Can Prescott beat Mccloskey? and if he does should he get a shot at Khan?

Prescott is more underrated than McCloskey is. After those losses, everyone said he sucks, but nobody references his improvements in his last fight against Jargal. Significant improvement in technical discipline and versatility. He dominated in a fight I was worried he'd have trouble in.

 

Well you're an idiot for being impressed with him beating a BUM!!! Jargal was not underrated if anything he was overrated he never beat a decent opponent and just 2 fights before the Presscott fight he drew with a fighter with a losing record. He sucked and Prescott sucks.

 

You dont put a 21 year old undefeated kid into an immediate rematch against some guy that just laided him out in 61 seconds you just dont. Putting any fighter into an immediate rematch s stupid esp a very young still growing prospect. He needed his confidence back if he fought Prescott again after that he wouldve got KO'd again and he mostly wouldnt be where he is right now. Great managing by Khan's people on that one. Not his fault Prescott sucked and couldnt win a decent fighter after.

 

Forrest was a great fighter but was side lined by shoulder injuries for years after the Mayorga fights but still managed to come back and have a decent career at 154 even though he was past his best and he showed in the rematch that he was def better then Mora. Against Mayorga it was just a bad style match up and back then Mayorga was a beast. He was a lot faster(very underrated speed), hit like a mule and had stamina to do it for 12 rounds. Also a great chin. Forrest was just over whelmed and couldnt deal with that style even though you can make an arguement for him winning the second fight. Head to head Forrest beats a lot of great welterweights including every welterweight out there now and prob all the 164 pounders. So comparing him to Prescott is a huge slap in the face to Forrest.

 

You're the idiot if you rely on a boxer's record alone to indicate his skill level, or whether or not he has improved. Jargal was a decent fighter coming up, with only a split-decision loss on his record, against a guy who hadn't had a 2nd loss in 20 fights prior. He had decent fundamentals, some pop in both hands, decent speed, and good defensive movement. He wasn't a top contender by any means, but I never claimed he was. He was simply a fighter who, despite showing no glaring flaws, was dominated by Prescott, who undeniably showed improvements in his technical skill level.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqbmAB215tI[/ame]


Khan doesn't need to fight Prescott, Prescott as of now doesn't deserve the shot, Khan would likely beat Prescott decisively if they fought again, but that doesn't mean Prescott isn't improving and that he can't beat McCloskey, who himself made a poor showing against Khan. Boxing is more than black-and-white judgments of fighters. Calling low-ranked fighters-the foundation of the sport- bums just because they're not big names shows your depth, or lack thereof, as a boxing fan.

 

he will deserve a shot for sure but i think mccloskey probably schools him

 

While I think (know) Khan was not only better than Prescott then, but has now advanced so far past him that the bout would be pointless, similar to a Wlad/Sanders rematch

A LOT of people, especially in England, think Khan is **** purely because of that fight, and will not let it go

I think it could help his image in a lot of peoples eyes to destroy him

 

Yeah that 22-1-1 fighter that had a completely padded record and sucked himself and Jargel STILL LOST!!!! when a 22-1-1 fighter fights a 15-0-3 fighter in only an 8 round fight its pretty much says all you need to know about them. The two best fighter Jargel has fought he lost two. And he drew with a 6-5-1 fighter in the fight before his lose and 2 years ago drew with a 10-21-2 fighter you can talk all that bull**** about records but when its that bad you cant claim "well his record doesnt show how good he really is". He was a C level fighter at best and yeah Prescott won easily. If he beats McClosksy then you can overrated him all you want but until then you just look like an assshole praising him off of a fight with a 15-1-3 fighter who's record doesnt show how BAD he actually is. Prescott looked the same in that fight as he did when he fought another C/D level fighter in Humberto Toledo and we saw how good Prescott was when he stepped up after that and got embarrassed by Mitchell and Vazquez. He's the same fighter. He's look good against scrubs and even though he's suppose to be this huge puncher he can barely knock out fighters that are a level above tomato cans but when he fights anything resembling a gate keeper or fringe contender he's going to lose.

 

And you put up a video against him vs a 6-5-1 fighter that he had a DRAW with to show how good he is?

 

Not great. But for ****'s sake he doesn't suck. I'm confident he'll beat McCloskey, or at least give him a tough fight. If he wins less than 5 rounds I'll have a short avatar bet with you.

 

Yeah he kinda does suck. If he didnt suck he would beat guys with records like 6-5 and 10-21-2.

And I'll take that bet. Even though McClosky isnt very good himself I still think he has even to beat Prescott. Maybe not as wide and embarrassing as Vazquez or Mitchell but he'll still win.

 

Sounds good.

 

One month sound good?

 

Yea one month sounds good. Do the rounds won/lost have to be official on all 3 scorecards? I guess that's a fair way to do it, unless robbery is apparent, in which case a poll would be fair.

 

Presscot does not have to earn a shot against me. Id sign his ass up in a heart beat just because he kmtfo in one round.