Arthur Abraham v Jermain Taylor - Super Six

he beat Bernard Hopkins twice and Cory Spinks.

 

Hopkins is debateable and Spinks hadn't fought at middleweight before or since.

 

He beat X twice and drew with Wright. Even if you think they were 50-50 it shows he belongs. He was leading against Froch, did well v Pavlik.

Taylor belongs. His record is average cos he actually fights the best.

 

11 out of Taylors 12 most recent fights have been past, present or future champs and he went 8-3-1 (arguably leading in 2 of his losses). Not bad me thinks.

 

Taylor can outbox Arthur......though no longer weight drained the King will be more explosive, Abraham clean K.O in the 6th.

Hope they show this at the Trent FM Arena :good

 

No bad at all but he's been KO'd 3 times, theres also a fair few 147 and 154 guys in that list and the less said about the version of Lacy he beat the better. You could argue that he hasn't beaten a top middleweight in 4 years....

 

:huhPavlik got a UD 2nd time around.

Not sure why people are keen to pick holes in Taylors record here,its superior to the records of any of the other 5 fighters in this tournament(albeit at MW)

 

Abraham KO.

With Pavlik and Froch having alrdy stopped Taylor I expect Abraham to do the same.

 

Taylor if it goes the distance has an outstanding chance, and with his new training he could be in with a real shot of achieving that. Still, you wouldn't want your house on it while you are waiting for the cards...

Abraham's territory is rounds 8-12. That is when he's done his best work against so many opponents and that is where Taylor struggles.

 

All good and great middleweights have welters and light middles in their record. As long as they are good fighters then they are good wins.

Taylor has been ko'd twice and by two guys who are considered two of the heaviest handed fighters in boxing today.

Your last line is deceiving. He has been mixing it at the highest level. In a cross road fight with Lacy he domianted him bar a knockdown. He was beating a world champ in Froch. He's operating at the highest level and competing so the 4 year thing don't mean nothing.

Taylors never got his due since Hopkins I. I don't know why. Technically he is atrocious but he is a true fighter to the core.

 

I think I can answer your last question, its because HBO were desperately teliing everyone who would listen that he was the next big American superstar of boxing on the back of middleweight title defences against smaller men (prior to Hopkins I don't think there is a natural 160lber in his title defences) when it was quite obvious that, despite being a decent fighter, he didn't have the skills for such a lofty job.

When you add in 2 snooze fests against Hopkins (decent results but probably down to Hopkins not liking 'busy' fighters at this stage in his career more than Taylor being the superior fighter), the draw against Wright and 2 loses to Pavlik its not too hard to why their might be differing opinions about the quality of his record. The fact that the win over a shopworn (to say the least!) Lacy is the stand out result from the last 4 years says a lot as well....