One of the best things about Pavlik

Is actually the sheer length, straightness, and extension on his shots.

A long armed fighter (for his division) is not that rare, but it's how they use those arms. A lot of fighters throw slightly looping punches, or with a certain technique that doesn't achieve full extension, and don't throw perfectly straight punches.

Pavlik throws such perfectly straight punches, and throws them in such a way that he maximises his reach for all it's worth.

Consistently his opponents look fucking surprised after being belted with a jab or straight right, and that's saying something because Kelly is hardly a fast handed fighter.

Yet he more than makes up for his slight lack of speed.

I've said before that I'll pick Joe by close decision if the fight happens, and I stand by that, but the more I think about it, the bigger the chance I give Pavlik.

He is big, he can bang, he is so utterly composed, relaxed, and focused in the ring. He has underrated skill, an awesome jab and right hand, a big variety of technically great punches, he is a true technician. A true fighter too though, he has balls and he's tough.

He has a bit of Monzon about him. Their style is slightly different, but their core mechanics and attributes are similar.

 

i agree i think he's class. wasn't there only like 2" difference in reach last night? yet he made it look huge.

what do you think about his chin? he walked threw miranda, but i though he was almost gone in the first taylor fight. i think its good, but it can be cracked? can't make my mind up on that one.

 

His chin is not impenetrable - Jermain Taylor was not the first to prove this.

Truthfully, it's easy to jump up and down over such a performance (I still laugh at those drooling over Cotto's beatdown of a Contender) but let's not forget that he struggled mightily to beat Taylor a few months ago. It was Gary Lockett in there who, from all accounts, sucks.

I like Pavlik a lot but this win doesn't tell me anything except that if you put a bum in front of him, he'll put him away early. Given that in his last two fights(against far better opposition) he was dropped, badly hurt and edged the second one, I think that's a better barometer for how good he is. And, in my opinion, that's not good enough to beat Joe Calzaghe.

 

It has nothing to do with this fight, he just happened to fight yesterday. It's a general observation about Pavlik.

 

I was responding to the poster who inquired about his chin. And also mentioned something I noticed re: the peanut gallery who go crazy after a mismatch like this one.

 

It's Been Noted PREVIOUSLY, but 1 of the Things that Impresses REED the Most about Pavlik is the EASE w/Which he Fires his Shots...

There's Very LITTLE Arm Motion, yet the EFFECTS R Devastating...He's Got that "George Foreman" Quality about him...Pavlik's Sooooooo HEAVY HANDED...

By Comparison, a Guy like Tommy Hearns Put EVERYTHING N 2 his Power Shots...It LOOKED like Tommy was Trying to Put your Lights Out when he Fired...w/Pavlik, he Throws ALL of his Shots N the Same RELAXED, Low Key Fashion...w/DEVASTATING Results...

No Doubt, this Contributes to his GOOD Stamina, just as The EFFORT Hearns Put N 2 his Shots Contributed NEGATIVELY to his...



REED:mj:

 

Yep, I've raised that point too after the first Taylor fight. The shot that started it all seemed like an effortless point scoring shot.

 

I agree with whoever compared his style to Monzon. Their styles are similar. Kelly has similar technique, like Monzon has a heavy jab, and also like Monzon is extremely casual and accurate with his power shots. Only Monzon had a better chin, and from the fights Ive seen, his hands were quicker than Pavlik's as well.

 

I thought he clearly beat Taylor in the rematch. Regardless, Taylor is a guy who fought Hopkins on even terms, at worst. He fared far worse and worse against Pavlik. Throw in Pavlik's remaining fights and you've got a guy who backs up a lot of hype.

 

Bang on mIKE.

I agree that he clearly beat taylor in the rematch, and Taylor fought as well as he possible could have done, and his gameplan was little more than survival, and not getting KO'd again.

And like you say, he is a guy who holds 2 wins over hopkins, and at worst had 2 very close fights with him.

Way to denegrate Pavlik Kenneth, you can't hold the first fight against him. He got stupid, almost got KO'd, but showed the heart and poise of a champion, came back and beat taylor into submission.

Fighters do get knocked down, and get up and win, a lot of very good fighters too.

Then in the second fight, did what he had to do against a cautious taylor, and outpointed him comfortably.

