What this shows is that Olympic. boxing...

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by thePRESIDENT, Sep 6, 2008.


  1. thePRESIDENT

    thePRESIDENT Active Member Full Member

    640
    0
    Mar 31, 2008
    is completely over rated, and has very little significance to how a fighter does @ the pros.

    Khan has conned everyone, undeservedly made millions when there r pros who are far better fighters get very little financial reward.

    The OlYMPICS IS PRODUCING A LESSER CALIBRE OF FIGHTER than the days of Leanord or even more recently De La oya


    Hope Degale doesn't get a stupid contract until he earns it
     
  2. thePRESIDENT

    thePRESIDENT Active Member Full Member

    640
    0
    Mar 31, 2008
  3. Raashid

    Raashid Member Full Member

    476
    0
    Oct 9, 2007
    not really, for every Khan/Harrison the Olympics produce Holyfields/Mayweather's as well.
     
  4. TFFP

    TFFP Guest

    It doesn't mean its overrated.

    It just shows that you can't read too much into the amateurs for how a guy will do in the pros. It also shows they are virtually 2 different sports, and the gap between them is getting ever wider.

    However, the signs were there in Khan's amateur career anyway. He did the chicken dance against Craig Watson.
     
  5. Dempsey08

    Dempsey08 New Member Full Member

    76
    0
    Jul 24, 2008
    The boxing at the Olympics is basically a different sport than pro boxing, Did you see the Tae Kwon Do at the Olympics? that has more in common with Olympic boxing these days
     
  6. Strike

    Strike Boxing Addict banned

    3,982
    0
    Sep 14, 2004
    No you are not right. However you are not totally wrong either.

    Am boxing is very different, but it can still clearly offer a window into a fighters potential at pro. If you watch a top am, and he is fast, evasive and has great footwork, that is clearly a good basis for any level or style of fighting.

    But yes Am boxing can be like fencing, it can reward shots that are nothing much and ignore hard, painful shots that are not in keeping with the scoring system.

    But usually the fighters fall into three groups...

    1. The definitely will be good pros - see RJJ
    2. The maybes, some great positives but issues - Khan
    3. The not suited to pro - most of them, but to use a British example Bronze medal winner David Price (Super Heavy Beijing)

    A guy like Khan showed speed, skills and some power in the ams, and that is exactly what we saw in the pros. His chin was not good enough and his style remained too rigid.

    For an example...of Britains Olympic fighters...I feel Billy Joe Saunders will be the best pro and he went out in the second round, Gold medal winner Degale is Domestic level and at best European, and the elite fighter (Frankie Gavin) who did not make weight is European and no more. Maybe even just domestic.

    Yes it is hard to judge for sure, but you can watch and make a fair case.
     
  7. Odo

    Odo Boxing Junkie Full Member

    11,145
    167
    Jul 25, 2004
    A great amateur is usually a great pro ,too.There are countless expamples to prove my words.
    Furthermore the last chapter on Khan hasnt been written yet.

    As for your funny statement that the olympics is producing a lesser calibe of fighter than the days of Leonard or De la Hoya I somehow doubt that you closely followed the olympic box tournament at all.

    Most of the promising olmypian wont turn pro because they stem from countries where pro boxing means **** and they are only 3 really important fight markets(USA,Germany,and Japan) for the pros on this planet where you can earn decent bucks.
    Most of the olympians are not marketable there due to their religion,origin,nationality,and so on.##+++

    And by the way the best fighter Beijing's olmypics,Lomachenko,looks far more promising than both did De la Hoya and Leonard did at their time at the olympics.

    De la Hoya had been convincingly beaten by Rudolf before the olympics and won a close fight against the same opponent in the olympic final.
    Lomachenko totally outclassed his opponent-who is one of the best european amateurs- impressively stopping him in the very first round of their encounter in the olympic final.

    Lomachenko can punch,has a very entertaining style,and is the best amateur pound for pound on this planet.I am positive that he will make a lot of noise at the pros if he turns pro.
     
  8. CottoDaBodykill

    CottoDaBodykill Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,735
    15
    Apr 6, 2008
    with the likes of delahoya jirov tarver jones jr mayweather jr byrd calzaghe and the others that have come up through that system i dont believe its hype at all
     
  9. fidds

    fidds Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,672
    106
    Mar 15, 2006
    There are plenty of top ameture boxers that didnt quite make top grade as pro's
    for example

    tyrell biggs 84 gold medalist

    Damiani 84 silver medalist first ever wbo champ no successful defences, its common place an olympic medal dosen't guarentee greatness in the pros.

    Yet roy jones got a bronze :patsch
     
  10. CottoDaBodykill

    CottoDaBodykill Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,735
    15
    Apr 6, 2008
    jones got a silver
     
  11. Nico

    Nico hi. Full Member

    950
    1
    Aug 17, 2005
    I wish that they didn't box with headgear on. Maybe that's a factor- we have little idea of how good their punch resistance is nowadays, when they've yet to turn pro and get hit without head protection. It's just one more thing that makes Olympic boxing boring to watch.
     
  12. fidds

    fidds Boxing Addict Full Member

    4,672
    106
    Mar 15, 2006
    Sorry evander got bronze but regardless of that you get my point gold isn't everything and anyway jones was robbed