Say what you like - Khan should never have won

[Howlin Mad Missy]

Have to correct you. If Barrera or his corner pull out it's a TKO loss. It's a NC if the ref/doc stop it before the 5th.

If they (the ref/doc) don't stop it he has to go for the KO because they (mab & corner) know it can't go 12 with that head wound.

[Howlin Mad Missy]

& I repeat, the doctor did not examine the cut. Check out the interaction in round 4. The doctor & Barrera are talking, blood is dripping off his eyebrow down his face. The doctor never examines the cut.... very poor.

[ElTerribleMorales]

& I repeat, the doctor did not examine the cut. Check out the interaction in round 4. The doctor & Barrera are talking, blood is dripping off his eyebrow down his face. The doctor never examines the cut.... very poor.

he cleans the cut and examines it, and i doubt that they were talking about the weather or that the Dr was asking for an autograph, so plz stop making more excuses than the most obvious, Barrera lost cause he had too much damn pride and chose to fight on, he had too much pride and tried to take on a younger, bigger, natural lightweight and it didn't pay off, Khan beat a shell of the old Barrera, end of

[Howlin Mad Missy]

& I repeat, the doctor did not examine the cut. Check out the interaction in round 4. The doctor & Barrera are talking, blood is dripping off his eyebrow down his face. The doctor never examines the cut.... very poor.

he cleans the cut and examines it, and i doubt that they were talking about the weather or that the Dr was asking for an autograph, so plz stop making more excuses than the most obvious, Barrera lost cause he had too much damn pride and chose to fight on, he had too much pride and tried to take on a younger, bigger, natural lightweight and it didn't pay off, Khan beat a shell of the old Barrera, end of

you must have a different version of the fight

doc/ref need to call it off before rd5 for it to be a nc.

[ElTerribleMorales]

& I repeat, the doctor did not examine the cut. Check out the interaction in round 4. The doctor & Barrera are talking, blood is dripping off his eyebrow down his face. The doctor never examines the cut.... very poor.

he cleans the cut and examines it, and i doubt that they were talking about the weather or that the Dr was asking for an autograph, so plz stop making more excuses than the most obvious, Barrera lost cause he had too much damn pride and chose to fight on, he had too much pride and tried to take on a younger, bigger, natural lightweight and it didn't pay off, Khan beat a shell of the old Barrera, end of

you must have a different version of the fight

doc/ref need to call it off before rd5 for it to be a nc.

just the fact that it was ruled a Technical Decision is proof enough that it would have been called a NO CONTEST if Barrera would have said he can't see, it was an accidental headbutt it was ruled an accidental headbutt, no way in hell it was gonna be ruled a TKO unless Khan would have battered Barrera with punches to the point that he couldn't continue, this is already getting to the point of ridiculous Barrera SHOULD NOT be fighting anymore, and that's what Khan proved

[Mar]

Boxrec shows who won the fight. There are good valid points to argue both sides, but at the end what show on your record is what matters. Librado andrade would probably agree.

[Julius Rain]

hey missy i understand your a great fan of marco, that fight was frustrating and that damn headbutt ruined the match. Khan had some good moments you should admit, after all he was against a great fighter. Marco has a valid point though he had a hard time seeing khan cause of the cut. Im with you missy i think marco can still be champ and become a 4 time division champion. Plus the guy he had a close fight with JMM is the new 135 KING.

As for khan, i think he does have potential as long as he stays focus and doesn't let any success get the best of his mind. Its a bit difficult to give much credit to khan because marco was a bit handicap but khan looked real fast and showed better ring generalship.

[Howlin Mad Missy]

hey missy i understand your a great fan of marco, that fight was frustrating and that damn headbutt ruined the match. Khan had some good moments you should admit, after all he was against a great fighter. Marco has a valid point though he had a hard time seeing khan cause of the cut. Im with you missy i think marco can still be champ and become a 4 time division champion. Plus the guy he had a close fight with JMM is the new 135 KING.

As for khan, i think he does have potential as long as he stays focus and doesn't let any success get the best of his mind. Its a bit difficult to give much credit to khan because marco was a bit handicap but khan looked real fast and showed better ring generalship.

Hi Julius. Thank you for comments. The problem for me in analysing the fight is that we have two fights to look at.

90 to 120 seconds of action before the fight. Both fighters were moving well. Marco coming forward looking to cut down the ring, Khan looking to keep it long & with angles. In that work Khan landed 7/8 shots on target everything else was blocked/slipped missed. In this session it promised to be a good fight. Youth vs Experience.

After the cut we got something very different. Marco backing up and occasionally launching an attack, Khan able to work without too much threat - I can see how that may have impressed many people, yes his hands were fast, yes he was moving well but looking at the tape again, most of Khan's work was missing. No question he was outpointing Barrera but I don't think that was surprising both as a matter of it being early in the fight and with the injury.