 

lockett had only been knocked down once i his career

before this fight. That's what the announcer said. I would say Pavlik has enough hand speed He matched Taylors hand speed.

 

Way to denigrate? Care to point out how I did that? Here's what I said re: the first fight -

Try talking out of your other hole next time.

Sure he showed the heart and poise of a champ. But he was knocked down and dropped, was he not? LOL@you. I was one of the few on here who had even liked Kelly to win that first fight (check that thread where Mitchell Kane sings the praises of Jermain Taylor) so I have no issue with him.

But the bottom line is, you can take absolutely NOTHING from last night's fight. I don't care if Lockett has been down only once before. Given the opposition he's faced, I'm surprised he's even been dropped before. So I'd rather look at Pavlik's previous bouts which - in spite of what you say - was fairly close. Then again, you're the same guy who had Hopkins winning only three rounds against Calzaghe. Maybe you like doing that so you can crow how "easily" your guy won--or save face when the arse-kicking you predict doesn't come to fruition. Fact is, a lot of people had Taylor ahead in that bout going into the championship rounds. IT WAS close.

But this has nothing to do with my original point - which is that Pavlik's chin can be penetrated. And Jermain Taylor isn't the first guy to hurt him.

 

That's not what I was talking about at all. I was talking about this line...

LOL @ you, nobody's even been trying to prop Pavlik up for beating lockets. It was utterly 1 sided just like it was supposed to be, no surprises there, lockets was a gimme, lockets was a borderline bum, and Kelly crushed him just like he was supposed to.

Nobody even mentioned the locket fight, so why are you acting like it's the base for what we're discussing?

Pavlik has more than proving himself against Zuniga, Zertuche, Miranda, and finally his big test in Taylor.

He got hurt, dropped, and came back like a champ to KO his man a few rounds later.

Again, many great fighters in the history of the sport get dropped and come back to win by KO, including fighters like Ali, against merely decent opposition like Henry Cooper.

And in the rematch, Kelly did what he could against a more negative and cautious Taylor, and won most of the rounds.

There's really no grounds to criticise Pavlik for either of those fights.

So essentially, why are you saying that the Taylor fights are a "better barometer" for assessing how good pavlik is, when nobody is using lockets as a barometer for how good he is, or why he'd beat Calzaghe? Where did that come from?

 

Can you explain how that line is denigrating? Was he not dropped and hurt?

We? I was talking to the poster above me who said something referring to his chin. I felt like responding, forum king.

Yes...and? Who is disagreeing with you?

Get the f*ck out of here, is that what happened?!!? I had no clue!

Now we're bringing up Ali. Geezus christ..what argument are you trying to make here?

Yeah...and it was a close but clear verdict. Again, where do we disagree?

Now Kelly Pavlik is infallible. Good God...

It came from me because I WANTED TO WRITE THAT. And since you agree with both comments, why the fukk are you arguing?

 

There is no hype with Pavlik. But I'm not too sure he beats Calzaghe and I don't think Arum makes that match-up. In spite of what the fans were screaming last night. Not yet, anyway.

 

Considering how AGGRESSIVE he Is, REED would Say Kelly Pavlik has a GOOD Chin...He's Not Jake LaMotta or Marvin Hagler, but it's NOT like Pavlik Gets BUZZED, HURT or WOBBLED N Every Other Fight Either...

Taylor BUZZED Pavlik, THEN Pavlik Got ARROGANT, Dropped his Hands (Giving Taylor a FREE SHOT @ Him) & was DROPPED for his Bravado...Pavlik Probably SHOULD have been KO'ed Right Then & There, but he WASN'T...That's a Testament to his CHIN...

By the Very NEXT Round, Pavlik was Back IN CONTROL of the Fight...

Stylistically, Pavlik is GOING to B N "Harms Way" More Times than Not...Considering this, he has a GOOD Chin N REED's Opinion...& Considering his OFFENSE, REED Thinks Pavlik can AFFORD to B LESS than Stellar Defensively (Though he BLOCKS & ROLLS w/ALOT More Shots than he's Given Credit for)....



REED:hammert:

 

His defense is underrated. And given what you have to go through in order to penetrate it...yeah, he's a problem. But he CAN be hurt. Jermain Taylor hadn't dropped a fighter since he fought a sparring partner and he put him on his a** early.

