Carl Froch humbles Abraham, is he putting Calzaghe to shame?

 

Carl Froch's win over Arthur Abraham for the WBA Super Middleweight title was so one sided, so complete, that I was genuinely surprised that they had given Abraham a round on one judge's card. Usually even in a one sided fight the judges seem to award rounds to the losing fighter almost out of some sort of compulsion to sympathy. In this case, every single round was dominated by one man, Carl Froch who regained the vacant WBC Super Middleweight title, vacated by the man he lost it to Mikkel Kessler.

From the first bell to the last, Froch was in complete control of an opponent who never figured out how to get past the jab and body shots of Froch and trudged to defeat without ever making an impact on the fight.

Carl deserves immense credit for following his corners game plan to the letter, and not getting drawn into a brawl as he has done so often before. In this case, I think it's clear that the loss to Kessler has actually done him a big favour.

So often in the past, Froch has relied on his cast iron chin, great engine and punching power to allow him to bang his way out of trouble. Against Jean Pascal it worked, he slugged his way to victory. Against Jermaine Taylor it worked, Froch somehow finding the shots to stop Taylor in the dying moments of s fight that he was well losing on the cards. Even against Andre Dirrell, it worked after a fashion as he got the result.

Against Mikkel Kessler however, his late surge in the fight didn't produce either a knock-out or a win. Kessler was durable and skilled enough to keep the later rounds close enough to steal a few and build on his earlier success. For the first time in his career, Froch came up short. This it seems has finally made him see that Robert McCracken knows what he is saying when he tries to hold Carl back from going into another all out war.

As Froch stated in an interview with Radio 5 Live.

"Abraham’s strong and tough but quite predictable and I was able to stick to the game plan by using my height and reach to out-box him. Normally I like to get stuck in to my opponents and have a proper fight but Robert (McCracken) kept holding me back and told me to stick to what I was doing as it was working perfectly!"

In hindsight it all seems so clear that Abraham's lack of lateral movement and plodding style would be tailor made for Froch - but nobody before the fight expected Froch to go a whole fight without getting drawn into a slugging match. Froch pulled a bit of a Barrera here, for Abraham, like Prince Naz before him, surely went in there expecting Froch to go toe-to-toe with him.

As disciplined and focussed as Froch was, I'd have to say that Abraham looked utterly clueless. Credit to Carl for executing a game plan which allowed him to totally dominate, but his opponent never tried to do anything different to turn the fight, and in fact displayed little or no urgency. Froch's jab was a major factor in the fight. Froch has always had an excellent jab, a throwback to his successful amateur career, but usually uses it more as a foil, a range finder, only sporadically landing it with any authority.

In this fight, round after round he racked up points using the jab to dictate the distance, keep his opponent off balance and disoriented, and to soften up Abraham's will. As early as the fourth round, Abraham's reddening features testified to the persistent menace that Froch's jab provided. The jab was thrown to both head and body too, and this mixed in with some vicious hooks under the elbow meant that Abraham never knew where the next punch was coming from. His shell like defence couldn't stop him shipping heavy shots throughout.

I personally thought that Froch could have stopped Abraham from the 9th round on. By this point, Carl was able to actually bludgeon his way through Abraham's high guard, as his tiring opponent wasn't able to keep his hands up and tight to his head any more. Had he put his foot on the gas and put together a sustained assault, I think that the referee would have rightly intervened. Abraham was a country mile behind on the cards, and was offering little or no offence, he was giving the referee little if any reason to allow him to continue should he be under heavy and protracted fire.

Abraham visibly winced from a very heavy body shot right on the belt line at the bell at the end of the 9th, and looked a totally beaten man as he trudged back wearily to his corner, where he sat looking resigned to defeat. Abraham never looked 'about to go' as they say,  but his will was all but crushed. Save for a 30 second spell in the last round, he did little of note for the remainder of the fight. That Froch didn't pursue the stoppage, which is his instinct, was down to the exhortations of trainer Robert McCracken to stick to the game plan and not to get involved. Time and again McCracken warned Froch of the danger Abraham presented if Carl left an opening, and Carl willingly followed the plan.

So, were we witnessing a newer, better version of Carl Froch, a man chastened by his defeat to Kessler who is now allying his ring smarts to his warrior outlook to produce more measured and controlled performances?

Yes, I think this is true, but we have to bear in mind that Abraham never really possessed the resources to force Carl to revert to type. Following a game plan is admirable, but it's much easier to stick to when you are dominating a fight. It will be interesting to see how Carl fights against more adaptable and tricky opponents from here on in.

Glen Johnson, now 42, is his next opponent. The former IBF light-heavyweight champion, now campaigning at the super-middleweight limit, is a far more cagey fighter than Abraham, and will be able to work his way inside the reach often enough to have more success against Froch. His age means it is not likely he will be able to prevail, but he will likely make a fight of it; nobody ever has an easy night's work against Johnson. He is almost certain to still be there at the end, but he cannot fight for the full three minutes of very round any more and this will allow Froch time and space to execute his own strategy.

To paraphrase Mr Han, evil overlord of 'Enter the Dragon', It is Andre Ward, and the prospect of defeat, that Froch must prepare himself for.

