New age promoting

Barker got trashed. It doesn't become competitive just because he was so negative that Sergio was struggling to smash him.

I haven't discounted everything Rees has done - he just hasn't done much above domestic level, bar his spell at 140 where he beat a weak champion and got battered by Kotelnik.

Pavlik and Martinez, I agree, were at the same level. Cotto, much as I love him, was coming off the terrible beating against Margarito. But, as a fighter at the time, he was much better than the two I've mentioned - IMO.

Post the videos, it doesn't change my view on the performances. Lockett treated the Pavlik fight as a cash-out. Jennings just wasn't good enough. Barker never really tried to win, he just hoped to wear Sergio out down the stretch - it was a pretty pitiful attempt (even if it was brave).

That;s all besides the point - what Hearn is doing is basically sacrificing his guys to much better fighters in the hope that they either pull of an upset or get some exposure on the US networks.

This is hardly "new" and it's rarely successful.

 

He did NOT do well. He got battered. Landing five or six good shots and being negative before getting stopped is not that much to shout about - unless you've very low standards.

 

I'm not sure if you're just very stupid, or just can't figure out what I'm saying. It's not that I love to argue (although it is fun), it's that you and others completely overstate some very average accomplishments for some sort of pro-Eddie fandom. It's weird.

Frank doesn't ever get a pass from me, but neither does Eddie.

 

Lol how did I know you would pick at the Cotto & Pavlik/Martinez comparison which is irrelevant to the discussion.

If you rate Barker's performance as the same as Jennings/Lockets i seriously question whether you have ever watched a boxing match.

You have discount what Rees has done. He won a European title and defended it. Thats above domestic level!

It's a sacrifice if the fighter has no chance of even putting up a fight. Barker was capable and did put up a good fight. lockett and jennings were not.


If you were Gavin Rees promoter what would you do with him?

 

Your doing the same thing DF. underplaying Rees and Barkers ability and accomplishments in some sort of weird anti Eddie fandom.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PjH9YsKZTp0[/ame]

 

Exactly.

WBC - Adrian Broner
WBA - Richard Abril for the vacant title
IBF - Miguel Vasquez
WBO - Ricky Burns

Rees would be a major underdog in all fights. An offer of £60k plus 2 options was made for the Burns fight. I doubt Vasquez & Abril would come to the UK, and if they did Rees would have to give up a significant purse. Against Broner he gets paid, if he puts in a good performance it raises his stock for fights against the other champions, and if he gets obliterated like Jennings/Lockett he can still fight Murray/Mitchell.

Personally I wouldn't have put Barker in with Martinez, but in hindsight it has not hindered Barkers career, in-fact it's helped him and his bank balance.

 

It's not really though - Jennings got smashed by a guy who was much better than either Pavlik or Martinez.

Did I say that? I just don't think it was much in front of those - he lasted longer, but only by being negative. He showed a little more in the way of smarts, but it didn't really bring him much success. Don't stoop to belittling others - you're nowhere near as educated on boxing as you think you are.

DeGale holds a Euro belt and I'd argue he's not above domestic level still. The closest Rees has to a Euro-level win since his 140 spell is Mezzache, who isn't up to much himself. Don't try and gloss over how meaningless these belts are.

Bollocks - Barker didn't put up a good fight, unless you count throwing **** all punches as fighting. Jennings and Lockett could have probably made it through a few more rounds with the same approach.

I'm not getting into this. I've made my point very clearly and you seem incapable of reading it without adding things I've never said. I don't have any issue with Rees taking the shot, but I can't be arsed with people claiming this is some wonderful new approach to promotion when it's been going on for years.

Eddie, and almost every boxing fan with eyes, knows Gavin will get ruined by Broner. He has the exact style that Broner loves. In my opinion, he's cashing him out in the hopes that he a) gets lucky, b) gets on HBO again or c) makes a bigger payday than usual.

There's nothing inherently wrong with that, but once again, it's nothing new and it's hardly deserving of special praise. It's EXACTLY what FW did with Jennings and Lockett.

Do you see what I'm saying?

Rees is right to take the shot, absolutely, but he has no chance.

 

You're striking low when you're using Marlow's jokes.

I have not underplayed anyone, I rate them exactly as they are.

Has either man beat a genuinely world class opponent?

No.

Did they both get smashed to bits when they faced one? Yes.

Everyone pissed on the Barker-Martinez match because it was woeful matchmaking. That doesn't change just because Barker was a bit awkward and didn't get tuned up in five rounds.

I have no problem at all with Eddie, I like him. He's been very gracious when I've asked him questions and swapped messages with others I know.

I have a big problem with tools licking his arse for nothing particularly special.

I know you struggle with subtlety, so hopefully that's clear enough.

 

Only a dumb ****er would fall for Matchrooms' spell.

 

Barker did not get smashed to bits. Anyone that says or thinks thay is a ****ing idiot!

 

Why are Matchroom so good?