Wrong: Haye. He's more proven, a bigger puncher, better overall defense and his sole loss came to a former titlist rather than an unproven fighter, and was by stoppage rather than clean, brutal KO.
khan got knocked out cold by a puncher, unproven puncher yes but his record still suggests he is a puncher. Haye is blessed with very good movement for a big man athletically and speed wise, he also has great power and very quick hands. khan has got lightening handspeed ...offensivley he is a joy to watch seems to have every punch, however i dont think he can box up close, his defense seems pretty sound but that is more down to the disciplined high hands he now sports. also Khans straight punching is brilliant... I would definitley say Khan has the better skillset
Hmmmm....I'd probably go with Khan. In the past year he seems to have the grasped the fundamentals a little better. There's not much difference between the two. However if you were to transfer them in to the same division, I'd probably pick Haye to win. With his type of power, he's always that one punch away from knocking Khan out.
What do you mean by 'better'? Haye has achieved far more. He's also more skilled. He's more varied, he can throw punches to head and body. Khan throws jabs all day.
I'm just curious as to what Khan's one dimension is? He's a perfectly fine boxer technically so its not like he uses one thing over and over again.
He's all straight punches strictly on the outside. No inside game, not much in the way of hooks, uppercuts and bodypunches.
Yes he does. He jabs and moves all over the ring. Which is okay, my favourite fighter primarily does that (without moving so much). Doesn't exactly make him more versatile than Haye though.