thing about khan that pisses me off he never wants to avenge his losses

Doesn't want to get his glass shattered again

 

He should have avenged all three losses, all are winnable if he fought smart.

 

Well he was scheduled to rematch Peterson (he was robbed in the first fight IMO) before we found out Lamont was roided up to the eyeballs and it rightly got canx

Al haymon/GBP took Garcia off in another direction and Presscitt is probably washing cars back in home country so who cares

 

OP has no clue he ducked Prescott that's it he wanted the other 2 rematches

 

Khan was cheated in Washington, DC in the fight with Peterson who had a crooked referee, judges and boxing commission. Peterson was on steroids.

However Matthysse knocked Peterson out in the third round, but Peterson is still IBF champion?! How sick...............

 

I think the OP has started a good discussion and agree with him,except I think Amir DOES have an exciting style. Has avoided nobody except the boxers who have already beat him.I don't understand people saying he beat Peterson,thought he was beaten handily.The time for a Prescott return is gone,but he could have made a voluntary when champion.Risky move though. I really don't believe him when he says he has been chasing a return with Garcia.If he had fought himself back into contention instead of talking about it he would have got one. With the same result,and I suspect he knows it.

 

The Prescott one isnt too bad because look at people that have rematched people they got their first loss to they lose again

Had Peterson winning was a close fight definitely shoulda rematches him and dont think he would ever take a Garcia rematch

 

That's not entirely true.

Khan signed up for an immediate rematch with Lamont Peterson, but Peterson was caught using PEDS, so he's to blame for the rematch not taking place.

Danny Garcia has never shown any aspect of giving Khan a rematch, after Khan beat Molina he called out Garcia, but Garcia doesn't seem that interested in fighting Khan again. It may happen though?

As for Prescott, it would be pointless just now for Khan even though it would still sell. Because Prescott's been defeated over and over and it's a very high risk low reward fight for Khan, even more so than the Kell Brook fight.

 

just pionting out khan has been beat over and over just like presscott

 

Khan's only got 3 losses (one more than Froch), but he's won and unified two world titles and he's still young. Whereas Prescott's loses over and over at fringe level.

At the end of the day you don't hear Mayweather wanting to fight Prescott.

 

add the limond fight and he only as one less than presscott if you dont its still only two off julio diaz would question the result of his last fight also making them equal

 

That's very debatable, but if you want to start doing that then we could go through all the boxers. For instance Froch, You could say he lost to Dirrell and you could count the Groves fight as a loss as well :hey

Lets be realistic here Floyd wants to fight Khan. And if Khan beats Collazo (which is a big ask) then fights Floyd then that will make him the current active British fighter who has fought the best opposition.

 

who is this dirrell one speaks of

 

Getting a bit tired of reading that Khan lost to Limond.

The ITV feed is quite instructive, coz the round clock is on screen the whole time.
Khan hits the deck as the clock changes to 2:03 remaining in the 6th round.
At 1:59 to go, just 4 seconds later, ref starts counting at 5 (ie Khan's lost a second)
At 1:53 Khan is on his feet - the ref calls him forward and the fight continues.

Therefore, ten seconds after he hits the deck he's on his feet being called forward.

Then Khan survives the round and goes on to punch Limond to a standstill.

And let's not forget, the ref is not a freaking metronome - all refs will count slow, or fast, when you compare them to an accurate timepiece. If you're talking about a second here or there then you're talking garbage.

Khan beat the count, then beat Limond. There is no other objective way of looking at it.