Is turning pro with Sports Network a good or a bad thing for the fighter?

I think the main issue is the matching.

Hatton, Calzaghe and Hamed all had periods where their career stagnated under Warren's management, when they ought to have been in superfights across the pond.

Now - this may have been their fault individually, but there does seem to be a common theme here.........

Fighters learn more from being properly matched - a guy like Paul Appleby is a classic example of someone being given fights that are 70-30 in his favour generally, rather than 95-5 like an SN fighter. That way the guy learns more.

Khan was put on a pedestal and spoonfed - given a few favours off refs, guys coming up in weight, non-punchers, all the time ducking the best names at domestic level and trying to convince people that he was past it all.

Then he boxes like a complete prat and gets knocked spark out by a guy who, lets be honest, probably ain't all that good.

 

depends how you look at it. you'll make money, win a title you can put on the posters, go on a huge unbeaten streak, never have to leave the country and seldom fight anyone you don't considerably outweigh. if on the other hand you're in boxing for glory, to test yourself against the best fighters etc. then it's definately not the way to go

 

Adding british changes the whole post completely. However, that isn't what you said. I'm not psychic.

 

Paul Appleby is mroe the case of they are so much better than any other fighter the promoter has and will do anything they say.

 

Perhaps so.

It must be said though, that whatever the reasoning, Appleby is being matched much better than any other young prospect we have.