
Originally Posted by
Silkeyjoe

Originally Posted by
ykdadamaja

Originally Posted by
p4pking
I highly doubt it, Quillin was going to make a very nice payday for the fight. Pretty sure it was a case of Haymon scrapping the whole event after being outbid on the thing, maybe that was his plan all along. I'm sure you've already read that this is what happened from several other posters on here though, and this is just another one of your dummy threads.
Risk vs. Reward... losing to Koborov, while he is good, would put Quillin to the middle of the pack at least. Sure, it would have been a payday then- but what about 4 fights down the line?
If Quillin shockingly lost to Koborov, he would not longer be as marketable.
Saying Haymon had issues is just an easy cop out, and only an idiot would believe that as the overall reason.
Quillin dropped a belt... a major belt... plus money... vs a guy we now know as more dangerous than his record and lack of media hype suggests.
Looking at it now, it had the makings of a Jermaine Taylor/Kelly Pavlik thing to it....
No it was all to do with Al Haymon. Korobov was a stellar amateur but hasnt progressed as he should. Quillin would be a strong favorite so risk v reward would mean the fight makes sense. Low risk for big reward. Your threads are getting worse and worse
I don't feel Koborov is the stiff folks make him out to be. He is undefeated. Fights for Top Rank. Amateur standout. Southpaw. Ranked #1 by the WBO ahead of very good fighters that the world clamors about.
His one knock is the apparent lack of bone crushing power, like GGG or Kovalev. But he's winning fights.... and losing very, very few rounds.
He's the prototypical boxer... not much of a puncher... but a good boxer.
Risk vs. Reward in that IF Quillin were to lose, and he has more to lose from losing than from winning, he loses more in the long run than Koborov would by losing.
You assume that Quillin would WIN... I'm not so sure now he would have won, hands down. That's my thing now that I look back at it.
Bookmarks