Dawson would beat Kessler

[Nameless]

on another forum u dumbshit.

if kessler is an "ultra effective" technician, then what do you make of guys like vernon forrest and marco antonio barrera who aren't even considered first-tier technicians?

if u think kessler is a technician, your standard for what makes a technician is atrociously low.

Wait Wait... are you saying Kessler is not a very solid technician here? If do, you didn't watch none of his fights; you can remove whatever you want from the guy but 2 things: Extremely solid technician and damn hard hands. NO. HE IS a fierce technician.

name me a technician who didn't know how to in-fight.

kalambay was a technician. hopkins is a technician. donald curry was a superb technician. calzaghe's a technician, despite how unorthodox(and many times sloppy) he looks. kessler isn't.

YOu haven't looked at Kessler fight and it is obvious. His head movements are perfect, his jab is one of the best around, his guard is stiff and he has excellent hook and uppercut, I do not see any arguments why he isn't good, hell, most specialists even see him winning the 6 men tournament, the guy's no fluke at all, you can hate him but it is not a reason to become irrational.

[iwng100]

Wait Wait... are you saying Kessler is not a very solid technician here? If do, you didn't watch none of his fights; you can remove whatever you want from the guy but 2 things: Extremely solid technician and damn hard hands. NO. HE IS a fierce technician.

name me a technician who didn't know how to in-fight.

kalambay was a technician. hopkins is a technician. donald curry was a superb technician. calzaghe's a technician, despite how unorthodox(and many times sloppy) he looks. kessler isn't.

YOu haven't looked at Kessler fight and it is obvious. His head movements are perfect, his jab is one of the best around, his guard is stiff and he has excellent hook and uppercut, I do not see any arguments why he isn't good, hell, most specialists even see him winning the 6 men tournament, the guy's no fluke at all, you can hate him but it is not a reason to become irrational.

I agree with all you said about Kessler and he’s one of the fighters that I like Nameless, but I rate Dawson a bit higher.
IMO BCD version that beat Adamek can beat any SM or LHW, Hopkins inclusive.

[Nameless]

name me a technician who didn't know how to in-fight.

kalambay was a technician. hopkins is a technician. donald curry was a superb technician. calzaghe's a technician, despite how unorthodox(and many times sloppy) he looks. kessler isn't.

YOu haven't looked at Kessler fight and it is obvious. His head movements are perfect, his jab is one of the best around, his guard is stiff and he has excellent hook and uppercut, I do not see any arguments why he isn't good, hell, most specialists even see him winning the 6 men tournament, the guy's no fluke at all, you can hate him but it is not a reason to become irrational.

I agree with all you said about Kessler and he’s one of the fighters that I like Nameless, but I rate Dawson a bit higher.
IMO BCD version that beat Adamek can beat any SM or LHW, Hopkins inclusive.

I have no problems with somebody thinking Dawson is superior, that's all a matter of brainstorming and making hypothesis and Dawson is not a bad boxer at all so though I think Kessler would make it, I wouldn't argue vehemently against it if just voicing that I think Kessler, in my opinion, i better. But to say that Kessler is not technical is all another thing and I just can't agree with that.

[sumkalambay]

some of you aren't getting the difference between a textbook fighter and being a technician.

arguello was textbook and a technician.

someone who's as incompetent as kessler is at IN-FIGHTING can't possibly be called a technician.

i guess it depends on how u define that term.