Ward will probably beat Abraham at a canter, keeping the smaller, less mobile man off balance and chasing shadows all night. If Froch can do it, Ward certainly should be able to with his superior pure boxing skills. Unlike Andre Dirrell, his former team mate, and friend, who exited the Super Six tournament after a truly dreadful bit of play acting , Ward doesn't appear to have that fear of actual combat. Ward also knows how to rough-house with the best of them, as he proved during a very dirty fight against one of the roughest and toughest men in the division, Sakio Bika. Ward's win over Kessler was controlled and he appeared to be fighting within his own comfort zone. He has all the tools to cause huge problems for Froch. Speed, agility, fast hands and a fighting brain are allied to tremendous technical skills.

Froch simply may not have the skills to out-box Ward, he may well have to devise a strategy that enables him to slow down the speeding American, and force him to stand and trade. It may well have to be a come from behind triumph either on points or by way of knock-out. Froch certainly seems in a better position to be able to execute a solid game plan having seemingly had the wax punched from his ears by Mikkel Kessler.

Should Froch beat Andre Ward and win the tournament, then where does he stand in the history of the Super Middleweight division? Where does he stack up right now against his most commonly mentioned nemesis, Calzaghe?

Right now, Froch has already amassed a pretty impressive record . He has already tested himself far more than Joe Calzaghe did in his career, and he has done more in a shorter period of time. His title winning effort over Jean Pascal the current WBC light heavyweight champion, looks better and better with time. Should the Frenchman topple Bernard Hopkins, which I expect him to, then it looks better still.

Sure, you could argue that Arthur Abraham was not really a truly tested Super Middleweight, and this is true. However, Arthur had a proven record as a champion at middleweight, and had looked devastating for much of his 10 defences. Jeff Lacy, widely held as Calzaghe's most impressive performance, had really beaten only a washed up Robin Reid in the run in to his devastating loss to Calzaghe, so this argument cuts both ways. Calzaghe's win over Kessler is for me probably the most impressive, and I would agree that this eclipses anything that Froch has done at 168 thus far.

Calzaghe was at the top longer, but for whatever reason you wish to ascribe, he failed to meet the likes of Markus Beyer, Sven Ottke, Eric Lucas, and Anthony Mundine, all fellow belt holders during his protracted WBO reign, to name but a few. He may well have beaten all of them, but he never stepped in the ring with them, so it is a moot point.

When you look at Carl Froch's championship run of Jean Pascal, Taylor, Dirrell, Kessler and Abraham, the calibre of the opponents surely trumps any successive run of five fights in Calzaghe's ledger.

Calzaghe's record saw more stiffs than a series of Quincy M.D - (one for the older readers).  Such rictus forgettables as Branco Sobot, Mger Mkyrtchian, Mario Veit, Miguel Angel Jiminez, Sakio Bika, Evans Ashira, Kabary Salem, Tocker Pudwill, and Will McIntyre. Aside from Veit, who he fought twice, all these men were voluntary defences of his title, as the WBO rarely enforced mandatories. None of those men were worthy challengers. Calzaghe's only truly worthy opponents of championship calibre were Eubank, Richie Woodhall, David Starie, Robin Reid, Charles Brewer, Byron Mitchell, Jeff Lacy (arguably) and Mikkel Kessler.

In 21 defences that's not a lot.

His win over Hopkins was of course creditable as Hopkins was the man at 175, and went on to continue winning after that. His dire retirement funding fight with a sadly faded Roy Jones Jr, most certainly was not.

Whilst I believe that Calzaghe in his prime would have been more than a match for Froch, it is not just talent and skills that define a career, but desire, and the tests a fighter subjects themselves to.

Froch has certainly secured a legacy as one of the gutsiest and cockiest fighters this country has produced in recent times, he's a journalists dream. He has been prepared to stake his reputation against the best operators out there.  Froch really should be a far bigger star than he is. He has given us some of the most exciting championship fights by a British title holder since Prince Naseem was in his pomp. Like Naz, he is brash, and full of bravura. Like Naz he can really fight too. Unlike Naz, he has bounced back from adversity and loss to return seemingly, at least against the likes of Abraham, a better fighter.

If Froch does somehow manage to win the super 6 tournament then a fight with Lucien Bute - the biggest name and title holder not included in the tournament beckons – this would make him undisputed champion, something it took Calzaghe 10 years to do from winning the WBO title.

If, and it's a big if, Froch achieves that, he will have done it in a much shorter space of time. He has already made it clear that if he becomes undisputed Super Middleweight champion, he intends to go for the light heavyweight title. That could set up a rematch with Jean Pascal, who has stated he would love to fight Froch again.

Wins over Ward, Bute and Pascal, for me would well eclipse Calzaghe's legacy. For all Joe's superior skill and perfect record, Froch has tested himself in a way Calzaghe always seemed unwilling to do. Famously, Calzaghe admitted that his own father had to talk him into the Jeff Lacy fight. Froch whether or not he succeeds or fails to achieve his dreams of being a two weight world champion, will have conducted his career with fearlessness, he has relished rather than feared being tested by the best challengers available, and taken big fights instead of defending a belt merely to enhance his win column and bank balance, as Calzaghe did for much of his 21 title defences. Froch for me is still behind Calzaghe in his achievements, but not by much.

Froch is 33 now, and he should be enjoyed for as long as he is still fighting. One thing seems certain, unlike Calzaghe he won't be closing out his career with cash-out fights against washed up shells of former greats like Roy Jones Jr. Froch may never earn the kind of money Calzaghe did after beating Jeff Lacy - but he will be remembered as a man, and a fighter who gave the public his all.

Froch should already be a big star. Sadly he isn't. Fighting on the Primetime channel against Arthur Abraham, on Pay Per View- a televisual backwater unknown to all but hardcore boxing fans, and with little or no press coverage during the build-up to the fight - is frankly criminal.

