FIGHTHYPE \\ WINKY WRIGHT SET TO FACE MATTHEW MACKLIN ON APRIL 9
I saw the post about Winky coming back but didn't see anyone put up who he was fighting so here it is. This shouldn't be a bad fight i fancy Macklin in this one what about you guys?
Printable View
FIGHTHYPE \\ WINKY WRIGHT SET TO FACE MATTHEW MACKLIN ON APRIL 9
I saw the post about Winky coming back but didn't see anyone put up who he was fighting so here it is. This shouldn't be a bad fight i fancy Macklin in this one what about you guys?
hmm I still like Winky to get this
From what I saw of Macklin in his last fight this isnt a bad warm up for Winky and straight back in the ratings;)Quote:
Originally Posted by mattboxingfan
Winky has good world class sparring where he is, Macklin doesnt. This has Bingham or Foster written all over it;D Warren thinks he can take advantag of Winkys age and inactivity. Maybe if Macklin was genuinly world class but he isnt!
agreed . Wright schools him
i thought henessey just won purse bids for macklin to face barker? am i missing something?
but yeah if this goes ahead winky all day unless macklin gets lucky
Quote:
Originally Posted by armyash
I have to agree other then a few rumors I have not seen or heard anything about Wright fighting anyone that has been inked....But then again that does not mean anything.....For all we know Wright could be in the middle of training camp:-\
Macklin could be busy enough to win this. That is what Warren must be hoping for at least.
Yeah.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
From what I saw of his last fight though, the bloke he was fighting came in on something stupid like a day or 2 notice and still took Macklin the distance and had him blowing out of his ass. Macklin looked far from the world ranking he has.
Yeah Macklin did himself no favours last time out. Could have been an off night but didn't look like a fighter banging on the door for a world title.Quote:
Originally Posted by rossYeah.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master
From what I saw of his last fight though, the bloke he was fighting came in on something stupid like a day or 2 notice and still took Macklin the distance and had him blowing out of his ass. Macklin looked far from the world ranking he has.
Hard to say really with Winkys inactivity but if he's still 50% the man he was he will torture Macklin! I will put a few quid on Winky if the price is right thats for sure!
Winky is done as an elite fighter. I actually think he's shot. The inactivity only makes it worse. With that said, he still toys Macklin to take the win
If this happens I hope Winky schools him. Dispise Macklin so much. What a complete idiot he really is.
Winky Wright!!! One of my all tiem favorite "BOXERS"! But taking so much time off is not what champions do. Unless he come back down to 154 and be active, he will never be a champion again. And when I say champion, I mean the linear champion of whatever division he decides to fight in.
As Winky's promoter, this is how I would set him up . . .
1. Macklin
2. K-9 Bundradge @ 154
3. Cotto
bad fight for macklin , winky hands him his ass
Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfn
why is he an idiot you idiot?
Talks about how he is levels above other fighters and always uses the excuse that when he underperforms, he is just performing to the level of his opponent. Also claims he is the best middleweight in the world. That makes him an idiot, because he hasn't proved jack shit. Those are idiotic comments that for me, prove his idiocy. Can't stand fighters talking about how they're going to do this and that when for their entire career, they haven't done or proven anything. He has also bounced from trainer to trainer and promotor to promotor without offering muchrespect to the work/help they have tried to give him throughout his career. His interview following the Wayne Elock fight was just plain disrespectful in my opinion. Now how does that make me an idiot?Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfn
why is he an idiot you idiot?
Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnTalks about how he is levels above other fighters and always uses the excuse that when he underperforms, he is just performing to the level of his opponent. Also claims he is the best middleweight in the world. That makes him an idiot, because he hasn't proved jack shit. Those are idiotic comments that for me, prove his idiocy. Can't stand fighters talking about how they're going to do this and that when for their entire career, they haven't done or proven anything. He has also bounced from trainer to trainer and promotor to promotor without offering muchrespect to the work/help they have tried to give him throughout his career. His interview following the Wayne Elock fight was just plain disrespectful in my opinion. Now how does that make me an idiot?Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfn
why is he an idiot you idiot?
just does dude
he's a nice fella, confident in his ability
ok, maybe he is aiming a bit higher than he can reach, but then again maybe he isnt
i havent heard him claim to be the best middleweight in the world mind
anyway just chill, enjoy his career, after all he was involved in the most exciting ever boxing fight
harsh man.Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnTalks about how he is levels above other fighters and always uses the excuse that when he underperforms, he is just performing to the level of his opponent. Also claims he is the best middleweight in the world. ThatQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfn
why is he an idiot you idiot?
makes him an idiot, because he hasn't proved jack shit.
Those are idiotic comments that for me, prove his
idiocy. Can't stand fighters talking about how they're
going to do this and that when for their entire career,
they haven't done or proven anything. He has also
bounced from trainer to trainer and promotor to
promotor without offering muchrespect to the work/help
they have tried to give him throughout his career. His
interview following the Wayne Elock fight was just plain
disrespectful in my opinion. Now how does that make
me an idiot?
You've started a poll in another thread calling Haye a "ducker" and Calzaghe a "slapper". Both of those guys have achieved a helluva lot more than Matthew Macklin. So disrespecting those 2 dispite their achievements would make you an idiot would it not? I'm criticising Macklin because he's claiming to be a big shot when he isn't. People on this forum have ragged on Hatton, Khan, Floyd and Pacquiao for their achievements. What I'm knocking Macklin for isn't harsh. I'm basically saying that before he shoots his mouth off, he should fight someone of note.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnTalks about how he is levels above other fighters and always uses the excuse that when he underperforms, he is just performing to the level of his opponent. Also claims he is the best middleweight in the world. That makes him an idiot, because he hasn't proved jack shit. Those are idiotic comments that for me, prove his idiocy. Can't stand fighters talking about how they're going to do this and that when for their entire career, they haven't done or proven anything. He has also bounced from trainer to trainer and promotor to promotor without offering muchrespect to the work/help they have tried to give him throughout his career. His interview following the Wayne Elock fight was just plain disrespectful in my opinion. Now how does that make me an idiot?Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfn
why is he an idiot you idiot?
just does dude
he's a nice fella, confident in his ability
ok, maybe he is aiming a bit higher than he can reach, but then again maybe he isnt
i havent heard him claim to be the best middleweight in the world mind
anyway just chill, enjoy his career, after all he was involved in the most exciting ever boxing fight
:) i never started that poll dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnYou've started a poll in another thread calling Haye a "ducker" and Calzaghe a "slapper". Both of those guys have achieved a helluva lot more than Matthew Macklin. So disrespecting those 2 dispite their achievements would make you an idiot would it not? I'm criticising Macklin because he's claiming to be a big shot when he isn't. People on this forum have ragged on Hatton, Khan, Floyd and Pacquiao for their achievements. What I'm knocking Macklin for isn't harsh. I'm basically saying that before he shoots his mouth off, he should fight someone of note.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnTalks about how he is levels above other fighters and always uses the excuse that when he underperforms, he is just performing to the level of his opponent. Also claims he is the best middleweight in the world. That makes him an idiot, because he hasn't proved jack shit. Those are idiotic comments that for me, prove his idiocy. Can't stand fighters talking about how they're going to do this and that when for their entire career, they haven't done or proven anything. He has also bounced from trainer to trainer and promotor to promotor without offering muchrespect to the work/help they have tried to give him throughout his career. His interview following the Wayne Elock fight was just plain disrespectful in my opinion. Now how does that make me an idiot?Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfn
why is he an idiot you idiot?
