That victory over an unbeaten prospect is more impressive than any of the other names on Darrens record.
Yeah maybe it is but Barker's already proved he can step up to the highest level and handle himself. Pirog has yet to do that. Pirog is tough and strong but a bit limited. Barker's got some skills. Close fight for me, could go either way. I hope it happens.
Maybe I was being a bit unkind, he's clearly more than just a banger. I still think Barker has enough to cope with him though.
Against the best middleweight in the world? Yes he was behind on the cards and got stopped late on. He gave Martinez lots of problems in the first half of the fight. He was highly praised for his performance. Did you see it?
Pirog's win over Maciel is underrated. Maciel is underrated, in fact. Anyway, I don't really consider Pirog a ''banger'', he's more of a boxer and a pretty awkward and unconventional one at that. Granted, he's probably not at the same level as Martinez, but stylistically he'd probably be a bit more troublesome for Barker if Darren were to fight in similar fashion to that of his Martinez gameplan.
Yes mate, i just think people are confusing Barker doing well with Barker doing better than was expected. In fact, given Barkers ability he should have done much BETTER than he did. Martinez is pretty overrated imo and being a southpaw Barker should have let his jab and straight right go a lot more than he did, whilst keeping that high guard up and fighting in a straight line, euro style. it would have upset martinez rythm and meant barker wouldnt have been punching with martinez which is his strength. It would have made martinez fight in a more conventional way and because of his unorthodox technique, made him look quite awkward and assisted in barker taking more rounds. thats just my opinion anyway ** martinez being the southpaw obviosuly
strange that seeing as a) you just did in some attempt of patrionising people b) this is a boxing forum, commenting is what you are here for
Fair enough. I thought he did both better than expected and I also think he did well. Could he have done better? It's easy to analyze it and, in hindsight, say he should have done this and he should have done that, but on the night, Martinez just had too much for him in the championship rounds. I think it's that simple. Martinez is probably overrated a little by some but he is a class act and Barker pushed him.
Its true that its easy to sit here with hindsight and act the smarty pants, but it is fruastrating to see guys lose over what essentially is 'in fight management' rather than strictly ability. That said some people shrink or dissapear after a title loss, but I think Barker (as well as Macklin and Murray) will be the better for the experience in the sense that they will have a greater balance between a fight plan and seeing whats in front of them.