Froch has shown tremendous loyalty to Mick Hennessy his promoter - an admirable trait. However, Hennessy's lack of a solid television deal is costing Froch the audience his talents and attitude deserve. I'm not blaming Hennessy, as he and Froch were the unfortunate victims of the ITV collapse,sometimes you gamble and lose. They are hurt by the lack a deal with the major player in coverage of boxing, Sky Sports. However, I am baffled by the lack of pre fight publicity going into this bout, nobody I knew outside of hardcore boxing fans had any idea it was happening, and I can recall no media appearances on TV prior to the fight. Whatever the explanation, the situation is lamentable.

When Carl Froch is finally done, they may have to give that man a knighthood - but for now - please get him a good TV deal.

PUNTER V PRO. WEEKLY FIGHT PICKS.

Each week, Spitbucket's James McDonnell, will go head to head with our professional bookmaker skanksta, who works for one of the biggest UK betting firms. To establish who is the master when it comes to betting on fights.

Each will make their picks for the week. James focusing on who the likely winner will be, whilst Skanksta offers advice on the best value according to the odds. All odds are on offer at oddschecker.com at the time of writing.

This week for starters, we've chosen to concentrate on the two biggest fights, Marquez v Katsidis, and Carl Froch v Arthur Abraham.

James McDonnell

Manuel Marquez v Michael Katsidis. Lightweight Unification fight. Saturday 27^th November.

Marquez v Katsidis is a fascinating encounter as there are a lot of factors involved.

On gut instinct without analysis, one would naturally favour Marquez. He is after all a current top 10 P4P, a future hall-of-famer, and one of the toughest Mexican warriors of his era. However, there are a number of caveats to this.

Marquez is 37, and has been in some punishing fights over his career, including two brutal fights with Pacquaio, containing four knockdowns, and more recently, a very hard fought win in his first win over Juan Diaz.

Marquez and Katsidis share two common opponents. The first is Joel Casamayor. In 2008 Marquez stopped Casamayor in 11 rounds. In the same year, Casamayor after starting with two knock-downs of Katsidis, had to come back from the brink of being stopped, being punched through the ropes by a surging Katsidis in the 6th. However, Casamayor proved too savvy, and Katsidis too raw, eventually Katsidis walked onto a huge left hook in the 10th which took his legs away. The follow up prompted the referee to correctly waive the contest over. Marquez stopped Casamayor in a nip and tuck fight in the 11th in Casmayors very next fight. The second is Juan Diaz, who Marquez has beaten twice, once by KO in a brutal give and take war, and once by lop-sided decision. Katsidis lost a close and some would say controversial decision against Diaz. A clear edge for Marquez in both cases - but the question is; how much has he slid since then?

Katsidis, is at 30 I think, in his prime in terms of his physical attributes, and also the level of experience he has gained. Back in 2007 when he beat Graham earl in a blood and guts classic, he had never before fought out of Australia. Since then he has faced Casamayor, Diaz and Jesus Chavez. Katsidis must surely have learnt from his defeat from by Casamayor, and has improved technically, to fight behind something approaching a guard. He will never be mistaken for Willie Pep, but he has learned the hard way that at top level, disregarding your opponents punching power leads to disappointment. During his most recent fight, a destruction of British prospect Kevin Mitchell, he showed improved punch placement and defence, but then, Marquez is no Mitchell.

The gulf in skill between the two men is pretty big, and indeed most of Katsidis' chance of winning come from him being able to exert a pressure that Marquez' 37 year old body cannot meet. I think that unlikely to happen as Marquez though old, looks far from shot. Diaz, who beat Katsidis, was not able to overpower Marquez, and in their first fight ended up being stopped himself, despite a terrific effort.

The fight is of massive importance to both men. Katsidis lost his brother recently to a suspected drug overdose, and despite this chose to fight on. Mike Tyson will no doubt remember the effect that a bereavement can have in galvanising a fighter's heart and abilities. It produced arguably the biggest upset in boxing history when he lost to rank outsider Buster Douglas. There is no guarantee of that of course here, but Katsidis, never the reticent type, is likely to give it everything he has.

For Marquez, he has indicated that he seeks a third and most likely final fight with Manny Pacquaio, after a draw and a narrow defeat, he would love one last chance to record a win, over the man who is widely regarded as the number one fighter in the world pound-for-pound.

For this reason, I think Marquez will try and box his way to a win and I think Marquez simply knows too many tricks, and still possesses the toughness and ability to fight back when pressed hard to make Katsidis pay for his onrushing tactics. Though Katsidis has improved since the Casamayor fight, it won't be enough to make the difference. There is always the chance that Marquez grows old overnight, but failing that Marquez wins this handily. Marquez isn't a murderous puncher at 135 lbs, and I think Katsidis will probably go the distance.

I could see a late stoppage  loss as a desperate Katsidis piles forward, walking onto big counters but on balance, I'm going to go for a Marquez points win, after some scary moments early in the fight, and some pitched battles in the middle to late rounds. Over the final quarter of the fight, I expect it to be all Marquez as he seals an emphatic points win. My own money, £40 of it, is on Marquez to prevail on points.

Betting line – Marquez points.

Froch v Abraham (Vacant WBC Super Middleweight Title) Saturday 27^th November 

This is an incredibly tough one to call. Both men have a single defeat on their records, and both have recorded that loss during the perhaps ill-fated super six tournament, which has seen the likely retirement from boxing of Jermaine Taylor and Mikkel Kessler. It is Kessler's probable retirement which has made this bout for a vacant title.

