Mancini has 'flashbacks' watching Pavlik on Saturday

Your remarks about Pavlik are about as insightful as the Pavlik hero worshippers. Obviously, you dislike the guy and it colors your comments regarding him.

As to the thread starter, I agree to a point that the cut changed things. However, in rounds 1-4, Martinez had yet to cut Kelly severely and yet the latter had a hell of a time coping with the former. Sure, Kelly performed better in the middle rounds prior to the cut, but his better rounds were no where near as dominant as Martinez's.

Sadly, Kelly is simply not the same fighter he once was.

 

... BWAAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH :rofl:

 

the problem with pavlik is he's not that good technically. simple as. people like me knew that straight away. yes pavlik has power, that's what got him to where he was, and if he lands that right hand then it'll hurt anyone. the problem is a little bit of movement and pavlik's ****ed, so like i said before the martinez fight, pavlik will get outboxed a few times througout his career.

anyway, another hype bites the dust. in that ring is the truth, that's where the truth gets exposed, and the truth is pavlik has proven to me what i already knew, and that's he was just hype by the muppets that know **** all.

 

Margarito stuff here.

First he asks people to come to HIS weight because that's where he belongs and dominates yet when a loss comes he doesn't belong there. Wasn't the Hopkins fight a fiasco because it was at a catchweight?

You HONESTLY think Kelly will go to Super Middleweight where almost EVERYONE would slice him to pieces?

 

No, his problem is he's not a good enough boxer. He's a perfectly good technician.

 

Yes because he is fighting better opponents. His wins over Taylor deserve a lot of respect but it could have easily been so different. People brush over how close he came to being stopped by Taylor. But he was whipped by Hopkins and beaten comfortably by Martinez.

Who are his other great wins over? Miranda? We have seen how he copes at the top level. And then I've seen Pavlik fans try and hype up McKart and Zuniga.
Pavlik is world champion level and an entertaining fighter, but he is hugely flawed and many of us said a long time ago that a counter puncher with decent speed or lateral movement would cause him fits.

If he moves up, who does he beat at the top level? For me nobody. Dirrell and Ward would win wide decisions, Froch would be a great fight to watch and is Pavliks best chance but the better chin on Froch means I think he stops Pavlik in a back and forth war.

Kessler, stops Pavlik, hands too quick, too much variety in his shots and Kelly does not have the movement to trouble Kessler like Ward did.
Bute? KOs Pavlik. Far too quick, hits hard and moves well.

 

Would you have preferred it if he'd cut down to 154 to defend his Middleweight titles?

Why? He's taller than everyone in the Super Six and has perfectly acceptable dimensions for a Super Middleweight. IMO, he'd probably beat Froch, has a good chance against AA and could beat Kessler depending on how much Kessler has left. Take Froch - IMO he'll lose to Kessler, AA and deserved to lose to Dirrell - that leaves him in a worse position than Pavlik if my predictions are correct, but where are the calls for him to pack it in?

The story repeats itself over and over. Hopkins should have retired after he lost to Taylor, he's too old to compete with the big strong lads up at 168/175, then he beats Tarver and Winky and all of a sudden he's back, then he "loses" to Calzaghe and he's an old man and should retire, blah blah blah. As long as Pavlik has the mindset to continue - as long as he's willing to stay motivated and healthy and is willing to take lower paydays and lower his expectations after the loss - there's no reason for him to retire.

 

Bingo. What amazed me the most, however, was Kelly's complete unwillingness to trade when Sergio engaged. Sure, Martinez possessed a decided advantage in speed, but I am bit surprised at Pavlik failed repeatedly to adequately time the speedy Spaniard's advances. You would have thought that at least once Kelly would have caught him coming in with a thunderous right hand.

 

Excellent post from a dispassionate, insightful poster.

 

Why does all this matter? Firstly, there are fighters (e.g. Froch) who would probably end up with a similar record to Pavlik against the top guys. I think Pavlik would beat Froch; there are those who have it the other way, but it's certainly not a given that Pavlik would lose. So why should Pavlik retire but not these guys?

Secondly, even if he can't compete at the top level, what's the big deal. IF (admittedly a big IF) he's willing to roll the dice and just fight without having to be a PPV star or having to fight on HBO or having to be a P4P top-10 name, what's the point in him retiring? I obviously don't know what his mindset is, but those calling for his retirement don't either.

 

Good point. This was actually something that I picked up upon while I was watching Pavlik on fight week. For a guy who loves to pressurise and seems willing to take a shot, he's surprisingly reluctant to throw back over the top of an opponent. He allows a guy to attack him, just stands there and blocks and waits for the guy to stop punching and move off, and then tries to attack again. (Pacquiao/Clottey all over again.) It's a recipe for disaster against someone with movement. You could understand against Hopkins, because he wouldn't have landed anyway, and it's natural to want to protect yourself in that kind of situation, but he was actually doing it against the likes of Zuniga etc. as well. He might have had much more success if he was willing to just fire back whenever Martinez came forward, and would have had a much greater chance of landing that one big shot.

 

When Pavlik beat Taylor, was or was Taylor not regarded as the king of the middleweight division??

Just a few years back, few would have selected Martinez to defeat Taylor. To suggest otherwise is merely revisionist history.

As for Froch, he's scarcely less flawed than Pavlik and I am not sure he hits as hard. In fact, I don't think he does. Bute, Ward, and Dirrel would more than likely score comfortable decisions. Kessler, from what I observed, would be favored, due in large part to recent events, though I would not grant him the edge you do.

Finally, your points about Pavlik's flaws are reasonable and well founded. Yet, if you watched enough of Pavlik's fights, than you have to recognize that something is simply missing. Take his punches, for example. Is it just me, or do his punches seem to lack that same snap??

 

I never said he should retire. And I agree with you that he can have a good career without being elite. He would crazy to retire, as he is a marketable fighter and his strengths are good enough to mean he can compete with all but the best and he could well grab another title.

I never called for him to quit. There are people making excuses for the fact that he simply is not the top level fighter they made him out to be.

 

he shouldnt retire unless he still has aspirations of being a ppv star and i think were all agreed hes been found lacking in these fights with hopkins and now a 154 fighter in martinez

i like pav but grew to dislike him by association , i mean his fans just **** you off as do outher fighters fans but pavs had the least cause to be so cocky and arogant