just does dude
he's a nice fella, confident in his ability
ok, maybe he is aiming a bit higher than he can reach, but then again maybe he isnt
i havent heard him claim to be the best middleweight in the world mind
anyway just chill, enjoy his career, after all he was involved in the most exciting ever boxing fight
Maclin doesnt exactly shoot his mouth off, hes just confident, i think you should listen again
Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
I dont mind a fighter who is confident, even arrogant but let them at least have something to be arrogant about. Like Eubank, Calzaghe and Hamed. I dont think you will hear in 20 years someone chatting down the pub saying "I wish British boxing was back in its hey day. You know, have the likes of Eubank, Ben, Hamed, Lewis, Calzaghe, Hatton and Macklin.";D
Quote:
Originally Posted by rossQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
I dont mind a fighter who is confident, even arrogant but let them at least have something to be arrogant about. Like Eubank, Calzaghe and Hamed. I dont think you will hear in 20 years someone chatting down the pub saying "I wish British boxing was back in its hey day. You know, have the likes of Eubank, Ben, Hamed, Lewis, Calzaghe, Hatton and Macklin.";D
right ok, so macklin doesn't deserve a fight with wright? and whether he does or doesnt how is he suppose to approach it?
well ive done alright so far in my carear but this is a big step and ill probly loose, in fact ive been lucky to win half the fights i have won already, im fat, i cant punch, i have a small willy and nobody loves me
Despite the fact I can't stand him I'm happy he has signed to fight someone of note. Not once in this thread has someone said "he doesn't deserve the fight with Winky". Nobody has questioned his approach to the fight with Winky either. Everything I have said has come from previous statements he has made. Maybe you should re-read a few posts again.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by rossQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
I dont mind a fighter who is confident, even arrogant but let them at least have something to be arrogant about. Like Eubank, Calzaghe and Hamed. I dont think you will hear in 20 years someone chatting down the pub saying "I wish British boxing was back in its hey day. You know, have the likes of Eubank, Ben, Hamed, Lewis, Calzaghe, Hatton and Macklin.";D
right ok, so macklin doesn't deserve a fight with wright? and whether he does or doesnt how is he suppose to approach it?
well ive done alright so far in my carear but this is a big step and ill probly loose, in fact ive been lucky to win half the fights i have won already, im fat, i cant punch, i have a small willy and nobody loves me
i dont need to reread the posts dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnDespite the fact I can't stand him I'm happy he has signed to fight someone of note. Not once in this thread has someone said "he doesn't deserve the fight with Winky". Nobody has questioned his approach to the fight with Winky either. Everything I have said has come from previous statements he has made. Maybe you should re-read a few posts again.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by rossQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
I dont mind a fighter who is confident, even arrogant but let them at least have something to be arrogant about. Like Eubank, Calzaghe and Hamed. I dont think you will hear in 20 years someone chatting down the pub saying "I wish British boxing was back in its hey day. You know, have the likes of Eubank, Ben, Hamed, Lewis, Calzaghe, Hatton and Macklin.";D
right ok, so macklin doesn't deserve a fight with wright? and whether he does or doesnt how is he suppose to approach it?
well ive done alright so far in my carear but this is a big step and ill probly loose, in fact ive been lucky to win half the fights i have won already, im fat, i cant punch, i have a small willy and nobody loves me
you are saying he is arrogant/over confindent/disresepctful or something along those lines arent you? and because of this he is an idiot?
and this is due to how he talks before/after fights yes?
so i am asking how he is suppose to talk, you tell me what he is suppose to say
should he say he wont win, or should he say he will?
you also said he hasnt backed up his words and he was disrespectful to elcock, he batterred elcock and proved he was levels above him, after the fight he said that and it did a good job of promoting his status
if he had of said, i won but it was a lucky punch, how much ambition does that show? how much self promotion is that?
this is boxing dude, this is how the top boxers talk
After the Elcock fight he said he was going straight to the top and would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3. He said he was going striaght to the top with "the best promotor in the world" Frank Warren. He then left Frank before he fought again. I'm not saying he should said "That was a lucky punch" after the Elcock fight, but if you're going to say you would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3, for fucks sake fight someone of note and step up your competition.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44i dont need to reread the posts dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnDespite the fact I can't stand him I'm happy he has signed to fight someone of note. Not once in this thread has someone said "he doesn't deserve the fight with Winky". Nobody has questioned his approach to the fight with Winky either. Everything I have said has come from previous statements he has made. Maybe you should re-read a few posts again.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by rossQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
I dont mind a fighter who is confident, even arrogant but let them at least have something to be arrogant about. Like Eubank, Calzaghe and Hamed. I dont think you will hear in 20 years someone chatting down the pub saying "I wish British boxing was back in its hey day. You know, have the likes of Eubank, Ben, Hamed, Lewis, Calzaghe, Hatton and Macklin.";D
right ok, so macklin doesn't deserve a fight with wright? and whether he does or doesnt how is he suppose to approach it?
