Khan/Prescott - Why it should and shouldn't happen.

Discussion in 'British Boxing Forum' started by Dubstep, Jan 17, 2011.


Page 1 of 2
  1. Dubstep

    Dubstep Active Member Full Member

    620
    3
    Jun 11, 2008
    Appreciate this is quite long - but hopefully quite interesting.

    Why it shouldn't happen

    Before Maidana, I definitely wanted to see Khan against Prescott, (I once even said that I'd have no respect for Khan until he rematched Prescott) after the Maidana fight I'm just not as bothered. My issue with Khan was that he was too easily matched and after Maidana that argument just doesn't hold. Maidana isn't just a banger, he is a better banger than Prescott so for me, Khan doesn't have to "prove" anything any more.

    Prescott hasn't done anything to warrant the fight, not at Light-welter and not at lightweight. Khan has proved he is capable of beating top class LWs, Prescott has proved he is capable of getting schooled by Kevin Mitchell. It's like Lee Swaby demanding a shot at Enzo's WBO title when he had it. Why should Khan give Prescott a payday when Amir has done all the work, and Prescott has dined out on one night?

    Why it should happen

    Having said that, I don't understand why he wouldn't want to fight Prescott. He is after all, the man solely responsible for Amir getting so much stick. Every single time he is asked about his chin, it is because of Prescott. Why not just go out there and shut him up? Lennox Lewis commands so much respect for righting his wrongs, why not do the same? Amir has improved vastly, why not just exercise that demon? It does make you wonder if Khan does see Prescott as his Kryptonite - his bogey man sort of thing...

    That's the other thing, it would sell well. Sky would call it something like "Redemption, it's Khan's homecoming and it's Prescott - who people know. I'm convinced Khan would win and the prize is bigger than just the fight, it just gets rid of all that **** about him being scared or fragile. Just nail him.

    Conclusion

    Still not 100% on this but I think he should. I would understand why he wouldn't fight Prescott and after Maidana, I wouldn't really care as much - but I think, almost for his own good, he should do it. We all think he wins it now, but until he fights him, there is always that lingering doubt that Prescott has his number - and an elite fighter, with ambitions like Khan, shouldn't have "a bogeyman" as limited as Prescott.

    Pros for Khan of the fight happening

    - It's a good story, it will sell - he will make lots of money.

    - Khan is unrecognisable from two/three years ago to such an extent the majority of us think he'd win comfortably - so it's seemingly low risk, very high reward.

    - It offers Khan almost (they'll still be some arseholes going on about his chin) complete redemption from his critics.

    Cons for Khan of the fight happening

    - If lightning did strike twice, it would be career over.

    Khan's career would have been over if he'd lost to Maidana - he should just take the fight.
     
    Dubstep, Jan 17, 2011
    Dubstep, Jan 17, 2011
    #1
  2. IRONSENSE2002

    IRONSENSE2002 muslim and proud Full Member

    5,383
    1
    Jul 27, 2010
    **** off
     
    IRONSENSE2002, Jan 17, 2011
    IRONSENSE2002, Jan 17, 2011
    #2
  3. hagman1989

    hagman1989 the boxing site , try it Full Member

    8,284
    1
    Dec 13, 2008
    there isnt a should

    it simply shouldnt happen , there carears since that night have gone in totally opposite directions , one punch two years ago should not be his meal ticket here . he cashed that in when he took fwanks money fo the mitchell fight , a fight and inflated purse he otherwise wouldnt have gotten
     
    hagman1989, Jan 17, 2011
    hagman1989, Jan 17, 2011
    #3
  4. jonnytightlips

    jonnytightlips Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,384
    1
    Aug 1, 2008
    It shouldnt happen. Prescott has been living off Khans name since 2008 and has done **** all since. Losing twice and hasnt beaten anybody of note. Prescott should **** off and beat someone relevant. Also he was outclassed by Kevin Mitchell who got found out at world level.
     
    jonnytightlips, Jan 17, 2011
    jonnytightlips, Jan 17, 2011
    #4
  5. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,482
    21,887
    Sep 15, 2009
    I say it's high risk, high reward. So high a risk I see him losing.

    That being said there are acceptable alternatives such as peterson. Ortiz and judah are booked.

    Paul isn't an acceptable alternate, beating him is no better than beating prescot.

    Who is paul's best victory? Doesn't top a ko victory over khan anyways.

    I'm surprised paul didn't bite amir's hand off with the fight offer tho!
     
    lufcrazy, Jan 17, 2011
    lufcrazy, Jan 17, 2011
    #5
  6. Lilo

    Lilo Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,947
    2
    Jul 6, 2010
    @ Dubstep - You completely summed up almost all my feelings about Khan/Prescott. One other thing though: there isn't any standout opponent for April, (one everyone is screaming out for) so why not make a shitload of money, get revenge and shutup all the haters once and for all?
     
