Name some good british fighters who had very little or no amature experience?

Anthony Small never got further than last 16 in the ABA's

Johnny Nelson bearley won an amateur fight

Ola Alafoabi never has an amateur fight

 

I dont think Shea Neary had much amateur experiance, could be wrong though

Must be loads who had a martial arts back ground only - can only think of Skelton off the top of my head

 

Curtis Woodhouse never had an amatuer bout.

I dunno how boxers can get licences without having any amatuer experience.

 

pele reid

 

Martin Rogan I believe.

 

Yeah to be fair roggie is who sprang to my mind first. Just comes across as a tough old ****er. somebody probably said to him about 3 years ago that he should box instead of knocking people out all the time like they did with Foreman

 

Terry Dunstan

 

I think you can tell, most of the names above had that little something missing that would have made them world class.

 

rogan had loads of am fights, he was national champ on a few occasions i think and was intending on fighting at the athens games

 

Dunstan had a lot of amateur fights for the Fitzroy Lodge and then St.Monica's.
Anthony Small had a lot of amateur experience in the South East divs and then in New York.
Johnny Nelson was a terrible amateur and turned it round -
Perhaps Clinton Woods - he had a bit of an anonymous unpaid career.
It's staggering that the pro game doesn't have to give one penny to the amateur game, not a single penny.

Adios.

 

There is nothing official but if your trying to tell me Bradley Saunders or Luke Campbell have not enjoyed a steak dinner on the sports network account i would be very suprised.

 

Enzo Maccarinelli had a very limited amateur career due the breakaway W.A.B.F and the limitations that came with that. Meant there were less people he was eligible to box and was not recognised for any international competitions.

Talking of good pros with little amateur experience, the opposite also rings true. I feel it is possible to have too much amateur experience. The first man that springs to mind is Jorge Luis Gonzalez. In the ams he beat Bowe, Lewis, and I think he even beat Stevenson if I'm not mistaken. However he bombed as a pro, often criticised for being too "amateur like".
But I think it's horses for courses, everybody's different. Bernard Hopkins did more or less nothing in the amateurs yet has gone on to achieve great things as a pro, where Audley Harrison won an Olympic gold medal and hasn't even won a domestic title in the 8 or 9 years he's been a pro.
Mike Tyson couldn't get on the Olympic squad, yet became one of the most sensational heavyweight phenomenons ever. Mark Breland is often hailed as one of the greatest amateurs ever, but despite becoming a world champion in the pros there is often a sense of underachievement about him.


When you think of the future of boxing, one has to wonder what future generations of pros will be like, as the pro and amateur game are getting further and further apart with regards to styles and technique. Boxers no longer train to box other boxers in the amateurs, they train to accomodate the computer system - which seems to be getting worse by the year. Now top level amateur boxing is becoming more so a game of tag with gloves and head guards.
This is bound to have an adverse effect on pro boxing in years to come if it stays the way it is.
In thirty years most of the amateur coaches will be ones who learned in the computer era and that's all they will be passing on and eventually the more, shall we say, "traditional" methods of boxing will fade out.
Computer scoring is killing the amateur sport, which as a result will eventually kill the professional game. Anyone agree or disagree? Am interested in hearing thoughts and opinions on this.

 

Agree entirely Gaz. So many things are broken in boxing but the old fella'z sat at ringside prefer not to realise that.They might actually have to do some work instead of just sat pushing a button for the guy from there favourite amateur club or region.