well ive done alright so far in my carear but this is a big step and ill probly loose, in fact ive been lucky to win half the fights i have won already, im fat, i cant punch, i have a small willy and nobody loves me
you are saying he is arrogant/over confindent/disresepctful or something along those lines arent you? and because of this he is an idiot?
and this is due to how he talks before/after fights yes?
so i am asking how he is suppose to talk, you tell me what he is suppose to say
should he say he wont win, or should he say he will?
you also said he hasnt backed up his words and he was disrespectful to elcock, he batterred elcock and proved he was levels above him, after the fight he said that and it did a good job of promoting his status
if he had of said, i won but it was a lucky punch, how much ambition does that show? how much self promotion is that?
this is boxing dude, this is how the top boxers talk
After the Elcock fight it was "all about levels". He said he knew he'd destroy him because he was streets ahead of him in terms of talent. After the Ruben Varon fight he said he he underperformed because he was fighting at the level of his opponent. You say this is how boxers talk but compare this with Darren Barker, who admits when he underperforms it is down to him making mistakes he needs to improve on. By being honest you assume that shows a lack of ambition? No, it shows a willingness to learn and improve. But am I to take from you that because Barker doesn't talk that way he will never be a top boxer? For the record, I've never heard Manny Pacquiao say he was going to be the best in the world. That hasn't stopped him from becoming so.
we arent all pacquiao dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnAfter the Elcock fight he said he was going straight to the top and would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3. He said he was going striaght to the top with "the best promotor in the world" Frank Warren. He then left Frank before he fought again. I'm not saying he should said "That was a lucky punch" after the Elcock fight, but if you're going to say you would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3, for fucks sake fight someone of note and step up your competition.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44i dont need to reread the posts dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnDespite the fact I can't stand him I'm happy he has signed to fight someone of note. Not once in this thread has someone said "he doesn't deserve the fight with Winky". Nobody has questioned his approach to the fight with Winky either. Everything I have said has come from previous statements he has made. Maybe you should re-read a few posts again.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by rossQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
I dont mind a fighter who is confident, even arrogant but let them at least have something to be arrogant about. Like Eubank, Calzaghe and Hamed. I dont think you will hear in 20 years someone chatting down the pub saying "I wish British boxing was back in its hey day. You know, have the likes of Eubank, Ben, Hamed, Lewis, Calzaghe, Hatton and Macklin.";D
right ok, so macklin doesn't deserve a fight with wright? and whether he does or doesnt how is he suppose to approach it?
well ive done alright so far in my carear but this is a big step and ill probly loose, in fact ive been lucky to win half the fights i have won already, im fat, i cant punch, i have a small willy and nobody loves me
you are saying he is arrogant/over confindent/disresepctful or something along those lines arent you? and because of this he is an idiot?
and this is due to how he talks before/after fights yes?
so i am asking how he is suppose to talk, you tell me what he is suppose to say
should he say he wont win, or should he say he will?
you also said he hasnt backed up his words and he was disrespectful to elcock, he batterred elcock and proved he was levels above him, after the fight he said that and it did a good job of promoting his status
if he had of said, i won but it was a lucky punch, how much ambition does that show? how much self promotion is that?
this is boxing dude, this is how the top boxers talk
After the Elcock fight it was "all about levels". He said he knew he'd destroy him because he was streets ahead of him in terms of talent. After the Ruben Varon fight he said he he underperformed because he was fighting at the level of his opponent. You say this is how boxers talk but compare this with Darren Barker, who admits when he underperforms it is down to him making mistakes he needs to improve on. By being honest you assume that shows a lack of ambition? No, it shows a willingness to learn and improve. But am I to take from you that because Barker doesn't talk that way he will never be a top boxer? For the record, I've never heard Manny Pacquiao say he was going to be the best in the world. That hasn't stopped him from becoming so.
who is better macklin or barker? who is better known?
erics44 in defending Brit shocker. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfn
why is he an idiot you idiot?
