Who should Kessler fight in his next match?

[CFH]

Kessler should fight somebody we've heard of. No more tomato cans. Bute or Froch preferably.

Problem is that no one has ever heard of Froch. At least not outside Britain.

I live on the west coast of North America, I know who he is and have for a while. I can't say the same about about Kessler's last two opponents.

[Mikkel_K]

Kessler should fight somebody we've heard of. No more tomato cans. Bute or Froch preferably.

Problem is that no one has ever heard of Froch. At least not outside Britain.

I live on the west coast of North America, I know who he is and have for a while. I can't say the same about about Kessler's last two opponents.

Well, you're a regular poster on a British boxing forum...

Anyway, I'll stick to the point that if Kessler - or any other elite fighter for that matter - handed Froch's ass to him, the 'who has he ever beat'-questions would arise straight up. Do people seriously think Kessler would get anywhere nearer a big fight in the US by taking on Froch?

[And quite frankly neither Froch, nor Pascal has really beaten anyone of note. If one of them beats the other, and then beats the winner of Taylor-Lacy, obviously the situation is different.]

[CFH]

Problem is that no one has ever heard of Froch. At least not outside Britain.

I live on the west coast of North America, I know who he is and have for a while. I can't say the same about about Kessler's last two opponents.

Well, you're a regular poster on a British boxing forum...

Anyway, I'll stick to the point that if Kessler - or any other elite fighter for that matter - handed Froch's ass to him, the 'who has he ever beat'-questions would arise straight up. Do people seriously think Kessler would get anywhere nearer a big fight in the US by taking on Froch?

[And quite frankly neither Froch, nor Pascal has really beaten anyone of note. If one of them beats the other, and then beats the winner of Taylor-Lacy, obviously the situation is different.]

I don't rate Froch highly at all, though I think he'll beat Pascal, who is ridiculously overrated. However, the fact remains that Froch is a more familiar name to myself, and most people who are serious boxing fans, than either of the stiffs Kessler has fought since the Calzaghe fight.

I like Kessler a lot, I was cheering for him against Calzaghe, and I'd cheer for him against almost any other SMW, but his recent opposition has been nothing short of laughable.

I do agree that I'd much rather see him fight Taylor/Lacy than Froch/Pascal, in fact, out of the available options I'd like to see Kessler target 1. Bute (if he's not rematching Andrade, which, again, he needs to do) 2. Taylor/Lacy, and 3. Froch Pascal. Although, any of these fighters are better than the guys Kessler is wasting his time with.

Edit: And I wouldn't term Saddo's strictly a British boxing forum, it has a heavy British membership, but IMO it is far too international in its make-up to term it a "British" site.

[Mikkel_K]

I like Kessler a lot, I was cheering for him against Calzaghe, and I'd cheer for him against almost any other SMW, but his recent opposition has been nothing short of laughable.

At the end of the day Kessler has bounced back from the Calzaghe defeat by re-conquring a belt and then going to his mandatory's home turf to knock him out.

Surely more interesting matches could be made - and I hope, they will be in the near future [1] - but it could have been worse too. As bad as Sartison and Häussler were (esp. Häussler), they were highly ranked by WBA, and both of them are as good as anyone Froch and Pascal have ever beaten. The only better wins at 168 this year imo than Sartison was Inkin's against Zuniga and Bute's against Andrade. And as for that last one...

[1] As stated before the Kessler camp has been talking of fighting in the US next. Apparently HBO would like to have him on in February or March.

[CFH]

I like Kessler a lot, I was cheering for him against Calzaghe, and I'd cheer for him against almost any other SMW, but his recent opposition has been nothing short of laughable.

At the end of the day Kessler has bounced back from the Calzaghe defeat by re-conquring a belt and then going to his mandatory's home turf to knock him out.

Surely more interesting matches could be made - and I hope, they will be in the near future [1] - but it could have been worse too. As bad as Sartison and Häussler were (esp. Häussler), they were highly ranked by WBA, and both of them are as good as anyone Froch and Pascal have ever beaten. The only better wins at 168 this year imo than Sartison was Inkin's against Zuniga and Bute's against Andrade. And as for that last one...

[1] As stated before the Kessler camp has been talking of fighting in the US next. Apparently HBO would like to have him on in February or March.

IMO, at the end of the day Kessler has taken two gimme's and showed real reluctance to take on a real challenge. One gimme fight for a belt after the Calzaghe fight I can stomach, but two (and it looks like 3) gimme fights in a row is absurd for a fighter who wants to lay claim to the title of the best 168lber. I don't think I need to address the lack of legitimacy in the sanctioning bodies ranking systems either.

I'd argue that Froch, though arguably not Pascal, presents a more legitimate fight than either Hausser or Sartison.

[Rantcatrat]

How about Kessler fighting Hopkins or Winkie?

[CFH]

How about Kessler fighting Hopkins or Winkie?

I'd be glad to see either one of those fights made as well, though I doubt Hopkins would be interested.

[Mikkel_K]

IMO, at the end of the day Kessler has taken two gimme's and showed real reluctance to take on a real challenge. One gimme fight for a belt after the Calzaghe fight I can stomach, but two (and it looks like 3) gimme fights in a row is absurd for a fighter who wants to lay claim to the title of the best 168lber. I don't think I need to address the lack of legitimacy in the sanctioning bodies ranking systems either.

I'd argue that Froch, though arguably not Pascal, presents a more legitimate fight than either Hausser or Sartison.

I dont get why it looks like 3? I also dont get why Kessler is reluctant to take on real challenges, having fought Mundine in Australia, Andrade as a mandatory and attempted unification in Cardiff against the current p4p #2.

As for your last argument I actually agree completely, but I still just dont get the "Why is he fighting x? Who has he ever beat, he should be fighting Froch instead" kind of arguments (not so much presented by you, but heard many times before, not only with Kessler but also with the likes of Calzaghe). Froch has yet to beat a top 25-fighter himself.

[CFH]

IMO, at the end of the day Kessler has taken two gimme's and showed real reluctance to take on a real challenge. One gimme fight for a belt after the Calzaghe fight I can stomach, but two (and it looks like 3) gimme fights in a row is absurd for a fighter who wants to lay claim to the title of the best 168lber. I don't think I need to address the lack of legitimacy in the sanctioning bodies ranking systems either.

I'd argue that Froch, though arguably not Pascal, presents a more legitimate fight than either Hausser or Sartison.

I dont get why it looks like 3? I also dont get why Kessler is reluctant to take on real challenges, having fought Mundine in Australia, Andrade as a mandatory and attempted unification in Cardiff against the current p4p #2.

As for your last argument I actually agree completely, but I still just dont get the "Why is he fighting x? Who has he ever beat, he should be fighting Froch instead" kind of arguments (not so much presented by you, but heard many times before, not only with Kessler but also with the likes of Calzaghe). Froch has yet to beat a top 25-fighter himself.

This article makes it look like 3, maybe even 4 (though Larsen would never beat Bute): Lucian Bute vs. Mads Larsen in The Works For Early 09

I think in the past, Kessler was more than willing to take on real challenges, it was one of the attributes that made me a fan of his, but since Calzaghe he's seemed different in that regards.

As for your last point, I have to same problem with people saying that type of thing, but in some instances it is founded, though, again like you (I think), I find it is often an unfounded claim or at least one that is made in regards to wanting to see fight x matched up against a different unproven fighter (IE Froch).

I'd rather Kessler fought a Bute or a Taylor/Lacy, but if he doesn't fight them, for whatever reason, I'd rather see him take on a highly-touted up and comer like Froch than someone like Larsen.