But I have never even HEARD of Gary Lockett before. The guy isn't even ranked, as far as I know. Yes, Pavlik deserves a break after taking a great amount of good match-ups, but he should've chosen someone who at least brought SOMETHING to the table. Beating Gary Lockett won't do much at all to help him. But if he were to lose (doubt it, but anything is possible), he would lose BIGTIME.
Definitely not. Firstly it is a mandatory WBO defence as Lockett is ranked as No 1 by them (What he has done to deserve this though I don't know) and Pavlik will have to take this fight at some point or give up the WBO belt. Secondly Pavlik deserves an easier fight, I mean four tough fights in a row within approx a year is enough.
I've watched both Yuri Tsarenko fights...I don't know how US fans are underestimating him. He's a got punch, but little else. Pavlik would have to be stupid like in round two and stick his chin out for Lockett for something shocking to go down.
Read the initial post...I'm questioning the idiocy of a so-calling boxing writer for CBS Sports who pretty much tears Pavlik for his choice in fighters, acting there's a double-standard between him and Taylor.
This is true, and they are all better boxers except maybe Miranda. Lockett seems more on the level with guys Kelly was beating 12-15 fights ago.