To be fair, only about a month back MP called himself the greatest fighter there's ever been. Interestingly there was none of the outrage or talk on it as when a certain security guard poking pal of his says the same. Anyway enough about that (jesus I've become one of those people making every thread about those two fuckers).Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnAfter the Elcock fight he said he was going straight to the top and would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3. He said he was going striaght to the top with "the best promotor in the world" Frank Warren. He then left Frank before he fought again. I'm not saying he should said "That was a lucky punch" after the Elcock fight, but if you're going to say you would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3, for fucks sake fight someone of note and step up your competition.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44i dont need to reread the posts dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnDespite the fact I can't stand him I'm happy he has signed to fight someone of note. Not once in this thread has someone said "he doesn't deserve the fight with Winky". Nobody has questioned his approach to the fight with Winky either. Everything I have said has come from previous statements he has made. Maybe you should re-read a few posts again.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by rossQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
I dont mind a fighter who is confident, even arrogant but let them at least have something to be arrogant about. Like Eubank, Calzaghe and Hamed. I dont think you will hear in 20 years someone chatting down the pub saying "I wish British boxing was back in its hey day. You know, have the likes of Eubank, Ben, Hamed, Lewis, Calzaghe, Hatton and Macklin.";D
right ok, so macklin doesn't deserve a fight with wright? and whether he does or doesnt how is he suppose to approach it?
well ive done alright so far in my carear but this is a big step and ill probly loose, in fact ive been lucky to win half the fights i have won already, im fat, i cant punch, i have a small willy and nobody loves me
you are saying he is arrogant/over confindent/disresepctful or something along those lines arent you? and because of this he is an idiot?
and this is due to how he talks before/after fights yes?
so i am asking how he is suppose to talk, you tell me what he is suppose to say
should he say he wont win, or should he say he will?
you also said he hasnt backed up his words and he was disrespectful to elcock, he batterred elcock and proved he was levels above him, after the fight he said that and it did a good job of promoting his status
if he had of said, i won but it was a lucky punch, how much ambition does that show? how much self promotion is that?
this is boxing dude, this is how the top boxers talk
After the Elcock fight it was "all about levels". He said he knew he'd destroy him because he was streets ahead of him in terms of talent. After the Ruben Varon fight he said he he underperformed because he was fighting at the level of his opponent. You say this is how boxers talk but compare this with Darren Barker, who admits when he underperforms it is down to him making mistakes he needs to improve on. By being honest you assume that shows a lack of ambition? No, it shows a willingness to learn and improve. But am I to take from you that because Barker doesn't talk that way he will never be a top boxer? For the record, I've never heard Manny Pacquiao say he was going to be the best in the world. That hasn't stopped him from becoming so.
Anyway, I disagree on Macklin's 'arrogance', I think there's nothing wrong with confidence, even if it is ill-founded. The Varon fight leads me to think that he's reached his level & the Asikainen fight was a bit of a false dawn. However, I agree how he's treated promoters & trainers doesn't speak well of him. I also disagree on Barker. I think he's a bit of a knob, who has somehow reached a level above where he belongs. ;D
Quote:
Originally Posted by koppaserics44 in defending Brit shocker. :oQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfn
why is he an idiot you idiot?
:)
I Just happen to be right tho
although if he was a yank he'd be a cunt :lickish:
Better known doesn't mean better fighter. Their achievements are identical, their attitudes are different. Personally, if they met, I'd bet Barker schools him.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44we arent all pacquiao dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnAfter the Elcock fight he said he was going straight to the top and would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3. He said he was going striaght to the top with "the best promotor in the world" Frank Warren. He then left Frank before he fought again. I'm not saying he should said "That was a lucky punch" after the Elcock fight, but if you're going to say you would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3, for fucks sake fight someone of note and step up your competition.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44i dont need to reread the posts dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnDespite the fact I can't stand him I'm happy he has signed to fight someone of note. Not once in this thread has someone said "he doesn't deserve the fight with Winky". Nobody has questioned his approach to the fight with Winky either. Everything I have said has come from previous statements he has made. Maybe you should re-read a few posts again.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by rossQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
I dont mind a fighter who is confident, even arrogant but let them at least have something to be arrogant about. Like Eubank, Calzaghe and Hamed. I dont think you will hear in 20 years someone chatting down the pub saying "I wish British boxing was back in its hey day. You know, have the likes of Eubank, Ben, Hamed, Lewis, Calzaghe, Hatton and Macklin.";D
right ok, so macklin doesn't deserve a fight with wright? and whether he does or doesnt how is he suppose to approach it?
well ive done alright so far in my carear but this is a big step and ill probly loose, in fact ive been lucky to win half the fights i have won already, im fat, i cant punch, i have a small willy and nobody loves me
you are saying he is arrogant/over confindent/disresepctful or something along those lines arent you? and because of this he is an idiot?
and this is due to how he talks before/after fights yes?
so i am asking how he is suppose to talk, you tell me what he is suppose to say
should he say he wont win, or should he say he will?
you also said he hasnt backed up his words and he was disrespectful to elcock, he batterred elcock and proved he was levels above him, after the fight he said that and it did a good job of promoting his status
if he had of said, i won but it was a lucky punch, how much ambition does that show? how much self promotion is that?
this is boxing dude, this is how the top boxers talk
After the Elcock fight it was "all about levels". He said he knew he'd destroy him because he was streets ahead of him in terms of talent. After the Ruben Varon fight he said he he underperformed because he was fighting at the level of his opponent. You say this is how boxers talk but compare this with Darren Barker, who admits when he underperforms it is down to him making mistakes he needs to improve on. By being honest you assume that shows a lack of ambition? No, it shows a willingness to learn and improve. But am I to take from you that because Barker doesn't talk that way he will never be a top boxer? For the record, I've never heard Manny Pacquiao say he was going to be the best in the world. That hasn't stopped him from becoming so.
who is better macklin or barker? who is better known?
if they met i dont think it would have anything to do with accademics, i think it would be a close fight thoQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnBetter known doesn't mean better fighter. Their achievements are identical, their attitudes are different. Personally, if they met, I'd bet Barker schools him.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44we arent all pacquiao dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnAfter the Elcock fight he said he was going straight to the top and would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3. He said he was going striaght to the top with "the best promotor in the world" Frank Warren. He then left Frank before he fought again. I'm not saying he should said "That was a lucky punch" after the Elcock fight, but if you're going to say you would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3, for fucks sake fight someone of note and step up your competition.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44i dont need to reread the posts dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnDespite the fact I can't stand him I'm happy he has signed to fight someone of note. Not once in this thread has someone said "he doesn't deserve the fight with Winky". Nobody has questioned his approach to the fight with Winky either. Everything I have said has come from previous statements he has made. Maybe you should re-read a few posts again.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44Quote:
Originally Posted by rossQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44
I dont mind a fighter who is confident, even arrogant but let them at least have something to be arrogant about. Like Eubank, Calzaghe and Hamed. I dont think you will hear in 20 years someone chatting down the pub saying "I wish British boxing was back in its hey day. You know, have the likes of Eubank, Ben, Hamed, Lewis, Calzaghe, Hatton and Macklin.";D
right ok, so macklin doesn't deserve a fight with wright? and whether he does or doesnt how is he suppose to approach it?
well ive done alright so far in my carear but this is a big step and ill probly loose, in fact ive been lucky to win half the fights i have won already, im fat, i cant punch, i have a small willy and nobody loves me
you are saying he is arrogant/over confindent/disresepctful or something along those lines arent you? and because of this he is an idiot?
