurning antics in the ring. I was delighted when Marco Barrera gave him a boxing lesson.
Khan v Alvarez
+8
Reebok Trotter
Norpig
rammywhite
boltonbonce
scottjames30
Hip Priest
luckyPeterpiper
Sluffy
12 posters
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
22 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 12:03
wanderlust
Nat Lofthouse
boltonbonce wrote:Tasty encounter with Kell Brook on the cards now.
There was something on the radio this morning about Khan not wishing to fight Brook because "he's just not high profile enough" so I don't think that will happen unless Khan runs out of options.
23 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 12:07
boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
Amir needs to get real. He can't call the shots any more.
24 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 13:01
Guest
Guest
boltonbonce wrote:Amir needs to get real. He can't call the shots any more.
...nor, it would appear, can he take them.
(Aye, a-thank-yeaw....!)
25 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 13:05
boltonbonce
Nat Lofthouse
I must be one of a happy band of people who haven't yet been run over by Khan. There's still time though.
26 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 18:15
scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
boltonbonce wrote:Didn't like Hamed and his gurning antics in the ring. I was delighted when Marco Barrera gave him a boxing lesson.
That was great, gave the horrible twat a lesson.
27 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 18:31
Reebok Trotter
Nat Lofthouse
Hamed was a decent fighter but I didn't like his attitude. He was far too cocky. He was never the same after Barrera whupped his ass.
28 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 18:39
scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
Reebok Trotter wrote:Hamed was a decent fighter but I didn't like his attitude. He was far too cocky. He was never the same after Barrera whupped his ass.
I agree, he met his match there, at least Fury backs his talk up and whupped klitschko's arse.
29 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 18:43
Reebok Trotter
Nat Lofthouse
scottjames30 wrote:Reebok Trotter wrote:Hamed was a decent fighter but I didn't like his attitude. He was far too cocky. He was never the same after Barrera whupped his ass.
I agree, he met his match there, at least Fury backs his talk up and whupped klitschko's arse.
I agree Scott..... but I still think Fury might meet his match when he steps up against our other World Heavyweight Champion.
31 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 18:50
scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
Fury would smash Joshua to bits, Joshua has never fought anybody remotely like Fury.
The only heavyweight on Furys level, or two heavyweights are Klit and Wilder, the rest are bare bums in the shower.
The only heavyweight on Furys level, or two heavyweights are Klit and Wilder, the rest are bare bums in the shower.
32 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 18:50
Reebok Trotter
Nat Lofthouse
Boggersbelief wrote:Anthony Joshua is a fraud
How so?
33 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 18:51
Reebok Trotter
Nat Lofthouse
scottjames30 wrote:Fury would smash Joshua to bits, Joshua has never fought anybody remotely like Fury.
The only heavyweight on Furys level, or two heavyweights are Klit and Wilder, the rest are bare bums in the shower.
Scott, IF the fight comes off then I'm happy to have a £20 wager with the profits going to charity.
34 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 18:54
scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
He has been given a limelight by his promotion team, building him up to be a superstar, putting bums infront of him, it's all a con, circus act, Fury hasn't even got a promotion team.
That's the difference, AJ is as boggers says a fraud.
That's the difference, AJ is as boggers says a fraud.
35 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 18:54
scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
Reebok Trotter wrote:scottjames30 wrote:Fury would smash Joshua to bits, Joshua has never fought anybody remotely like Fury.
The only heavyweight on Furys level, or two heavyweights are Klit and Wilder, the rest are bare bums in the shower.
Scott, IF the fight comes off then I'm happy to have a £20 wager with the profits going to charity.
Done.
36 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 21:11
Bwfc1958
Tinned Toms - You know it makes sense!
He was a bit of a tit but every sport needs characters. I'm not a massive fan of Tyson Fury but dull he isn't.Reebok Trotter wrote:Hamed was a decent fighter but I didn't like his attitude. He was far too cocky. He was never the same after Barrera whupped his ass.
37 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 21:43
Sluffy
Admin
Reebok Trotter wrote:Hamed was a decent fighter but I didn't like his attitude. He was far too cocky. He was never the same after Barrera whupped his ass.
Apparently he broke his hand in his match before the Barrera bout, which never properly healed. He only boxed once again (and won) after this match with Barrera citing a chronic hand problem.
For the Barrera bout he turned up 3 stone over the weight limit and apparently was sweating it off even on the night before the contest - he clearly wasn't up for this fight for whatever reason.
I thought he was a superb boxer and it was a pity how his career petered out.
38 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 10 2016, 21:57
luckyPeterpiper
Ivan Campo
Remind me not to make any more boxing predictions.
Khan was actually winning until that one hit but I bet his ears are still ringing now! Sheesh, I half expected his head to land in someone's lap about four rows back in the audience.
You called it dead on sluffy, he got one solid punch to the head and did a sack of spuds impression.
Khan was actually winning until that one hit but I bet his ears are still ringing now! Sheesh, I half expected his head to land in someone's lap about four rows back in the audience.
You called it dead on sluffy, he got one solid punch to the head and did a sack of spuds impression.
39 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 17 2016, 10:54
whatsgoingon
Frank Worthington
I have nothing but admiration for him for taking the fight, too many boxers hide behind politics to avoid fighting worthy opponents. But several pundits before said Khan was too brave for his own good and I would agree with that, it was a fight he should never have taken. Even while he was "winning" the fight it was painfully obvious that he was overmatched and was having no impact on Alvarez whilst using up a lot of energy.
While I don't necessarily think it's possible to judge whether Joshua is the real deal or not, there are parallels between him and Bruno in terms of physique (I don't believe that a muscle bound physique is actually beneficial for a boxer as it restricts movement) and how they are managed in terms of hand-picking opponents to make him look good. We will only see what he's made of when someone get's in the ring with him who isn't intimidated by his size and tests his chin.
While I don't necessarily think it's possible to judge whether Joshua is the real deal or not, there are parallels between him and Bruno in terms of physique (I don't believe that a muscle bound physique is actually beneficial for a boxer as it restricts movement) and how they are managed in terms of hand-picking opponents to make him look good. We will only see what he's made of when someone get's in the ring with him who isn't intimidated by his size and tests his chin.
40 Re: Khan v Alvarez Tue May 17 2016, 18:31
scottjames30
Nat Lofthouse
Scared to fight ( world champion ) Kell Brook, he says he wants bigger names, what gives him the right to think he can fight who he wants?
Get back of the line you no chin big nose cocky prick.
Get back of the line you no chin big nose cocky prick.
Go to page : 1, 2, 3
Similar topics
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum