to clarify i agree that being a top am doesnt mean becoming a top pro but strongly disagree with most pros have no amatgeur background
and again,i have gone back on the zilch comment and seen the error of my ways and admitted i was wrong,and i never said most pros have no am experience,someone said that 90% of top pros have top am experience,which is bollocks . i will google and have a look when back from pub tonight,off out now:hi: oh and **** going back on the zilch comment,read below,****s
infact,read what i put,i actually forgot what i wrote,it was a few days ago where have i said that that pro's have NO amateur experiance where have i said that 90% of pro boxers have no am experience i also said if you are at the top of you amateur game it can mean something i also said that there are a hell of a lot of pro's that make it to brit/euro and above without many am fights what have i wrote there which is not true ? its ****ing you lot putting words into my mouth and confusing a old punchy man,**** off ya twats,pub time:hi:
Disregarding the first part as you've already admitted you were wrong with that, can you give examples for that bottom line you wrote? You're insisting that everyone proves their point to you yet you haven't backed up your own opinion either?
I apologise then. I thought he turned pro' late with no amateur background. First time I've ever been wrong, well done As for your lack of knowledge, I was just trolling really and guessing because I've never seen you write anything about historical stuff and you're a Burns fan etc etc I made an assumption and it was wrong of me to do so. You've always been sound although I've never really had any correspondence with you admittedly. What about prison boxers like Qawi and B-Hop?
Loads of Asians as well. Johnny Famechon turned pro' with 0 amateur fights, admtitedly his uncle was a very good pro' boxer who taught him but hey, Fammo was the best featherweight in the World for a period of time. EDIT: Nationality; born in France raised in Autralia :good And obviously I'm on the wind up with my 'writing wrongs' thing. ****in' Hell, some of my posts are just to someone else's, but admittedly my main purpose for coming on here is to learn from others and terrorise people talking ****. In this instance I've admitted that I was wrong (with that example anyway) and that I totally misjudged a poster. Even the 2011 Poster of the Year can make a mistake I've never fought, only trained. Nor has Kru Yodtong Senenan but he knew a bit.
The main thing that does my head in is when people get a hard on for Olympians or other top amateurs and put them on a pedestal, as if they've simply got to be great regardless. A while back people were basically saying that Gavin, DeGale and Saunders etc are all GUARANTEED to get to world level. For all the **** that DeGale gets, he's the one that's closest at the minute.
Same thing can pretty much be said for Daniel Ponce De Leon who isn't a heavyweight. Strength and stamina coupled with toughness and a will to win can overcome technical flaws at any weight imo.
Now that they have changed the am code back to what it was I bet we will see the standard of pro boxing improve in the next 10 years.
boxing is a sport that a lot of people claim to have done a boit of training in. on inspection of their ability to hit pads, the bag or even shadow box it is sadly lacking. thats long before we even get to sparring. boxing is clearly a sport sorts the men from the boys as loads seem to ahve tried training but not so many fought. not like cricket, football etc. not having a pop at anyone just an observation. i am also talking about lots opf people i have met in real life. 'you ever fought?' 'no, but i used to train' is a standard resposnse. i guesws this covedrs a multitude of scenarios from ive hit a heavy bag a few times at fitness first, to boxercise, to trainng a few times a fighting gym to people who love training but sdont want to fight or cant commit to getting fit enough.