First, the similarities. Both men are murderous punchers, Froch with his long shots and uppercuts, Abraham with short hooks and straight punches. Both men too are known for having bags of stamina, physical strength, and explosive power. Of the two, Froch is the naturally bigger man, but Abraham, for me, the slightly more explosive, and more importantly, accurate puncher.

The major difference between the two men is in stature and in their defensive capabilities. Froch is much the bigger man, with very long arms, (though surprisingly only a 3 inch reach advantage, according to boxrec), whilst Abraham is squat and compact, with a barrel chest and thick set frame. I note that Abraham is thicker in thigh, calf and bicep. Power generally comes from the man with the bigger thicker legs, though not always. I think there is very little, if anything in terms of physical strength between the two. Froch's power is at range, whilst Abraham is the harder hitter in close.

Abraham has a definite edge in defence, insofar as he possesses one. Froch is defensively very fallible, relying on his ability to hold a shot, which so far has not failed him. If ever he faced a fighter who was going to crack his chin, Abraham is that fighter. Abraham fights behind a high peekaboo style guard, stalking his opponent looking for openings, often taking a while to get going. Froch is also for me a little more static than Abraham, his wide footed stance not allowing him much option to get out of the way when opponents are on the attack.

Their most telling common opponent, is I think Jermaine Taylor. Though he lost to both by KO in the dying seconds of the last round, Taylor was ahead on two cards against Froch, whilst losing on all three against Abraham. A massive single right hook floored Taylor for the count against Abraham, whilst Froch needed a sustained and unanswered attack to end the fight. This suggests Abraham is the more versatile boxer.

Andre Dirrell, another common opponent won on a disqualification against a surging Abraham in their fight, after taking an early lead, whilst against Froch, he ran like a thief most of the night, but arguably landed all the most telling shots, and I think, showed Froch up as a little pedestrian. Froch recorded a win but was far from impressive, still he at least did beat Dirrell.

Both men have shown they are incredibly resilient in the ring. Abraham survived an horrific beating at the hands of Edison Miranda, which resulted in a broken jaw to prevail in their first fight. Froch has taken absolute bombs off Pascal and Taylor without wilting. Andre Dirrell also hurt Froch with a big shot in their fight, that shook the Nottingham man to his boots.

For me the crux is, is the edge in defence for Abraham. He fights out of a very high guard, and exploits small openings to land crisp heavy handed straight counters. He builds the pressure over many rounds, often sacrificing a few at the beginning. Froch himself is usually a slow starter, so it is likely there won't be much in the early rounds, but the fight will heat up and turn, I think, into a barn burner. Froch loves a tear up, and Abraham is just the man to give it to him. Abraham is going to get hit, but not as often as Froch will, and I think the scores of the fight will hinge on that fact. Either man could produce a stoppage win, but I don't think that the most likely outcome, due to the determination of both protagonists.

It's hard to rule out almost any outcome with two such big puncher, but I think the most likely outcome however, is a close win for Abraham. I wouldn't rule a draw out either. On this occasion, I won't bet, as it is so tight, but if wanted to, my money would be on Abraham W12. 

Betting line – Abraham Points.

Skanktsa

Marquez vs Katsidis is an easy fight to put numbers to - we have a clear favourite, and an established form line with common opponents.

With two such consumate professionals there's no need to worry about poor training-camps, weight-making difficulties and such like - both guys will turn up with their 'A' game. Although JMM can brawl and blast and Katsidis has improved his defence and footwork, essentially Marquez will play the matador, Katsidis the bull.
Katsidis has two ways to win - if he has improved enough, then his physicality, workrate and strength can overcome the class gap and dominate the naturally, smaller, older Mexican. Or, he could find the great Marquez - veteran of some of the great, elite-level wars in modern boxing - has lost that little bit of timing, resilience and je ne sais quoi that makes the difference for elite athletes.

For Marquez, all he has to do is be as good as he ever was and he should win. His granite chin, allied with the ability to fight back hard when needed, should see him through the inevitable rough spells. His mastery of boxing will take care of the rest of the fight.

All this must then be put in to numbers - a %age chance of each guy winning plus the draw. I'll start with the draw - this is a closely matched fight, likely to go the distance and it may well be a question of what the judges prefer - Katsidis' greater effort or Marquez's greater accuracy. The draw is likelier than usual - I'll give it 4%. I'm quite pro Katsidis chances here, but I'll still give JMM 62% chance of winning and 34% to Katsidis. The next step is to give each fighter a KO %age - assuming they have won.

This is the second essential component of pricing a boxing match and it's the most difficult to trade InPlay. Marquez is one of the most accurate punchers in the sport and Katsidis has a wild 'come-in' style that has seen him in terrible trouble many times - even when on the verge of victory - so Marquez must have a decent chance of scoring a stoppage. However, not only will it be tough to stop such a big, determined lightweight as Katsidis, I don't really imagine it will be in Marquez's game plan. Katsidis must have a higher KO%age than Marquez - he's more aggressive and powerful, but also more likely to NEED a KO to win. Nevertheless, Marquez hasn't been stopped by a who's who of boxing and has a great defence - it must be odds against.

I gave Marquez a 30% chance of a KO (IF he's won remember - not overall) and Katsidis 40%.

Whether you take five minutes to come up with the numbers, or spend weeks analysing videos and old fight reports, that is the process you must follow to begin trying to bet value on boxing. When it's finished you're left with percentages like this...


