Macklin seems to be overlooking Barker a bit.

Barker got put down twice in one fight by a guy with a record 6 wins and 16 losses. Barker is a good boxer at british level his flicking jab is garbage at wouldnt keep a super bantam weight off him, he couldnt do nothing but stand in front belghecham and take punches so his footwork is crap, and if you call running for 6 rounds in a 12 round fight good ring genralship than ok.........

 

no he got tagged in the last 10 seconds other wise it was a shut out

nothing special better than barker is what he is


http://boxrec.com/list_bouts.php?human_id=51107&cat=boxer
this lad had barker down twice i reckon its shakey

 

Could be, thats why I mentioned that as a footnote. It wouldn't be surprising if Barker's chin is poor as there are a few signs. If it isn't he'll hold up in the fight pretty well if he boxes properly instead of doing what he did against the French guy.

 

Fill us in then mate. I have'nt seen a great deal where barker has done anything suprisingly dominant or decisive in his fights. I can only see barker winning if macklin has a serious off night. He has'nt the punch, jab or footwork to worry macklin imo.

 

I agree with this 100%. people are getting carried away with Barker. I was looking forward to seeing him against Elcock but unfortunately that didnt happen. He has never fought a european level fighter or even an upper level brit

 

have to disagree mate dont think he willl be be able to hack the pressure

 

Someones getting KO'd in this fight imo.

 

actually i think he will jab macklins face off all night. his foot work is very good and he has a great judge range. never in trouble but always hitting the target.

 

He fought the wrong fight and did not pace himself, that was Barkers mistake and he almost paid for it, quite convenient to forget that he looked ok for the first six rounds until he gassed.:good

ps. I think Macklin wins, not convinced by Barkers chin at all, hope im proved wrong as he's probably better than Macklin.:?

 

Barker is definitely better than the one we seen against Belgecham. But even still, I don't think he has it in him to outbox Macklin for 12 rounds. His chin is dodgy and Macklin has shown he can KO boxers with both hands in recent fights. Like Katsidis v Mitchell, the stronger, more ferocious pressure fighter will be too much for Barker to deal with. It's a much bigger step up for Barker than it is for Macklin. The occasion will be too big for him imo. Macklin mid round stoppage. Avi bet if any one is up for it.

 

i dont like barker since he beat jason mckay

 

I wouldnt read into what either Macklin or Barker say in press conferences to be honest.

 

Mitchell vs Katsidis is a completley different fight. Katsidis was a few leagues ahead of Mitchell and got out classed. He was so much better due to the higher level of opposition he has faced. Other than Jamie Moore, which he lost, and 1 round with a shot Asikainen, he hasnt beat anyone decent either.

Macklin is Barkers toughtest fight so far, I also think Barker is Macklins toughest. Niether have faced anyone beyond European level. Its a step up for both.

I will take the bet.

 

I'll have it with you. We're more in the dark with Barker here. Macklin is tried and tested, even if he lost showing us.Barkers jab is not good enough to boast about, i might of been a bit harsh with his footwork but again it does'nt stand out from just average. This is a fight that is really gonna stir up some excitement on esb. BTW i think moore is an allround better fighter than barker, so i dont see it as hard.

 

There are lots of parallels between both fights, to say it is completely different is not being truthful. Pressure fighting brawler against a more classical unbeaten boxer who has yet to step up competition. Macklin is on Euro level. His annihilation of Elcock and the Fin showed that. Not saying he is as accomplished as Kats but to say it's a completely different situation is ridiculous.

Re the bet: You're on. Good luck :good One month sound fair?