Winky Wright vs Matthew Macklin on April 9th

[erics44]

Maclin doesnt exactly shoot his mouth off, hes just confident, i think you should listen again

I dont mind a fighter who is confident, even arrogant but let them at least have something to be arrogant about. Like Eubank, Calzaghe and Hamed. I dont think you will hear in 20 years someone chatting down the pub saying "I wish British boxing was back in its hey day. You know, have the likes of Eubank, Ben, Hamed, Lewis, Calzaghe, Hatton and Macklin."

right ok, so macklin doesn't deserve a fight with wright? and whether he does or doesnt how is he suppose to approach it?

well ive done alright so far in my carear but this is a big step and ill probly loose, in fact ive been lucky to win half the fights i have won already, im fat, i cant punch, i have a small willy and nobody loves me

Despite the fact I can't stand him I'm happy he has signed to fight someone of note. Not once in this thread has someone said "he doesn't deserve the fight with Winky". Nobody has questioned his approach to the fight with Winky either. Everything I have said has come from previous statements he has made. Maybe you should re-read a few posts again.

i dont need to reread the posts dude

you are saying he is arrogant/over confindent/disresepctful or something along those lines arent you? and because of this he is an idiot?

and this is due to how he talks before/after fights yes?

so i am asking how he is suppose to talk, you tell me what he is suppose to say

should he say he wont win, or should he say he will?

you also said he hasnt backed up his words and he was disrespectful to elcock, he batterred elcock and proved he was levels above him, after the fight he said that and it did a good job of promoting his status

if he had of said, i won but it was a lucky punch, how much ambition does that show? how much self promotion is that?

this is boxing dude, this is how the top boxers talk

After the Elcock fight he said he was going straight to the top and would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3. He said he was going striaght to the top with "the best promotor in the world" Frank Warren. He then left Frank before he fought again. I'm not saying he should said "That was a lucky punch" after the Elcock fight, but if you're going to say you would beat anyone in the world outside the top 3, for fucks sake fight someone of note and step up your competition.

After the Elcock fight it was "all about levels". He said he knew he'd destroy him because he was streets ahead of him in terms of talent. After the Ruben Varon fight he said he he underperformed because he was fighting at the level of his opponent. You say this is how boxers talk but compare this with Darren Barker, who admits when he underperforms it is down to him making mistakes he needs to improve on. By being honest you assume that shows a lack of ambition? No, it shows a willingness to learn and improve. But am I to take from you that because Barker doesn't talk that way he will never be a top boxer? For the record, I've never heard Manny Pacquiao say he was going to be the best in the world. That hasn't stopped him from becoming so.

we arent all pacquiao dude

who is better macklin or barker? who is better known?

Better known doesn't mean better fighter. Their achievements are identical, their attitudes are different. Personally, if they met, I'd bet Barker schools him.

if they met i dont think it would have anything to do with accademics, i think it would be a close fight tho

our conversation is about "better known" dude, macklin says what he says, barker says what he says, they are on a similar level (in my opinion), yet macklin has a much bigger profile, do you think there might be a link?

[boxingbantz]

Why can't people just quote one post? It really isn't hard.

[erics44]

Why can't americans just quote one post? It really isn't hard.

shouldnt this be in the hate waterhole thread?

[bzkfn]

if they met i dont think it would have anything to do with accademics, i think it would be a close fight tho

our conversation is about "better known" dude, macklin says what he says, barker says what he says, they are on a similar level (in my opinion), yet macklin has a much bigger profile, do you think there might be a link?

The average man on the street wouldn't have a clue who either of them are. Barker's profile isn't as high in boxing terms because his promoter doesn't have a TV deal. I wouldn't say Macklin's profile is that much bigger though. Maybe after Winky it will be. Our conversation was about why I thought Macklin was an idiot. By now, he should have been backing up his boasts. I have seen nothing that makes me think he's as good as he says he is.

Koppas, sorry bout the million quotes. I'm in work...the button is right there...I was being lazy.

[erics44]

if they met i dont think it would have anything to do with accademics, i think it would be a close fight tho

our conversation is about "better known" dude, macklin says what he says, barker says what he says, they are on a similar level (in my opinion), yet macklin has a much bigger profile, do you think there might be a link?

The average man on the street wouldn't have a clue who either of them are. Barker's profile isn't as high in boxing terms because his promoter doesn't have a TV deal. I wouldn't say Macklin's profile is that much bigger though. Maybe after Winky it will be. Our conversation was about why I thought Macklin was an idiot. By now, he should have been backing up his boasts. I have seen nothing that makes me think he's as good as he says he is.

Koppas, sorry bout the million quotes. I'm in work...the button is right there...I was being lazy.

i thought our conversation had progressed to the bigger picture dude

[bzkfn]

if they met i dont think it would have anything to do with accademics, i think it would be a close fight tho

our conversation is about "better known" dude, macklin says what he says, barker says what he says, they are on a similar level (in my opinion), yet macklin has a much bigger profile, do you think there might be a link?

The average man on the street wouldn't have a clue who either of them are. Barker's profile isn't as high in boxing terms because his promoter doesn't have a TV deal. I wouldn't say Macklin's profile is that much bigger though. Maybe after Winky it will be. Our conversation was about why I thought Macklin was an idiot. By now, he should have been backing up his boasts. I have seen nothing that makes me think he's as good as he says he is.

Koppas, sorry bout the million quotes. I'm in work...the button is right there...I was being lazy.

i thought our conversation had progressed to the bigger picture dude

I still answered you though

[erics44]

if they met i dont think it would have anything to do with accademics, i think it would be a close fight tho

our conversation is about "better known" dude, macklin says what he says, barker says what he says, they are on a similar level (in my opinion), yet macklin has a much bigger profile, do you think there might be a link?

The average man on the street wouldn't have a clue who either of them are. Barker's profile isn't as high in boxing terms because his promoter doesn't have a TV deal. I wouldn't say Macklin's profile is that much bigger though. Maybe after Winky it will be. Our conversation was about why I thought Macklin was an idiot. By now, he should have been backing up his boasts. I have seen nothing that makes me think he's as good as he says he is.

Koppas, sorry bout the million quotes. I'm in work...the button is right there...I was being lazy.

i thought our conversation had progressed to the bigger picture dude

I still answered you though

did you? well done

my missus made far too many ginger bread men with my kids at the weekend, there is still a tupperware tub full of them in the kitchen and i cant stop eating them

she has good skills in cake making

[Dropanuke]

hmm I still like Winky to get this

I agree! Winky at Amy level or age is too smart, he gave Hopkins a bit of trouble and u can't only smash winky to bits if your name is Paul Williams