JMM 62% (19KO/43PTS)
MK 34% (14KO/20PTS)
DRAW 4%

As a bookie, I'll wrap a profit margin around those numbers and let the punters bet with me. As a keen punter myself, I'll look to see how my numbers compare with the odds offered by others. If I give any event a better chance of happening than the odds imply, I'll bet. Staking plans are important - but it's a quite a dull subject for a boxing site, so we'll leave it for some other time.

As a pro punter, I'll often do things that seem counter-intuitive and that is certainly the case here.

My big bet is JMM points - I know I'm pro Katsidis, but my figure of 43% is SOO much bigger than the 5/2 available that I'll be getting involved. Strangely, the second bet that appeals is Katsiidis points ! 12/1 is simply too big for a fighter of his skills to win on the cards. Just to muddy the waters further I rate the draw at 28/1 a tiny edge - not normally enough to bet on, but with the very real danger that it goes the distance I'd have a small saver on it.

New visitors to the site will understand why The Punter gets frustrated with me, when he asks , "Who've you bet on ?" and I come up with an answer like, Katsidis, Marquez and the draw ! However, I've been betting value outcomes like this for many years as both bookie and professional - if it ain't broke don't fix it. For my fantasy bet for the blog, I'll put the following staking up, but I assure you - I WILL be doing something very similar with my own cash !

Pick
8 pts Marquez by Dec/TD @ 11/4
1.5 pts Katsidis by Dec/TD @ 12/1
0.5 pts draw @ 28/1

Froch vs Abraham.

Just as the first fight was easy - this is hard. Anything can happen and there are a lot imponderables. It's difficult to even say who the favourite is with much confidence. Abraham's best work has been at middle and we don't know if his rugged 'power game' will really work against such a big, tough opponent as Froch. I can see Froch doing well in this fight - he's been made to look very ordinary by speed and movement, but that isn't Abraham's forte. Against a less mobile target, the Englishman can bring his powerful long-armed jabs in to play. Abraham is a notorious slow starter and I'd be considering backing Froch just to lay off when he takes the first few rounds.  Equally, there's a little voice in my head saying, "Froch is a KO loss waiting to happen - you can't keep relying on a great chin as your defence at world level".

A very tough fight to pick then. Abraham must have the bigger KO percentage here - Froch's defence sees to that, so I come up with...

AA 52 (24KO/28pts)
CF 44 (16KO/28pts)
Draw 4
I won't put more than a cup of tea on this , but for the purposes of the article, I'll pick...
Froch pts @ a standout 10/3 for 9 £pounds, and
Abraham KO in rounds 10-12 @ 10/1 for 1 point.

James McDonnell

OPINION Magnificent Manny - his past, his standing, his future?

 

Having crushed Antonio Margarito's face, if not his will in 12 brutal rounds- Manny Pacquiao is rightly receiving the plaudits for an emphatically one-sided performance. I was amazed to read a glowing piece by a real old veteran from the New York Daily Post, Bill Gallo, now 87, admitted that Pacquaio was, and I quote.

“….one hell of a fighter, the likes of which I haven’t seen since Willie Pep and Sugar Ray Robinson. Yes, those two whom I’ve always regarded as the best ever.”

Even the UK's own notoriously acerbic old time scribe Colin Hart, was forced to admit that Manny was indeed a bit special during the Sky TV Broadcast, glowing, and rarefied praise indeed.

People are already comparing Manny Pacquaio to Henry Armstrong, that other little man who wreaked havoc through the weight divisions, from featherweight, through lightweight, to welterweight. Armstrong though did this in an era without the nutritional advances of today, and became the first and last man to hold all three belts at the same time, as the rules were changed to require a fighter to relinquish one belt, if they gained a second one at another weight. 

Whilst I can see the similarities, I think Pacquiao has a little way yet to go, to match the peerless achievements of Hammering Hank Armstrong. Armstrong started his career at 120 lbs, won the featherweight title in 1937, then added the Welterweight in 1938, (14 fights later!) from Barney Ross weighing in at 133, two pounds under the lightweight limit. He then added the lightweight belt in his very next fight.

Armstrong  defended his welterweight title a total of 21 times, all but 4 by way of KO, and in the space of 2 years. He lost it to Fritzie Zivic, in 1940, and though he never regained it, he fought on for another 5 years, including a distance loss to a young Ray Robinson. He was retired at 34 with an incredible record of 149 fights, 101 wins, 21 losses and 10 draws, most of his losses and draws coming very early or very late in his career, for at his peak, he was almost unbeatable. Only Lou Ambers beat him during his reign of terror between lightweight and Welterweight. A reign of terror of the Welterweight ranks has never been seen before or since. Whilst his reign at the top of the pile was not as long as Ray Robinson's, Armstrongs was the brightest fiercest arc I think boxing has ever seen. Rightly many, myself included consider him the greatest fighter than ever lived over Robinson. If not for his actual skills, for silky they were not, then for the ferocity of his peak and total domination of opponents.

Remember also that Armstrong did this during an era of same day weigh ins.

What is undeniable though is that Pacquaio, like Henry Armstrong, excells in breaking his opponents will with a high octane style, that relies on quickness, overwhelming pressure, and incredible stamina. Armstrong was blessed in having an unusually large heart, which physicians said enabled his blood to carry more oxygen, and therefore fight harder for longer. Manny is blessed with a great chin, incredible stamina, terrific punch placement, and blazing speed. Speed which seems not to have diminished as he has moved up the weights.

