Comments Thread For: Ricky Burns vs. Julius Indongo in The Works For April

[mlac]

Yes? He had one title run, held the European and British. Ricky Burns has topped that.

one title run? just euro and british?

learn your boxing man, he was the undisputed lightweight champion of the world.

Roberto duran still states to this day one of his greatest personal win's was against the great Scot.

[GMAN SUPREME]

dude i never said anything about pacman v burns? stop stalking me you mentalist.

many thanks.

hanzgruber aka stax on deck is a weirdo.always laughing and bringing up random **** that has nothing to do with the thread.

[GMAN SUPREME]

we don't know how good indongo is I think his ko victory over troya may have been fluke.

[Jamie harris]

Burns had an easy fight to win that title. I believe he's a shot fighter so I do think he will have his work cut out and I believe he will lose by about 5 rounds even if it is in scotland

[W1LL]

one title run? just euro and british?

learn your boxing man, he was the undisputed lightweight champion of the world.

Roberto duran still states to this day one of his greatest personal win's was against the great Scot.

Yes one title run. Buchanan fighting for the unified/undisputed title is one of the shadiest things in boxing. He won the WBA title very impressively, but the WBC held zero worth.

Ricky Burns is a three-weight champion. If he can unify three belts in his next fight I'd say he has a valid arguement to being Scotland's best.

Learn your boxing man.

[mlac]

Yes one title run. Buchanan fighting for the unified/undisputed title is one of the shadiest things in boxing. He won the WBA title very impressively, but the WBC held zero worth.

Ricky Burns is a three-weight champion. If he can unify three belts in his next fight I'd say he has a valid arguement to being Scotland's best.

Learn your boxing man.

lol. so you've gone from buchanan 'only won a british and european title' to now saying ' oh yeah but the wbc was crap then so he wasnt really champion'

'scholar'? eh?

[W1LL]

lol. so you've gone from buchanan 'only won a british and european title' to now saying ' oh yeah but the wbc was crap then so he wasnt really champion'

'scholar'? eh?

On the contrary. You're the one inserting the words "just", "only" when talking about the British and European. I'm aware you've only been around this forum for a short time, but I've always believed the British, European and then World is the best route for a British boxer to take. I've expressed this many times and never diminished either title. That was you not me.

Ken Buchanan was a good fighter and Ricky Burns is a good fighter. In my opinion Burns being a three weight world champion, and the unified Super Lightweight champion puts his achievements above and beyond Buchanan's.

[mlac]

On the contrary. You're the one inserting the words "just", "only" when talking about the British and European. I'm aware you've only been around this forum for a short time, but I've always believed the British, European and then World is the best route for a British boxer to take. I've expressed this many times and never diminished either title. That was you not me.

Ken Buchanan was a good fighter and Ricky Burns is a good fighter. In my opinion Burns being a three weight world champion, and the unified Super Lightweight champion puts his achievements above and beyond Buchanan's.

come off it dude, your blabbering about nothing trying to regain e points.

Firstly to even insinuate burns is even on PAR with a legend like buchanan is ridiculous.
To then say buchanan only had a 'euro and british titles' leads me to think you don't know what you're talking about.

Buchanan is often considered by most boxing historians to be not only the greatest scottish boxer of all time but the greatest British lightweight of all time.

Instead of repeating the '3 weight world title' line, any boxing nerd know's burns recent run is highly controversial and not in any way to be considered as anything kind of great.

-He got smashed by beltran and got a gift draw

-He won a vacant title Vs a random Australian dude that even boxing nerds barely know who he is.

-He fought a random guy from Belarus that no one had ever heard of, got Knocked down, reff didnt count it and got a highly controversial win.

- he hasnt beaten any decent guy's in years, this 'great run' and ' 3 weight world champion' is all well and good and count's in the history book's, but any boxing 'scholar' know's that Burns is benefiting from Hearn robbery decisions and easy routes to vacant titles.

In his prime Burns got some good win's V Martinez and Katsidis, and was a good boxer, with a good chin albeit zero power.
In no way shape or form is he in any way surpassed someone like buchanan.

Your pathetic attempts to try and diminish buchanan and then repeating ' 3 weight world champion' leads me to believe you are the falsely advertising your namesake

[W1LL]

I'm not trying to diminish anything. It doesn't matter what "experts and historians" say. Are you Scottish? Have you been spoon-fed the Ken Buchanan spiel your whole time as a boxing fan?

[mlac]

I'm not trying to diminish anything. It doesn't matter what "experts and historians" say. Are you Scottish? Have you been spoon-fed the Ken Buchanan spiel your whole time as a boxing fan?

Lol, you firstly stated that Buchanan only won the 'british and european titles' and that ricky burns had surpassed that

after i corrected you, you obviously googled some crap and started blabbering about the WBC being 'not valued back then'

No offence but you don't know what you're talking about bud.