A fighter loses and everyone always knew he was crap or always thought he was overrated
kirkland is a prime example today
and today the whole of the light welterweight division is crap and over rated because maidana didnt knock morales out
Printable View
A fighter loses and everyone always knew he was crap or always thought he was overrated
kirkland is a prime example today
and today the whole of the light welterweight division is crap and over rated because maidana didnt knock morales out
Trainer Monkey predicted great things for Kirkland so it's a miracle it took this long for him to be sparked.
I don't think "Everybody" is saying 1 thing or another...I just mentioned that I had heard (or read rather) that Kirkland couldn't take a punch...I didn't much care at the time as I'm not a real fan of his. He's talented yes, but I'm not sure...I just didn't get wrapped up in the hype of the guy especially after prison and him ditching his trainer. I saw those as bad for his career no mater what. Lots of people may hate on Kirkland now...I think he'll rebound, but I also think he'd better straighten up outside the ring too and that includes getting a new trainer that will pay special attention to him ie keep him out of trouble inside and outside the ring, because I've got the feeling that the kid ain't too fucking brilliant.
As for Maidana and Morales...Morales is a warriror and he's not going to lie down for an opponent, he's a great fighter, his best days are past him, but look at other greats that were past it and came back to beat or press fighters they had no business of beating or competing with...the sport is littered with past it fighters who over achieve.
Also notice people aren't talking too much crap about David Lemieux and how he got hammered...just saying
Fair points, but I think a lot of people liked Lemieux and were more high on him than Kirkland. I thought pretty highly of both guys, probably more so even of Kirkland and his all out Tyson type of style.Quote:
Originally Posted by El Kabong
They were both getting a ton of hype...they had earned it for the most part. I was a little more wary of Kirkland due to the prison and trainer deals...his life to me seems to lack balance and stability and his performance vs Ishida mirrored that exactly.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hulk
I think both are exciting fighters, but once again I put more faith in Lemieux to rebound than Kirkland due to the relationship he seems to have with his trainer, the kid seems to have a good head on his shoulders, and well...Kirkland just got stopped and was still talking shit, that shows me that in his mind the loss wasn't his fault ie "I did 0 wrong, so I have 0 to correct in training"...I think Kirkland is still dangerous, but his opponents will be emboldened by what Ishida did to him while not many guys would take the beating Rubio took and still be with it enough to come back and stop Lemieux. David didn't pace himself...Kirkland just got rocked and couldn't deal with it.
These guys are young, youngsters make mistakes but for right now I see 1 guy that's willing to learn and 1 guy that's completely in denial.
...on any given day. Any fighter can loose. I agree with what was posted above. It is funny how someone like kirkland can loose a fight and people forget about the twenty or so people they beat and call them crap. Let's all remember the other guy in the ring is always trying to win too. It isn't always over hype or any other excuse spewed out after a loss. Sometime the opponet is just better if not overall at least for that one night. Makes this sport great.
I really don't think the Kirkland result was a huge upset at all, said as much prior to the fight. Kirkland really had-has a long way to develope. The guy he lost to though not a heavy hitter had boo koo rounds and serious distance fights vs a long layoff and some patch work shake the rust off quickies for Kirkland. You can't fake rounds and think experience, that's why to me early career kos are pretty overrated and can be misleading. Sort put David Lemieux in same group. Yeh your the next best thing and cave in walls but where's the 2nd gear, what do you do when you fight a vet who remembers to duck...and knows when to fire back.
The other difference between Lemieux losing and Kirkland losing is that Rubio is a pretty talented perenial top ten middleweight who is the definition of a crafty veteran. I didn't expect this to be an easy outing for Lemieux even though I thought he would be victorious. Also, given Lemieux's age of 22, losing to Rubio for Lemieux is just a set-back, not the end of a career. There are easy things he can fix.
If I can just add, I thought the loss was odd. Lemieux was dominating every round and then all of a sudden he was tagged, and within a minute, the fight was over. It's like he was never taught to properly clinch or move away in times of trouble. If he had that one wrinkle in his game, it may have been different. Anyway.
James Kirkland also is 27, which is a lot more far along than 22 in the career of a boxer. As Lyle pointed out, Kirkland had a falling out with the trainer that really got him to where he was before he went to jail. Kirkland seems to be in more of a crossroads situation.
very good thread, but if you look at it smartly, LWW is one of the best divisions still and Kirkland still is a prospect- (altough I dont rate him as i used to)
To be fair to Kirkland, Wolfe dumped him not the other way round but otherwise I agree with Lyle & Rant.
I think a major problem for Lemieux & Kirkland is that they both could just walk through their opponents, especially in Kirkland's case having no sparring. I think if you're as rusty as he is a camp with no sparring is a recipe for an early stoppage loss.
I do agree with the OP though about these guys being written off. I remember it particularly with the delight some seemed in writing off Jacobs after he got stopped in a fight less than a week after the woman who'd raised him had died. Not a particularly proud Saddo moment.
i think the point is its hard to say from that fight, he hasnt gone shitQuote:
Originally Posted by gest12645
he got caught and didnt recover, doesnt really even mean he cant take a punch, on another night we might see him take a whole barrel of punches and not go down
that punch just landed on the right night in the right spot at the right time in the fight
I think Kirkland probably could've continued and had he have made it to the bell would probably have won that fight.
It just wasn't his night...I mean even with Kirkland fully recovered Ishida was sharper, quicker, and used more skill. Kirkland would attack, leave himself open and Ishida had to do is block and counter.Quote:
Originally Posted by BIG H
I think it was a number of things that hurt Kirkland, he didn't spar apparently, he looked slower than normal and a little more rigid that how he usually looks and these guys are professionals if you lose timing and the fluidity of your style you'll eventually get beat.
Who was training Kirkland the other night? I would assume somebody like Ronnie Shields would do ok with him, but in all honesty for his style, attitude, and physique Freddy Roach would seem to benefit him the most. Some long shot candidates being Floyd Sr., Roger Mayweather (wouldn't be good for his attitude but would correct his defense and make the most of his handspeed), and the forgotten man Kevin Rooney would help him out with putting his punches together and head movement, but who the hell knows if he can train a top level fighter again. Dan Birmingham or Joe Goosen might help out as well....but whoever the trainer is Kirkland has a lot to work on.