I know that ultimately it's the fighter's decision to take the fight or not take the fight, but I know there were a lot of people on this board, myself included, that thought this was a horrible career choice for Pavlik. Looks like we were right. Hopefully, this isn't a major setback for him, but you have to question the decision making of Arum and Pavlik's entire team. Again, now after the fact, what was the point of taking this fight?
Totally. They shouldn't have even fought Taylor @ 166. But when a road paver is your trainer, 3 million sounds pretty sweet. Pavlik should get a real management team that knows what they are doing as well as a real trainer like maybe Manny or Freddie. Even Buddy McGirt would be a vast improvement.
Don't get me wrong, I feel they all suffered from arrogance, and I get why they took the fight, I guess, but the cons of taking this fight outweighed the pros in my opinion.
For taking the fight, no. I think they just simply underestimated B-Hop and miscalculated the outcome of the fight. Whether Pavlik was to win impressively or just getting by it was supposed to be a win for him. What I do blame is Jack Loew not telling Kelly to press more after about the 6th round and after about the 9th he didn't tell Kelly he needed a knockout to win. I honestly don't think the weight would of have mattered B-Hop deserves every amount of credit and respect for this win, which IMO see as his greatest victory and something I have never witnessed before.
Yes !! Hey Jack Lowe you will never win a fight by telling your fighter to double up the jab and shoot your right from rd 1 to rd 12 !!
Pavlik should have stayed at 160 where he should be.. I would've supported him going up to 168, but after last nights performance, he should stay at 160 where he is the champion at.. Not to many threats down there except for Abraham.. That's who he should be signing a fight with.. Not Hopkins or Calzaghe..
Why the f*ck would anyone have to blame another? A clearly superior fighter beat a clearly inferior, that happens in boxing in 8 times out of 10. Does that mean they always have to blame someone? If there's winner, then there's a loser. It's simply as that. Why did Hatton fight Mayweather? Why did Mosley fight Winky? Why did Marquez fought Vazquez? Money, glory, fame, recognition etc... but nothing is for free... there's no big reward without big risk. Kelly took it. He failed. But there's nobody to blame. This happens, only you see it from the winners' perspective 90%. You don't ask who to blame that Hakkar took the Hopkins fight or Woods took the Jones fight or Mayorga took the DLH fight.
No. Pavlik didn't have a game plan and didn't adjust. it's his fault. he's the one in the ring, not his management.
Pavlik's corner was worse than Kessler's in the Calzaghe fight! Cameron Dunkin has been trying to get rid of Jack Leow for years. I honestly hope Kelly starts listening. Once it was clear that Kelly was in real trouble Leow had no ****ing clue how to coach him back into the fight!
