Quote Originally Posted by ICB View Post
Because he beat Andriy Kotelnik, the most mediocre title holder in modern day history ? and even he went the distance winning 4 rounds, and clocking Amir Khan quite a few times late on, even with Amir Khan's supposedly improved "defense".
See, this is what annoys me, and it's not just you who does it, but...

This is what you said before the fight...

"I think Andriy Kotelnik may have the experience and toughness, to maybe drag Amir Khan into deep waters and maybe stop him late on. In the MAB fight i still see the same flaws in Amir Khan."

and this is what you said during the fight...

"But Andriy Kotelnik is no mug either, he's a solid opponent with a decent boxing brain. I didn't think he would get caught with much silly punches. Overall a decent win for Amir Khan."

This is exactly why i don't think he'd get credit for beating the likes of Maidana, Holt, Paulie, D-Hop etc...

It's too easy to use hindsight. If you think a fighter is going to lose a fight and he wins, you should give him credit for it.

I can see it now...If he beats Maidana it's because Maidana is slow and sloppy (which ICB has already said), If he beats Holt, then it's no big deal because Holt hasn't really beaten anyone of note. If he beats Paulie, he'll get stick for not fighting a puncher. He can't win, and it's been like that pretty much since he turned pro, on here.