Pavlik can clear out the middleweight division. But I think his handlers would be wise to keep him away from a guy like Calzaghe...far away. Let him continue to build himself up, he'll have plenty of opportunities for a big fight down the line. By then, the landscape at 168 would've greatly changed. I'm pretty sure he can take out Andre Ward and a match between Pavlik and a seasoned Matrix Dirrell would be incredible a year or two from now.

 

Really, there should be almost nothing garnered from the winner of a fight like this.

 

Pavlik will destroy Calzaghe. That's all

 

I wouldn't say he fights like Monzon so much as a much taller Chavez.

He throws straight punches, doesn't back up, and has a very solid jab that he hooks off of often. (assonance)

Monzon was more of a boxer who could be offensive, Pavlik is a pressure fighter with great power and really solid skills.

 

Only one thing is certain.... by the end of 2010, and possibly 2009, Pavlik will have been brutally knocked out.

 

:nono: rubbish

 

I like Pavlik's style, he is a very exciting fighter and hitter, I do not fancy his chances against a Calzaghe though..

The fact that we have already seen Pavlik hurt and on the canvas before makes me want to watch his fights. With Kelly the opponent sees and knows whats coming, but what can they do to stop it?

 

I'm arguing because you seemed to get the wrong gist of the thead.

My interpretation of your interpretation of this thread is that we were salivating over the Pavlik for doing a number on the great Gary Lockett, and you needed to keep the nuthugging in check, by stating "Hang on a minute dudes, he looked impressive, but it only only Gary Lockett, the Taylor fights are a better barometer for how good he is, and why he wouldn't beat Calzaghe".

And I am merely stating that's not what this thread is about. I watched a few Pavlik fights in the last few days, and this time what really stood out to me when analysing Pavlik, is the ridiculous extension on his long, straight shots, that seems to really shock opponents - they think they're out of range, and clearly they're not. It's clearly a big weapon in the Pavlik's arsenal.

I should bash you Kenneth.

 

Right Tam, but again you're sort of missed the point of the thread, as I was trying to explain to Kenneth.

Notice I didn't even mention lockets in the post, this is just a general observation about Pavlik, that happened to be made around the time he had a fight, as Pavlik is in the air, and in the minds and hearts of the people ::

 

Right, that's why I said stylistically they are slightly different, but their core attributes and "mechanics" if you shall, are very similar. This much is totally true.

 

That's great but you don't need to clarify what this thread's about. I can read. I can also interject what I feel like re: Pavlik. If you disagree, cool - but you don't need to defend the honor of your thread.

And since you WEREN'T posting this as a result of the Pavlik fight that happened, oh, this past weekend - then you should be critiquing his past performances in preparation for future ones. We all know he hits hard effortlessly - look at his record. But we also know, based on these last two fights, he can be dropped and hurt, and he can be outboxed. Jermain Taylor did both. So while I credit Pavlik for being the world's best middle, I (LIKE YOU) believe he would lose to Calzaghe. So...no need to defend Pavlik's honor either ::

 

REED has YET to See Pavlik Get "OutBoxed"...Jermain Taylor Certainly DIDN'T Do It...



REED:hammert:

 

Jermain Taylor enjoyed plenty of success against Pavlik in the second bout simply by zipping in and out with short combinations. He certainly didn't win those rounds by outslugging him. He enjoyed similar success in their first fight (albeit for only one round).

The kind of fighter who beats Kelly Pavlik is either someone who can KHTFO or can force the lanky mutherfukker to MOVE. Pavlik struggled against Taylor the second time simply because JT refused to stand directly in front of him. He constantly gave him angles whenever he was in punching range, would fire off his shots and then MOVE.

Pavlik, for all his strengths, is very flat-footed. It is why I am of the opinion that a bout against Calzaghe is a bad, bad move for him. And I don't think Arum is dumb enough to do that. Calzaghe's strength - and chin - is quite underrated around these parts. He'll enjoy facing a middleweight, even a big middleweight like Pavlik. Furthermore, he's versatile - I suspect he'll employ the same kind of strategy against The Ghost that he did against Kessler. What will really be interesting to see is who backs up whom. Calzaghe can win moving backwards. Can Pavlik?