I don't see how bringing these points up is inflammatory. I've even said elsewhere Khan looked to have improved...hardly bashing is it?

[Kev]

Have to correct you. If Barrera or his corner pull out it's a TKO loss. It's a NC if the ref/doc stop it before the 5th.

If they (the ref/doc) don't stop it he has to go for the KO because they (mab & corner) know it can't go 12 with that head wound.

You seem intent on making this such an extreme example. On the one hadn your trying to suggest it was the most horrific cut to ever happen to a fighter, now your suggesting that the doctor and ref were so incompetent that they would have forced Barrera to fight on with this appalling injury and that if he said he couldn't see they would have disqualified him or ruled it a loss.

Neither point is realistic. It was a bad cut for sure but probably not the worst injury to happen so far this year let alone of all times, and the doctor would have been duty bound to stop the fight if Barrera insisted he could not see.

We saw in the case of Hasim Rahman where he had just a tiny little cut that everyone whined what a pussy he was for quitting against Toney that the commision overruled the loss and ruled it a No Contest.

The idea that Barrera's cut would have not been deemed serious enough to stop the fight if he had insisted he couldn't see is just ludicrous.

What I find ironic is that Barrera needed 33 stitches (which I agree is a very bad cut) and people say the fight should have been stopped immediately whereas Vitali Klitschko needed 60 against Lennox Lewis and for years people have been arguing that that stoppage was premature.

[Gandalf]

Have to correct you. If Barrera or his corner pull out it's a TKO loss. It's a NC if the ref/doc stop it before the 5th.

If they (the ref/doc) don't stop it he has to go for the KO because they (mab & corner) know it can't go 12 with that head wound.

You seem intent on making this such an extreme example. On the one hadn your trying to suggest it was the most horrific cut to ever happen to a fighter, now your suggesting that the doctor and ref were so incompetent that they would have forced Barrera to fight on with this appalling injury and that if he said he couldn't see they would have disqualified him or ruled it a loss.

Neither point is realistic. It was a bad cut for sure but probably not the worst injury to happen so far this year let alone of all times, and the doctor would have been duty bound to stop the fight if Barrera insisted he could not see.

We saw in the case of Hasim Rahman where he had just a tiny little cut that everyone whined what a pussy he was for quitting against Toney that the commision overruled the loss and ruled it a No Contest.

The idea that Barrera's cut would have not been deemed serious enough to stop the fight if he had insisted he couldn't see is just ludicrous.

What I find ironic is that Barrera needed 33 stitches (which I agree is a very bad cut) and people say the fight should have been stopped immediately whereas Vitali Klitschko needed 60 against Lennox Lewis and for years people have been arguing that that stoppage was premature.

It was a head clash caused in the first round that went on to require a lot of embroidery work and caused a lot of blood to come shooting down the head in horrid little spurts. It should have been stopped far quicker. Do you not think it should have been stopped and declared a NC

Barrera wasn't going to wimp out was he now, he's certainly never shown a yellow streak before. The officials should have stopped it. I don't quite recall seeing a cut like that this year, Bilbo. In fact it's up there as one of the worst cuts I've seen in recent times. And caused by a butt in the second minute!

[chip]

Have to correct you. If Barrera or his corner pull out it's a TKO loss. It's a NC if the ref/doc stop it before the 5th.

If they (the ref/doc) don't stop it he has to go for the KO because they (mab & corner) know it can't go 12 with that head wound.

You seem intent on making this such an extreme example. On the one hadn your trying to suggest it was the most horrific cut to ever happen to a fighter, now your suggesting that the doctor and ref were so incompetent that they would have forced Barrera to fight on with this appalling injury and that if he said he couldn't see they would have disqualified him or ruled it a loss.

Neither point is realistic. It was a bad cut for sure but probably not the worst injury to happen so far this year let alone of all times, and the doctor would have been duty bound to stop the fight if Barrera insisted he could not see.

We saw in the case of Hasim Rahman where he had just a tiny little cut that everyone whined what a pussy he was for quitting against Toney that the commision overruled the loss and ruled it a No Contest.

The idea that Barrera's cut would have not been deemed serious enough to stop the fight if he had insisted he couldn't see is just ludicrous.

What I find ironic is that Barrera needed 33 stitches (which I agree is a very bad cut) and people say the fight should have been stopped immediately whereas Vitali Klitschko needed 60 against Lennox Lewis and for years people have been arguing that that stoppage was premature.

It was extreme
MAB was never gonna quit never has i have seems lesser cuts stopped immediatley, if you watch Warren in the 5 round he clearly indicates to the ref to attend the cut and stop the fight. Can you hand on heart honestly believe that if Khan had that cut it would have been allowed to continue i will find the clip i saw it the other day.

