I see distant similarities to fury Parker. All well and good nullifying the intensity and I did at one point think kg had it but no matter how good your footwork is if you’re not letting your hands go in the champions back yard you’re going to struggle at the decision
He did do a good job of nullifying Warrington but he didn’t do much else. (You could also say that Warrington nullified Galahad’s offence as neither landed much of significance, at least Warrington was trying to fight though). Mayweather would at least nullify an opponents offence and land some point scoring shots of his own to ‘win’ rounds. Was a close fight but I had Warrington edging it. Wouldn’t argue either way, was a pretty sh*t fight to watch to be honest.
Come on, 90% of the clean accurate punches came from Galahad. He never throw a massive number of punches but when he did he done so with the precision of a brain surgeon.
I know people saying KG nullified and didnt do a lot else. The fact is he nullified Josh and to be fair, Josh barely landed much of note throughout the entire fight, so I don't see how you can say he won the fight. The fact the crowd was virtually silent between rounds 3 and 8 especially spoke volumes.
Galahad had better Footwork Control of pace Better defence Better punch accuracy Landed more clean shots Galahad and Dom Ingles tactics were world class
George Groves better have brought some safety goggles sitting next to Big John fury, if Big John gets excited he will accidentally pull a eye out.
Have to be honest mate, I only really remember Warrington landing the very sporadic clean shot in the midst of a flurry. Battle of the jabs was indecisive, both landed with similar frequency. One of those fights I would probably need to watch again but don't think I'll bother lol
I am objective and Ga Hope my post 36 minutes ago helped you - experience in watching fights helps one to predict the cards at the end. If Warden wants home fighter to win, there is 95% chance it will happen if the away fighter has not destroyed the home man.
I'm going to say it, I enjoyed it. Sue me. Once it was clear what Barry's tactics were I thought it was a good test of Warrington and sadly I thought he largely fluffed his lines. He looked utterly lost at times and despondent as the things that had worked against Selby and Frampton weren't helping against Galahad. Yes it was messy, yes it was clinch city, but there's a certain attraction in seeing someone go out to negate a dangerous opponent and largely nail it. I thought Galahad narrowly won it, but could understand scoring a narrow win for Josh also, especially with his strong finish to the fight. The cards for Josh though were way too wide. Oh and Josh you can take that 'you can't come to the home of a champion' **** and stick it where the sun don't shine. I despise that utter bollocks when it's trotted out across the pond, don't start with it here. Once that bell goes there's no champion till the decision as far as I'm concerned.
I wanted Warrington to win and backed him. That was my mindset. I like him, I like his story, I love the way he fights... However, he lost that fight. I know that’s not a popular thing to say. Sorry Spartacus. I had it 116-112 Galahad. It was an ugly fight and Galahad should have been deducted points for excessive clinching. Even then I would have give him the decision. He consistently landed the better scoring shots. His ring generalship was superb, he held the centre of the ring and dictated the pace and tempo of the fight. He silenced the Leeds crowd and that said it all. The way he was switching stances was quality. Yes, Galahad is a drugs cheat. He has hardly any fans. He made that fight an eyesore, but he won that fight and that result has left a bitter taste for me.