Steve Kim insults Darren Barker on twitter

Kim has always been pure garbage.

Could someone also explain to me how Macklin was so much more engaging or entertaining than Barker as a Martinez opponent? Macklin sure as hell didn't fight the come-forward action style that people were expecting after the Sturm fight and Kim is (as usual) talking out of his ass if he thinks Macklin was any more inclined to engage than Barker was. Was it just because Macklin got a questionable knockdown, because from what I was seeing, Barker was making Martinez a lot more uncomfortable in there.

 

For not being nice enough to Bob Arum and Kathy Duva.

 

:happy:happy:happy:gooddealartyarty

 

Yeah, I agree. Macklin and Barker were both very hesitant and threw around the same number of punches. The difference was that Barker was hesitant with a high guard and Macklin was hesitant with a lot of fainting and moving. The reason the Macklin fight was more entertaining was that watching a fighter with a high guard like Barker is very frustrating to a viewer even if he throws a similar amount of punches as another fighter with a lower guard. A lot of that suspense of knowing a punch can land at any second is lost when a fighter gets in to a tight shell. The Macklin fight also had a better crowd that cheered every time Macklin threw a punch even if it was blocked or slipped, which made it seem more competitive than it was. And it ended on a better knockout.

I actually though Barker landed cleaner punches than Macklin and did more damage to Martinez overall. I made a Martinez vs Barker highlight video and was surprised how many notable Barker punches I found while analyzing the fight for clips. I was going to make one for the Macklin fight as well, but I could barely find anything that landed cleanly by Macklin.

 

I think this is all largely correct. I would note that Macklin probably faced a better Martinez due simply to the elbow and hamstring injuries he had in the Barker bout, but I still came away with a higher opinion of Barker's performance.

I'd also note that I don't think the high guard vs. feints explains Kim's assessment, but rather narrow minded confirmation bias. He was bitching about the fight from the start as part of his neverending quest against the Greenburg/Davis administration, citing the odds to highlight its unacceptability (though curiously he had nowhere near the negative reaction to the similarly lopsided Donaire-Narvaez). Then when the fight ended, he used the wide cards to conclude he had been right all along and that Barker hadn't done anything in there.

 

Barker fought a good fight with Martinez, broke his nose and won more rounds against him than Macklin, in my opinion. Another opinion: **** Jose Sulaiman and Steve Kim.

 

This is how blacks react..

It's f'n twitter.

 

boxing writers must be the pettiest journalists and have the biggest egos, thats fairly disgusting but not shocking given the fact kim is an ******* who gives negative coverage to anyone who ain't arum

 

Lol steve kim knows damn well he wouldnt say this to his face.

 

Yeah I don't follow him or even read his articles so I'm not worried, I just wanted to tell him what I thought.

 

barker did better and was better to watch than macklin vs martinez, kim is a moron, i never saw barker before that fight and that fight made me a fan, he showed an obvious worldclass skillset that none of his countrymen have shown.

 

So what? He's still saying it to a real person.

 

This no-mark Steve Kim is an absolute disgrace. He has no ounce of credibility.:dead:dead:dead

 

I left this bumsteak a nice message.:rofl:rofl

@stevemaxboxing I hope Barker shatters your Glass Jaw you absolute disgrace. You wouldn't dare criticise him to his face you boz eyed twerp.

 

that was rather distasteful

Kim should be writing about the news, not making it.