Like Armstrong, Pacquaio is routinely taking on naturally bigger men, and making the size differential look utterly meaningless. For all Margarito's weight draining to make the catch-weight, he came in 17 lbs heavier than Pacman on the night, but was on the end of a relentless and one sided beating. What is remarkable about both men is that there was no major dip in their destructive abilities as they moved through the weights. Armstrong was seemingly more devastating against Welterweights than he had been at featherweight and lightweight.

Whilst it may be a little premature, that Pacquaio is even being mentioned in such illustrious company by some, it is testament to the impression he has created even amongst the cynical boxing press, but just how good is he really, are people getting ahead of themselves?

I find myself, that displays as emphatic as Pacquaio's victory over Margarito, can skew perceptions a little, and it's usually best to wait a few days until the true implications of the victory can be chewed over and cogitated ruminatively. If you so wished, you can pick apart Manny's victory against Margarito.

After all, Margarito is not the top 154 pound fighter in the world, and furthermore was beaten into a cocked hat by Shane Mosley, only two fights ago. Special as Mosley is, or perhaps was, he was 38 going into that bout.  Sure, the controversy with the illegal hand-wraps cannot have helped with any game-plan Margarito had, but even so, it was a brutal beatdown.

For me the significance of Pacquaio's fight with Margarito hinges on the fact that he was, yet again, fighting in a higher weight class, and his destructive power, seemed little diminished. Only the remarkably stolid resolve of Margarito (and a little mercy from Pacman in the last two rounds) kept him in a fight, which most opponents would not have finished. Every time Pacquaio steps up in weight, against Barrera, against Diaz, against Hatton, against Cotto, against De La Hoya, and now against Margarito, everyone waits for the wheels to fall off, but so far, he just keeps winning, and winning with ease.

Lest people forget, Pacquaio started at his career as a poorly nourished and underdeveloped 106 pounds. Like so many asian fighters, being forcibly boiled down for much of his earlier career, he suffered the only two KO losses on his record weighing 110 and 112 respectively. To be able to hit and hurt men of Margarito's size is therefore nothing short of remarkable.

Whatever caveats you want to administer about the particular conditions surrounding his opposition, can be said of any great fighter. It's often said that Roy Jones Jr, that he beat a badly weight drained James Toney and an inexperienced version of Bernard Hopkins. His reign at light heavyweight contained quite a few scrubs and part timers. John Ruiz was tailor made for him at heavyweight. Is Jones Jr. not an all time great? This is an exercise that can be conducted ad nauseum with almost any great fighter.

What you really need to look at with a fighter, is their overall level of competition, through their whole career, and their level of performance when competing with the best.

Let's look at Manny Pacquaio's career since he burst into the international consciousness with an upset victory over Marco Antonio Barrera in 2003. Pacquaio was rightly the underdog going into that fight. Yet he tore the form book up by stunning Barrera early and staying on him through the whole fight, eventuall stopping him in 11 rounds. The tone really was set for his career in the elite level of the sport.

Even against the inscrutable and vastly more experienced Barrera his incredible footwork, handspeed and punch placement, overcame the Mexican. Since then his roster has included such luminaries as Juan Manuel Marquez, Erik Morales, Oscar Larios, David Diaz, Oscar De La Hoya, Ricky Hatton, Miguel Cotto, and now Antonio Margarito. Al of these men were former or current world champions.

During that run he has had, 16 fights, 1 loss, and 1 draw including 10 stoppage wins. Against that level of opposition, that is pretty astonishing. Of the men that survived 12 rounds, two, Clottey and Barrera came to last the distance. Margarito only survived because of his size , durability and mexican fighting heart. Only Marquez has ever been able it seems to stand and trade with Pacquaio, (more on him later). He has lost one (to Morales who he stopped in two further fights), and drawn one with Marquez.

When you consider that, Barrera, Marquez, Morales, and De La Hoya are surely all locks for the International Boxing Hall of Fame and that Cotto may yet make it too. That's some record.

Ok back to Marquez, and a caveat. Personally by my scorecards he lost both his fights with Marquez. I thought Marquez unlucky to only get a draw from their first fight, and thought he won a close but clear one in their rematch. He is hardly alone in having close fights go his way. Those are his only two, and you are allowed that in a whole career. Even two losses to Marquez would hardly marr his career in my eyes, given that Marquez has been a top 10 P4P fighter for the best part of a decade.

Yes, it's true, you could argue that some of those names were not prime versions, again, that could be said of virtually every single all time great fighter. Prime against Prime happens so seldom, that when it does, it's a major event. That was why there was such a massive pell-mell around the first Leonard v Hearns fight. Two unbeaten Welterweight champions at their peaks putting their 0's on the line. Barrera and Morales too were that boxing rarity, two greats in their primes. The same was true of the first 'superfight' between Ali and Frazier. The best very rarely meet at their peak. That's just how it is.

Add to that, that prior to this run, he had won world titles at flyweight, and super bantamweight and you have a hell of a career. And guess what? He's not done yet. At only 31, he may well yet have another three, maybe four years at the top of his game. The biggest barrier to this, seems to be his political aspirations in his home country of the Phillipines where he has been elected congressman.

This brings me to Manny's future, and inevitably his arch-rival in the P4P stakes, the boxing encyclopedia that is Floyd Mayweather.

A fight between Pacquaio and Mayweather would for me be the most significant superfight since Leonard and Hearns fought the first time. However, unless this fight happens soon, the edge risks being taken off it by Mayweather's inactivity. 

