londoner Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 Burns moving on up Scotsman steps up in weight after struggling to make 9st 9lbs limit Ricky Burns has opted to give up his WBO super-featherweight title so he can step up to lightweight. Ths Scotsman, 28, had been due to face undefeated American Adrien Broner in the fourth defence of his belt in Cincinnati in November. However, he has had his struggles making the 9st 9lbs limit to defend the strap he claimed with a stunning victory over Roman Martinez last year. Instead, Burns is now set to go toe-to-toe with Australian Michael Katsidis in Glasgow for the vacant interim WBO lightweight belt. "I'm happy and relieved that Ricky is relinquishing the title because constantly having to make the weight was taking its toll," manager Alex Morrison told STV. "We have had confirmation through from Frank Warren's people that Ricky will now face Katsidis in November. "The lightweight title is vacant just now and we are all agreed that this is the best fight for Ricky in the long run. "As Ricky gets older he is struggling to make the weight for his current division and the next sensible step seemed to be to move up to lightweight." http://www.skysports.com/story/0,,12183_7177685,00.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londoner Posted September 16, 2011 Author Share Posted September 16, 2011 I thought Burns might have pulled out of a fight with Broner after his management realised Broner was a really tough opponent to be fighting on the road and maybe they wanted more money even. But to vacate the title and then move up and fight Michael Katsidis in his first fight is anything but ducking. I think Katsidis, even with his recent losses, is a tougher opponent right now than Broner. Really tough fight to pick a winner from IMO. I'd call it a 50-50 fight. Katsidis has all the experience and pedigree so he would probably be favourite to win. But Burns did dethrone arguably the best fighter at 130lbs (Roman Martinez) to win the WBO title and is undefeated in nearly 5 years. He'll also have home advantage. I think i might go with Burns by SD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamasadlittleboy Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 Broner in the US with no fans behind you Katsidis in the UK with a bunch of Scottish folk behind you I know which one I'd be taking...especially after seeing how well uncle Frank can oil up the wheels (see Sai v Cox if you need an example) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wheelchair Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 Katsidis will have nowhere to go if he loses this one, but Burns hasn't the power to keep him off. Katsidis wins this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gavpowell Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 I don;t think you need power, just a reasonable amount of boxing skill and some movement, and Burns can do that. I pick Burns for a Ud if the fight ever comes off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
londoner Posted September 16, 2011 Author Share Posted September 16, 2011 Broner in the US with no fans behind you Katsidis in the UK with a bunch of Scottish folk behind you I know which one I'd be taking...especially after seeing how well uncle Frank can oil up the wheels (see Sai v Cox if you need an example) I see what you mean but then again Kevin Mitchell fought Katsidis at home in front of a home crowd and got stopped in 3 rounds. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gavpowell Posted September 16, 2011 Share Posted September 16, 2011 Kevin Mitchell fought like a fool and was not remotely prepared either - he'd had awful preparation for that fight, family arguments etc. It was like Haye vs Thompson - you know how he fights, he's made a career out of absorbing punishment, wearig his man down and then battering them in a remarkable comeback. so why did you go all out for the knockout in the first 3 rounds? Becuase you're a vainglorious idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skav Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 Kevin Mitchell fought like a fool and was not remotely prepared either - he'd had awful preparation for that fight, family arguments etc. Yeah, so he kept saying. There may be some truth to that but in the end it was Mitchell who found himself against the ropes (there were plenty of times when he did it against Murray) and made an error in his positioning and got knocked out. I personally don't make excuses for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
punter Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 Katsidis to win this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamasadlittleboy Posted September 17, 2011 Share Posted September 17, 2011 Broner in the US with no fans behind you Katsidis in the UK with a bunch of Scottish folk behind you I know which one I'd be taking...especially after seeing how well uncle Frank can oil up the wheels (see Sai v Cox if you need an example) I see what you mean but then again Kevin Mitchell fought Katsidis at home in front of a home crowd and got stopped in 3 rounds. and I bet he preferred that to going into the lions den for a fight against someone equally as tough at a weird time... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now