[chip]

heres the link around 36 seconds left of the round

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N-J1RpPD2Bg

[chip]

agree with you miles but cant rep you at the moment

[Howlin Mad Missy]

You seem intent on making this such an extreme example. On the one hadn your trying to suggest it was the most horrific cut to ever happen to a fighter, now your suggesting that the doctor and ref were so incompetent that they would have forced Barrera to fight on with this appalling injury and that if he said he couldn't see they would have disqualified him or ruled it a loss.

Neither point is realistic. It was a bad cut for sure but probably not the worst injury to happen so far this year let alone of all times, and the doctor would have been duty bound to stop the fight if Barrera insisted he could not see.

We saw in the case of Hasim Rahman where he had just a tiny little cut that everyone whined what a pussy he was for quitting against Toney that the commision overruled the loss and ruled it a No Contest.

The idea that Barrera's cut would have not been deemed serious enough to stop the fight if he had insisted he couldn't see is just ludicrous.

What I find ironic is that Barrera needed 33 stitches (which I agree is a very bad cut) and people say the fight should have been stopped immediately whereas Vitali Klitschko needed 60 against Lennox Lewis and for years people have been arguing that that stoppage was premature.

I seriously think you are once again spoiling for a fight. No dinosaurs to discuss this month?

Have I ever said it's the worst cut? No. I know other people have said but once again you try and single me out.

Cuts over bone and over fleshy areas react differently to trauma. I don't need a doctor to tell me this. I've got enough scars to know this as fact. If he'd taken a clean shot to that wound I have no doubt it would have torn far worse than it was.

Stop exaggerating. I am not saying it is the worst cut of all time but it was serious a cut to hamper the fighter. I've seen much less serious cuts stop a fight. And I do think the ref/doc were at fault..as do many others so don't make out it's just me.

Which part of the ref/doc operating to protect a fighter do you not understand? You'd said with your own words that fighters get called pussies for quitting & you're suggesting MAB should have done this
If MAB quits or his corner retire him it's a TKO loss - again which part of this is not getting through to you?

Have I ever called those fights in to question? VT cuts were bad. In that case it wasn't so much of how they were bleeding or were hampering his vision it was that it looked like someone had sliced him with a razor blade and it could have caused permanent damage.

You really do talk bollocks at time, only the others are too polite to mention it.

[ono]

You seem intent on making this such an extreme example. On the one hadn your trying to suggest it was the most horrific cut to ever happen to a fighter, now your suggesting that the doctor and ref were so incompetent that they would have forced Barrera to fight on with this appalling injury and that if he said he couldn't see they would have disqualified him or ruled it a loss.

Neither point is realistic. It was a bad cut for sure but probably not the worst injury to happen so far this year let alone of all times, and the doctor would have been duty bound to stop the fight if Barrera insisted he could not see.

We saw in the case of Hasim Rahman where he had just a tiny little cut that everyone whined what a pussy he was for quitting against Toney that the commision overruled the loss and ruled it a No Contest.

The idea that Barrera's cut would have not been deemed serious enough to stop the fight if he had insisted he couldn't see is just ludicrous.

What I find ironic is that Barrera needed 33 stitches (which I agree is a very bad cut) and people say the fight should have been stopped immediately whereas Vitali Klitschko needed 60 against Lennox Lewis and for years people have been arguing that that stoppage was premature.

I seriously think you are once again spoiling for a fight. No dinosaurs to discuss this month?

Have I ever said it's the worst cut? No. I know other people have said but once again you try and single me out.

Cuts over bone and over fleshy areas react differently to trauma. I don't need a doctor to tell me this. I've got enough scars to know this as fact. If he'd taken a clean shot to that wound I have no doubt it would have torn far worse than it was.

Stop exaggerating. I am not saying it is the worst cut of all time but it was serious a cut to hamper the fighter. I've seen much less serious cuts stop a fight. And I do think the ref/doc were at fault..as do many others so don't make out it's just me.

Which part of the ref/doc operating to protect a fighter do you not understand? You'd said with your own words that fighters get called pussies for quitting & you're suggesting MAB should have done this
If MAB quits or his corner retire him it's a TKO loss - again which part of this is not getting through to you?

Have I ever called those fights in to question? VT cuts were bad. In that case it wasn't so much of how they were bleeding or were hampering his vision it was that it looked like someone had sliced him with a razor blade and it could have caused permanent damage.

You really do talk bollocks at time, only the others are too polite to mention it.

I don't think that is needed.

You've started the thread which roughly translates to you over-ruling everyone elses opinion on the fight...like you're allowing everyone to debate it providing they all share the same opinion as you.

People are going to oppose your opinion of the fight, as a mod i would have thought it would have been obvious to you that on a boxing forum, opinions are going to be different so personally attacking somebody for having the opposite opinion as you is not really called for.