and this is due to how he talks before/after fights yes?
so i am asking how he is suppose to talk, you tell me what he is suppose to say
should he say he wont win, or should he say he will?
you also said he hasnt backed up his words and he was disrespectful to elcock, he batterred elcock and proved he was levels above him, after the fight he said that and it did a good job of promoting his status
if he had of said, i won but it was a lucky punch, how much ambition does that show? how much self promotion is that?
this is boxing dude, this is how the top boxers talk
After the Elcock fight it was "all about levels". He said he knew he'd destroy him because he was streets ahead of him in terms of talent. After the Ruben Varon fight he said he he underperformed because he was fighting at the level of his opponent. You say this is how boxers talk but compare this with Darren Barker, who admits when he underperforms it is down to him making mistakes he needs to improve on. By being honest you assume that shows a lack of ambition? No, it shows a willingness to learn and improve. But am I to take from you that because Barker doesn't talk that way he will never be a top boxer? For the record, I've never heard Manny Pacquiao say he was going to be the best in the world. That hasn't stopped him from becoming so.
who is better macklin or barker? who is better known?
our conversation is about "better known" dude, macklin says what he says, barker says what he says, they are on a similar level (in my opinion), yet macklin has a much bigger profile, do you think there might be a link?
Why can't people just quote one post? It really isn't hard. ;D
Quote:
Originally Posted by koppas
shouldnt this be in the hate waterhole thread?
The average man on the street wouldn't have a clue who either of them are. Barker's profile isn't as high in boxing terms because his promoter doesn't have a TV deal. I wouldn't say Macklin's profile is that much bigger though. Maybe after Winky it will be. Our conversation was about why I thought Macklin was an idiot. By now, he should have been backing up his boasts. I have seen nothing that makes me think he's as good as he says he is.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
Koppas, sorry bout the million quotes. I'm in work...the button is right there...I was being lazy. ;D
i thought our conversation had progressed to the bigger picture dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnThe average man on the street wouldn't have a clue who either of them are. Barker's profile isn't as high in boxing terms because his promoter doesn't have a TV deal. I wouldn't say Macklin's profile is that much bigger though. Maybe after Winky it will be. Our conversation was about why I thought Macklin was an idiot. By now, he should have been backing up his boasts. I have seen nothing that makes me think he's as good as he says he is.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
Koppas, sorry bout the million quotes. I'm in work...the button is right there...I was being lazy. ;D
I still answered you thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44i thought our conversation had progressed to the bigger picture dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnThe average man on the street wouldn't have a clue who either of them are. Barker's profile isn't as high in boxing terms because his promoter doesn't have a TV deal. I wouldn't say Macklin's profile is that much bigger though. Maybe after Winky it will be. Our conversation was about why I thought Macklin was an idiot. By now, he should have been backing up his boasts. I have seen nothing that makes me think he's as good as he says he is.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
Koppas, sorry bout the million quotes. I'm in work...the button is right there...I was being lazy. ;D
did you? well done :)Quote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnI still answered you thoughQuote:
Originally Posted by erics44i thought our conversation had progressed to the bigger picture dudeQuote:
Originally Posted by bzkfnThe average man on the street wouldn't have a clue who either of them are. Barker's profile isn't as high in boxing terms because his promoter doesn't have a TV deal. I wouldn't say Macklin's profile is that much bigger though. Maybe after Winky it will be. Our conversation was about why I thought Macklin was an idiot. By now, he should have been backing up his boasts. I have seen nothing that makes me think he's as good as he says he is.Quote:
Originally Posted by erics44
Koppas, sorry bout the million quotes. I'm in work...the button is right there...I was being lazy. ;D
my missus made far too many ginger bread men with my kids at the weekend, there is still a tupperware tub full of them in the kitchen and i cant stop eating them
she has good skills in cake making
I agree! Winky at Amy level or age is too smart, he gave Hopkins a bit of trouble and u can't only smash winky to bits if your name is Paul WilliamsQuote:
Originally Posted by gest12645