how good is Naazim Richardson

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by Macwitdacheese, Jun 11, 2013.


  1. :think also Virgil Hunter.I think Khan was better off with Roach
     
  2. bald_head_slick

    bald_head_slick Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    27,388
    2
    May 15, 2009
    Because YDKSAB. :yep

    Khan and Pac where with Roach forever and have no defense and can't cut off a ring for crap. OK. That's just them but... Watch more fights with Roach's fighters and see the exact same deficiencies. How many losses does a camp have in one year due to the exact same problems before you realize it is the camp? :huh:blood

    Khan will never realize his full potential to be trained part time training. He needs to move his ass to the US and become a full time student with Roach, Hill, or anyone else. :deal
     
  3. Nonito Smoak

    Nonito Smoak Ioka>Lomo, sorry my dudes Full Member

    53,088
    6,685
    Sep 8, 2010
    There seems to be a sentiment brewing that Khan was better off with Roach.

    I completely disagree.

    Khan needs to be smarter. He wasn't going to get that out of Roach, whose fighters show a distinct ability NOT to think things through in the ring, make adjustments, or come in prepared.
     
  4. Leonit

    Leonit Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,331
    4
    Jan 6, 2009
    Khan was definitely better with Roach I can't remember him getting rocked by C+ fighters when he was with him. Khan has deteriorated but it's hard to say how much of this is due to the physical and mental effect of the beating Garcia gave him. If Khan from the Diaz fight, fights against Maidana he gets KOed in 4 rounds.
     
  5. Leonit

    Leonit Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,331
    4
    Jan 6, 2009
    I think that Naazim is more proven than Virgil at that point. He had good results with at least 3 different fighters. Virgil for now has only Ward (correct me if wrong) and very questionable results with Khan and Angulo. Those fighters don't suit the style he taught Ward at all though. So it is hard to say if he didn't just chose the wrong fighters to work with.
     
  6. ripcity

    ripcity Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    20,449
    51
    Dec 5, 2006
    Khan is better off with headgear.
     
  7. Rumsfeld

    Rumsfeld Moderator Staff Member

    49,513
    15,926
    Jul 19, 2004
    Perhaps Khan was better with Roach. Difficult to say. Some trainers are more effective with certain fighters than others. I think it's too early to tell.

    It took Wladimir Klitschko a handful of fights before he the fine-tuning of Emanuel's training really took hold. Perhaps Hunter is a better match with Khan than we yet realize.

    That said, back on topic, Naazim is an outstanding trainer. No question about it.
     
  8. Rumsfeld

    Rumsfeld Moderator Staff Member

    49,513
    15,926
    Jul 19, 2004
    Just to play devil's advocate, I don't think it's necessarily fair to assume that Hunter is automatically trying to teach Khan or Angulo the type of things he's teaching (and has taught) Ward. Andre is an exceptionally gifted talent, period.

    Sometimes certain trainers do have a knack for certain styles. Emanuel, for instance. He's good with tall fighters who usually have power and work off the jab. But that doesn't mean he trained every fighter to fight that style. A good trainer works with what he has, and tries to improve on what's there. You work with a fighter's strengths and try to improve upon them, while also trying to minimize the effects of deficiencies and weaknesses.

    I think in many ways, Hunter might be trying to fine-tune Khan with some of the lessons Andre received, and certainly more of those same lessons than, say, Angulo is receiving. But I also think there are a fair share of lessons Andre received that Khan will never meet the prerequisites on, due to his limitations (which I believe are far greater than Ward's).
     
  9. Leonit

    Leonit Boxing Junkie Full Member

    12,331
    4
    Jan 6, 2009
    Very good point. Time will tell if he will be able to work with fighters with different styles or with only slick boxers. He doesn't have enough elite fighters at the moment to judge and to be honest Angulo and Khan were somewhat damaged already when he took care of them. I like listening to Virgil talk about boxing and I wish him the best. On a side note I still think that Angulo choice of his trainers was disastrous for his career.
     
  10. grinch

    grinch Member Full Member

    118
    0
    Dec 3, 2005
    Virgil, seems like a good dude, but giving khan advice from outside the ring was odd, very odd.. did he ever explain why he did this?
     
  11. jaymon112

    jaymon112 MARVELOUS Full Member

    2,846
    10
    Mar 14, 2012
    What I've heard though is Hill has just recently said he has only worked with Khan for 10 weeks altogether and if Khan want's to see some serious change he should move to the US and become a gym rat at his gym. 10 weeks is a short time for any type of change.
     
  12. Rumsfeld

    Rumsfeld Moderator Staff Member

    49,513
    15,926
    Jul 19, 2004
    Agreed.
     
  13. kommieforniaglo

    kommieforniaglo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    8,396
    15
    Jun 10, 2010
    I don't think its a valid apples to apples comparison when you compare what Hunter and Roach have done for Khan.


    Roach has had more time with Khan, I think it is still a little too early to make a definitive assertion on who is better.


    I like both
     
  14. D-G-TheTruth

    D-G-TheTruth Active Member Full Member

    518
    0
    Oct 17, 2010
    Hmmm, yeah I understand ams and pros a different game but andre ward was an olympic gold medalist, supposedly not lost since he was 12, I like virgil but I think he gets a little bit too much credit for ward, naazim is good though