Bob Arum: Kessler is on Pavlik's short list

He will never win another significant fight. Prove me wrong when he does. That is all.

 

I think it would be the best fight to be made!

 

You never heard me say that Pavlik, or especially not Miranda was great? I just think Pavlik is better than Kessler. IMO Taylor would have beaten Kessler 9 of 10 times. Your list of the people he has fought just proved my point. All B list fighters, at best. I still would like to see the fight.

 

What an acerbic rebuke! Throwing my "That is all" back at me- it is dead-set pure comical genius.

Though he no doubt will do so, whether or not Kessler wins another signifcant fight was not your contention. And I don't have to prove you wrong because I don't really care whether you're living in an alternate reality or not.

But I digress...

You originally said of Kessler, "[he is] Strong but not a boxer, not hard to hit, or IMO a big puncher," before proceeding to claim that he "is more of an athlete with gloves than a fighter." You then put the final nail in your ignoramus coffin with, "[Kessler is] a textbook boxer???...[Kessler is] really an average guy all round."

Plainly, as intimated earlier, you're asking of me to have Kessler win another "significant fight" to prove you wrong is tangential to your earlier statements.

You were assessing Kessler's ability as a fighter. Poorly.

Kessler IS a boxer. His defence, in particular his control of distance with footwork, IS good- very, very good. He IS a textbook boxer. Clearly. So you're wrong on all counts.

You either haven't seen Kessler, or are devoid of reality.

Whether the points above (with which you ridiculously disagree) are enough to beat Pavlik is the issue at hand. Personally, I think so in a close but clear fight. I have no problems with intelligent posters disagreeing after giving an even quasi-decent argument.

But when one clearly distort facts, showing demonstrable bias against one fighter, it bankrupts the discussion.

Please desist. Educate yourself.

And feel free to quote me again...

 

Back to the topic. How do we see the fight being made?

Think maybe Abraham beats Miranda. Pavlik then beats Abraham. Kessler plays with Miranda. Kessler/Pavlik meet? That would be wicked!

 

Kessler Vs Pavlik is a massive fight which we will al wanna see, but not yet man Calzaghe Vs Pavlik is the best fight in boxing now that PBF has ''retired''.

 

We don't. Two web sites with this news. One is Kessler's manager. One is Kesslers promoter. We've seen them do this same crap before and it never shows up ANYWHERE else.:bart

 

Seen him fight several times. His boxing talent is subject to opinion (like any other fighters), nothing more or less. So to say my opinion distorts facts is simply not accurate. I think hes average, but does well in a weak div. The facts are he is a decent boxer, a strong well trained athlete. A nice kid with a good jab, and ok power. He seems neither especially motivated, or gifted to me in any area. A stand up, somewhat stiff Euro fighter. In the mold of the Soviet bloc Olympic fighters of the 60's and 70's. The fight between him and JC was a good match because they both fight at about the same level. He can neither hit like Pavlik, box like JC, and doesn't have the hand speed of Taylor. A combination of moderate talents brought together to make a decent fighter. I understand the reasoning why people pull for him, despite reality. Its because you can relate to his average skills. They seem obtainable through hard work, vs the raw talent of a RJJ. However my long experience over rides my emotion when observing fighters. I have seen too many fighters like him come and go over the years. you'll see. I wish him the best, but i think his best fight will prove out to be the one with JC.

 

That's pretty gay, bro.

 

no its not. only your childish interpretation.

 

You have altered your tone considerably. That makes me all warm and fuzzy on the inside. Rather than being entirely dismissive of Kessler, you are now just being ignorant.

You've gone from, "[he is] strong but not a boxer" to "the facts are he is a decent boxer."

Rather than overriding your emotion, your "many years of experience" appear to have rendered you one-eyed.

And your, "He can neither hit like Pavlik, box like JC, and doesn't have the hand speed of Taylor. A combination of moderate talents brought together to make a decent fighter," what a ridiculous heuristic! Assuming that they are all true (which is highly disputable), using your logic, we could argue that Pavlik can neither box like Winky, doesn't have the power of Nunn, nor the handspeed of RJJ. Ergo, he is just a moderate talent. This would be clearly ridiculous, even to you. It is a fallacious method of analysing fighters.

And please stop with your incredibly patronising, "I understand the reasoning why people pull for him, despite reality. Its because you can relate to his average skills," and your emotive "a nice kid with a good jab."

I maintain that you are a buffoon.

Should they ever meet, Pavlik may well win. But it will be a great victory because he will have beaten a great fighter. It will not be a great victory because Kessler was "a nice kid with a good jab," nor because he was "a stand up, somewhat stiff Euro fighter...A combination of moderate talents brought together to make a decent fighter."

You can argue that Pavlik would win, should they meet. That is fine, and you are welcome to your opinion. You cannot do so on the grounds you have given. You have been ostensibly biased.

I suggest that after "your many years of experience" you need to get your eyesight checked.

Again, you are a buffoon.

 

Maybe, but i'll bet my left nut you have laced a glove, except when alone hiding in your room. Douchebag

 

I wouldnt mind seeing this 2 b honest