Whilst Floyd Mayweather skulks in semi-retirement, awaiting his fiscal situation to deteriorate to the point where another fight looks attractive, fighting just once a year on average, Manny is still active, hungry, and amazingly, still improving. What is even more surprising, is that he has retained his speed, and seemingly carried most of his power up with him. He is perhaps a little less destructive above 135, but he is still one of the harder punchers out there even at 147.

After watching Mayweather dissect Marquez, I was convinced that he would have Manny's number, given Manny's struggles with Marquez, but now, well I'm not so sure.

Marquez' would probably still give manny a tussle at any weight, his incredible ability to stand and trade with Manny and keep him off balance, and an incredible chin, is what sets him apart from the rest of his opponents. However, I think Manny has improved since then, whilst Marquez now 37 has declined a little. He's now a little bit slower than he was when they last fought in 2008. In any case, Marquez has yet to get by the Rugged and comparatively youthful Michael Katsidis whom he fights for the lightweight title. That is no forgone conclusion, as Katsidis is much the younger, stronger and bigger man in that fight.

Roach is incidentally calling Marquez out already for a rubber match at 147, in part I'm sure to try and tempt Mayweather out of retirement. I hope this fight doesn't materialise. Marquez clearly cannot function very well above the lightweight limit of 135. At the welterweight limit, he still functioned well enough to keep Mayweather if not exactly honest, then at least respectful, but he was never in it. Manny's extra strength at the weight would be too much for Marquez.

Where else can Manny go? A move to Middleweight against the winner of Martinez and Williams is surely a leap too far even for the little sensation. They are too big and more importantly too skilled for the dynamite Filipino to overcome the size disparity. It would be a handicap that woulld owe little to the respective abilities of the participants, but merely the laws of physics. I know it's hard to doubt Pacquaio, but the end of the line has to come somewhere.

No, really, there is only one fight that will do, to cap off the careers of both Paquaio and Mayweather, and determine once and for all who is the greatest of their era, there is nobody out there for them to fight, that will enhance their respective legacies to such an extent.

At the moment, Manny has to be top 20 all time. Where is debatable, but there are a lot of great fighters in history that deserve at least consideration above him. Ray Robinson and Armstrong are a lock for the top 2.
In no particular order, the likes of Roberto Duran, Ray Leonard, Muhammad Ali, Benny Leonard, Archie Moore, Willie Pep, Jimmy Wilde,  Roy Jones Jr. et' al are somewhere in the top 20, where precisely is an article in itself, the list could go on and on.

A win over Mayweather surely propels him far higher up that list for me, perhaps top 5, and into the rarefied stratosphere inhabited by the likes of Armstrong, and Robinson and the other men who are routinely placed in their company. Even being competitive and losing a close one with Mayweather, for me enhances his status.

For Mayweather, a win, and especially an emphatically one sided one, prove once and for all that he really is the best fighter of his generation, and propels him into the same stata as the greats. Right now, Mayweather's standing has been eroded by inactivity and too few serious challenges. Mayweather has been in his comfort zone too long, but then maybe, like Roy Jones in his prime, there is nobody to take him out of that comfort zone.

These two men really must fight for the sake of boxing. Were the two men to retire without having faced one another, it would be as bad as if the fabulous four of Leonard, Duran, Hearns and Hagler, never stepped into the ring with one another. This for me is like having Robinson and Armstrong face one another in their primes. I wouldn't go so far as to say that Mayweather has achieved anything like Robinson has, but he is definitely as smooth and composed a fighter as I've ever seen.

Let's hope the negotiations do resume. I'm hoping the phenomenal potential purse will facilitate this, because this is surely going to be the richest fight in boxing history. These two are the undisputed top 2 fighters in the world, you can argue as to which is top, but their primacy is clearly established.

If the fight happens, I see a fight where Pacquaio gets off to a flying start, giving Mayweather uncomfortable moments, before Mayweather makes adjustments and begins to control proceedings. Where I think the pattern changes from other mayweather fights, Is that Pacman will be able to press Mayweather like nobody since Castillo, and keep him in a real fight.

I think Pacquaio will step into an extra gear over the latter stages of the fight, and who will win, will depend whether or not Mayweather has the concomitant hunger to match Pacquaio. Mayweather's fitness is not in question, but for me, his desire to walk through the flames to win, is.

He is so used to dominating fights almost entirely on his own terms, that it would surely be a shock for him to have to fight tooth and nail to persevere. He's done it in spurts against Castillo, Judah, Mosley, and even Hatton, who gave him some shaky moments early on. The difference with Pacquaio is that the Filipino will never stop coming for 12 whole rounds, and will fight with the same intensity in the last as the first. Manny has the speed and footwork to land often enough to make Mayweather work.

I think right now it's a genuine 50-50 fight. I think that Pacman has continued to improve under the tutelage of Roach, and now he appears to be more or less the finished article. Footwork, combination punching, speed, stamina, and a great durability, make him, like Armstrong before him, seemingly the ultimate fighting machine.

I am not saying that Manny is unbeatable. Neither was Armstrong, nor was Sugar Ray Leonard, Roberto Duran, nor any of the real greats. I'd have favoured Chavez over Pacquaio at featherweight, Duran at Lightweight, Ray Leonard, Mosley or a prime Oscar DeLaHoya at Welterweight.

