I ain't bothered about you disagreeing with me, I'm pissed off about you questioning my criteria, something I've clearly stated about five times! Get used to it, I don't take **** from noobs:deal
Agree with McC from your side of the water. Shame he didnt get the match up with David Barnes, would have been a good technical fight.
Oh to have 10,000 posts Who do you think is more skilled,Ricky Hatton or Frankie Gavin?One has proved his talent against world class opposition,the other has not.Do you see where i'm going here...
I normally agree with a lot of what you have to say, even though i don't normally comment. But this **** with noobs it pathetic. 84 posts, versus 10k plus posts means **** all, knowledge isn't posts at the end of the day. Comments like that are why boxreccers think esb is full of wankers. (i am not a boxreccer per se, i just browse on there sometimes)
Just giving back a bit pal, only in jest:goodTo be fair to him he knows what he's on about, I'll concede that. In response to Loughlan, comparing Hatton to Haye is ridiculous. Haye managed to evade Valuev for 12 rounds, puts his punches together well in most of his other fights and doesn't just rely on his pure power. He uses nice little feints from his cagey stance to get his punches off. Napa, as good as he is in his mini-James Toney style, gets kudos no doubt. But Britains most skilled boxer? No. I'd say Frankie Gavin is more impressive thus far, but as I say; Haye has proved his skillset. People seem to think that having no power puts you at a massive disadvantage. Tell that to Ivan Calderon. Napa has been on the wrong end of some dodgy decisions but it doesn't mean he's uber-skilled and Britains best. He's tidy, no doubt. But not as skilled as Haye. The fact they have completely different styles does not make comparing them that easy to be fair. There is no one around currently bar Frankie Gavin that looks to be one of our 'technicians'. I.e Driscoll, Buchnanan.
Having thought about this, it didn't matter **** that haye didn't have the power to KO valuev. End of the day he won but adapting his skills and tactics. The fact his has KO power helps him in some fights and not others. Where Napa is concerned he has a certain skill set and has developed how he has due to the fact he can't get respect for his power in the ring, so he has developed good evasive skills and counter punching. But i would concede that although i cant put my finger on what it is he lacks, he lacks something that would have taken to the next level by this point in his career. Whether it be that he doesn't have a star quaility, or that you couldn't sell his style to anyone outside of boxing circles who would appreciate his style of boxing, i don't know, but there seems to be something lacking on the basis he hasn't moved on.
I wasn't comparing Hatton to Haye,I was comparing a proven world class operator with questionable skills - Hatton,to an unproven boxer with obvious skills - Gavin.Obviously Gavin has the more impressive skillset even though he has yet to prove it against world class opposition.I get where you're coming from but I think Britain has far more skilled fighters than Haye.
Haye an awful finisher, give me a break. hes got a 90% KO ratio. His reflexes are clearly excellent, he rarley gets hit clean (luckily so becuse if he does he goes down. Mayweather also has a solid chin so doesnt matter as much if he get smashed in the face.
I'm not saying Haye is unskilled,far from it but he is not the most skilled in my opinion.I was using the Hatton/Gavin comparison to show that skill level can be gauged whether the fighters in question have proven their talent at world level or not.If Gavin never got to show what he can do at world level he would still go down as one of Britains most skilled boxers,he can do things in the ring that others simply can't.Same applies to Booth and Nappa.