    Lilo, Jan 17, 2011
    Lilo, Jan 17, 2011
    #6
  7. Dubstep

    Dubstep Active Member Full Member

    620
    3
    Jun 11, 2008
    My point is though, why not just put it to bed?

    This April fight is not going to be against anybody special anyway, so why not just destroy the myth and get well paid for it?

    My biggest annoyance is that Prescott will get well paid for it as well and he doesn't deserve it. But what if Prescott was true to all the chat and did fight for a tiny amount. Price is clearly important for Team Khan, if Prescott genuinely came in for something stupidly low, should Khan still reject it?
     
    Dubstep, Jan 17, 2011
    Dubstep, Jan 17, 2011
    #7
  8. lufcrazy

    lufcrazy requiescat in pace Full Member

    81,482
    21,887
    Sep 15, 2009
    I don't see katsidis as a relevant opponent, he's been stopped twice at lightweight and knocked down numerous times, a victory over him proves nothing.

    Sad really cos I thought kats was gonna beat marquez and I had him beating amir had they fought a year ago, but not now.

    Interesting side point, who has the better victory: katsidis over mitchell or prescot over khan?

    I think prescot over khan.
     
    lufcrazy, Jan 17, 2011
    lufcrazy, Jan 17, 2011
    #8
  9. Dubstep

    Dubstep Active Member Full Member

    620
    3
    Jun 11, 2008
    .

    Exactly, It's not like I'm saying he has to fight Prescott or else he's not a true champion etc. I'm just saying why not? It's more interesting than any of the other names, it will make more money and it will get the haters off his back.

    If Prescott tries to play silly buggers at the negotiation table, just say "**** off, come back when you've earned it." if he comes in dirt cheap, just smash him up.
     
    Dubstep, Jan 17, 2011
    Dubstep, Jan 17, 2011
    #9
  10. Lilo

    Lilo Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,947
    2
    Jul 6, 2010
    Prescott would certainly make the biggest event - to me its a definite no brainer; a Prescott fight (despite poor recent record) brings the most to the table so...
     
    Lilo, Jan 17, 2011
    Lilo, Jan 17, 2011
    #10
  11. Noam Chomsky

    Noam Chomsky A Source of Emulation Full Member

    916
    0
    Nov 27, 2010
    Khan should make his pro MMA debut against Prescott.
     
    Noam Chomsky, Jan 17, 2011
    Noam Chomsky, Jan 17, 2011
    #11
  12. WalletInspector

    WalletInspector Obsessed with Boxing banned

    21,194
    2
    Jan 1, 2010
    Good post, Dubstep :good

    The difference between the Lewis fights is that both McCall and Rahman were still relevant at the time he fought them.
     
    WalletInspector, Jan 18, 2011
    WalletInspector, Jan 18, 2011
    #12
  13. Beeston Brawler

    Beeston Brawler Comical Ali-egedly Full Member

    46,399
    15
    Jan 9, 2008
    I strongly disagree with this.

    Katsidis might have been stopped at lightweight twice but both opponents were the recognised linear champion at the time - he was winning one fight and was competitive in the other against probably the 2nd best fighter in the sport.

    Prescott lost to Mitchell conclusively - the same Mitchell that Katsidis took a look at for a couple of rounds and then stopped pretty much with the first decent combination he put together.

    You can't apply double standards to the likes of these two - the difference in quality is staggering. Katsidis would brutalise Prescott, inside a couple of rounds.
     
    Beeston Brawler, Jan 18, 2011
    Beeston Brawler, Jan 18, 2011
    #13
  14. TFFP

    TFFP The Eskimo

    45,002
    3
    Nov 28, 2007
    For ****s sake. Just when all the Haye/Klitschko and Mayweather/Pac bollocks had died a death this absolute shite about Prescott is rumbling on. And on. And on..........................................................
     
    TFFP, Jan 18, 2011
    TFFP, Jan 18, 2011
    #14
  15. Uncle Rico

    Uncle Rico Loyal Member Full Member

    39,748
    3
    Jun 28, 2009
    Another thread.

    Honestly, I'd be all for a Khan-Prescott II if Prescott did what he was suppose to do - take advantage of that KO win, and become a respectable force in the 135/140 divisions. But the fact is, he hasn't done that! He went on to lose 2 of his next 3 bouts, and went back into obscurity. Khan, on the other hand, has been on a fast-moving ascendency which has put him in contention with the light welterweight division’s best. He’s on the verge of unifying a very talented weight class. Why on earth would he risk all that and go back to a guy who’s been exposed for the limited fighter he is?
     
    Uncle Rico, Jan 18, 2011
    Uncle Rico, Jan 18, 2011
    #15
Page 1 of 2