Right now however in the present day, only Mayweather I think at 147 and below, with his uncanny ability to slow time around him, to anticipate, hypnotise and discombobulate his opponents, to make adjustments and upset and halt their own work, with his incredible mastery of distance and timing, can provide a foil, and provide the test, which will prove, once and for all, who is the greatest fighter of the early 21st century.

Let's hope that Mayweather's current legal issues (he has an assult charge pending) do not preclude this fight ever happening.

Round Up: Requiem for a heavyweight disappointment

The rotten corpse of Audley Harrison's career was finally found, mangled and battered in a ring in Manchester. A baying, booing, lustful crowd his only mourners.

In three rounds, which amounted to little more than a minute of actual action, all of it from the defending WBA heavyweight champion David Haye, save for one jab, Audley was finally divested of any shreds of dignity he could have about his professional boxing career in a public autopsy which revealed once and for all his lack of as Barry McGuigan once put it 'intestinal fortitude.'

Audley is and will ever remain a rather enigmatic figure. Never has any fighter I can think of, (I challenge anyone else to do the same) demonstrated such unshakeable self belief before a fight, despite the evidential fights in their career, been as convincing a talker where the public are concerned, and yet on each occasion they fought, shown so little in ring.

I don't personally believe that Audley went into that contest thinking he was going to lose. He had clearly been crying moments before the post fight interview in his dressing room. Tear streaks were evident down his face. Audley cut a folorn, abject figure. Here clearly was a man who had believed he was going to fulfill his much proferred destiny, only to be reminded in the most brutal terms just how fallacious his perception really was. The fact that he flew over his partner and child to witness the debacle suggests he went in there with the intent, if not the ability to win.

I thought there was a very telling incident during the first pre-fight press conference for the fight, an event when many were impressed with Audleys focus and seeming determination, but failed to see that beneath the self belief, there was little else to suggest he had the capacity to formulate a way to win.

Audley suggested that at 'some point' (not the vagueness even here), his rather overstated left hook would land on Haye and turn out the lights. However, Haye's telling counterpoint; that he knew all about Audley's left hand, having sparred him on many occasions and that his own right was quicker, left Audley flummoxed, and the only answers he could proffer when quizzed how he overcome this, were 'wait and see' and 'it's my destiny.'

Destiny doesn't win fights, fighters create their destinies with punches and defensive skills. Audley exhibited neither against Haye.

There are those now who choose to, or perhaps even want to, believe that the whole fight was a fix, that the two men colluded to provide such an unedifying spectacle to the british public. These are commonly the same people who bizzarely gave Audley more than the slimmest of chances of landing the bingo punch that would end Haye's reign as WBA champion.

The truth of the matter is that Audley was, as was to be expected by any rational follower of the sport, completely outclassed and had no business being in the ring in the first place. Harrisons two best victories over Williams and Sprott, have to be taken with a large dose of salt. Not only had he lost to both men before rematches, but Williams was a spent and disinterested force for their second fight, and Sprott was well on his way to winning the second fight before the hail mary left hook landed, and furthermore, had crushed Harrison with a single left hook of his own in their first fight. Winning prize fighter is not, and should not be a foil to garnering a world title shot against a world heavyweight title holder.

I question anyone who believes that Audley would not only willingly subject himself to the battering he took on the ropes before going to the canvas, but then get up to receive more heavy blows to the head. Haye is clearly a murderous puncher, and Audley would have been forgiven, if for little else, then for staying down for the count. The fact he chose to rise, and fight on, just marks out his incredible self delusion in an even starker light. Bravery? In this case his actions were more foolhardy, as he simply did not have the tools to survive the round. 

Audley would claim post fight than his game plan was being executed. I would love to sit and speak with his training team and see if they support his view. Surely no trainer of any repute, would advise any fighter getting into the ring, against someone as aggresive, fast handed, and powerful a puncher as Haye, to throw no punches of any conviction, cede the centre of the ring, and then cover up on the ropes and allow their opponent to tee off at will? His lack of nous even extended to not covering up effectively, or holding when hurt. Whatever game plan was established pre-fight, simply evaporated as soon as Haye's first successful assault landed. Audley's inherent fear of being hit abnegated any sensible course of action.

It is lamentable that as tragic a figure as Audley was ever given the opportunity to share the ring with Haye. I do feel, that despite his most woeful and pathetic (in the true sense of the word) of efforts, Audley is a man more to be pitied than reviled. I will be very glad to see him retire, as his fights have provided more frustration and boredom than entertainment. It is hard to forgive Audley for being the man who almost single handedly turned the BBC off professional boxing. I can still remember the embarassment I felt when I invited several friends round to watch his big first 'fight' with Danny Williams, only for them to hurl a string of unrepeatable expletives at the screen for a few rounds, before commencing to talk among themselves for the remainder of the action deprived bout.

However, the truth is, Audley probably never should have turned professional. The paid ranks didn't offer him the cosseted almost semi-contact nature of the amateur game, which suited him so well. Even outclassed opponents fire back with mean intent and there's the risk of being involved in what amounts to something equating to an actual fight. This was something Audley simply could not brook as a professional, and sought to avoid at all costs. Agaisnt Haye, as against Sprott, Rogan and to a lesser extent Dominic Guinn, he was in against opponents not at all fazed by his physical presence and gold medal credentials, and in each case, to varying degrees he was punished by their lack of respect.

Audley has probably already made several times what I will earn in a lifetime, but I personally would not want to be him this morning, and possibly for the rest of his life. What he does in his life outside of professional boxing, is likely to determine his future happiness, because in the final analysis, his career has been a heavy dissapointment of valuevian proportions.