NEVIN HEADING FOR GERMANY

Pighead

Nevin's changed his mind and has decided not to go down the professional route. He's going to stay an amateur.

http://thescore.thejournal.ie/u-turn-john-joe-nevin-to-stay-amateur-eyes-tilt-at-olympic-gold-663902-Nov2012/?utm_source=shortlink

walshb

I just could never see Nevin doing much at the pro game. He just doesn't have that kind of style. He is perfect for the fencing like amateur game.

Jayob10

Pighead wrote: »

Nevin's changed his mind and has decided not to go down the professional route. He's going to stay an amateur.

http://thescore.thejournal.ie/u-turn-john-joe-nevin-to-stay-amateur-eyes-tilt-at-olympic-gold-663902-Nov2012/?utm_source=shortlink

I see Joe Ward is giving the WSB a go aswell, good stuff. He will be tailor made for that I reckon.

Good move by Ward, far too young to be going pro, he is a major talent for the high performance squad if he keeps his focus.

The WSB will give him a taste of the pro game aswell

megadodge

walshb wrote: »

I just could never see Nevin doing much at the pro game. He just doesn't have that kind of style. He is perfect for the fencing like amateur game.

If you're completely honest you originally didn't really see him doing much in the amateur game either.

I remember when Sutcliffe KO'd JJ Joyce in the National finals, you were prepared to bet with me that Sutcliffe would go further in the next major tournament than Nevin after I had praised Nevin's performances. Badly wrong there.

As Big Ears has pointed out here more than once, Nevin's performances in the WSB proved that he could very well make it in the pros. He stood his ground much more and landed hard, fast accurate punches while still remaining elusive. Don't underestimate him again.

Heliotrope

How does this work? Is the British Lionhearts like a club team or something as there's two Irish lads and few other non-Brits on the squad.

Hope it goes well for him.

walshb

megadodge wrote: »

If you're completely honest you originally didn't really see him doing much in the amateur game either.

I remember when Sutcliffe KO'd JJ Joyce in the National finals, you were prepared to bet with me that Sutcliffe would go further in the next major tournament than Nevin after I had praised Nevin's performances. Badly wrong there.

As Big Ears has pointed out here more than once, Nevin's performances in the WSB proved that he could very well make it in the pros. He stood his ground much more and landed hard, fast accurate punches while still remaining elusive. Don't underestimate him again.

Yes, early on Nevin didn't impress me too much. Recent years he has, and that will be seen in many of my posts. He certainly did improve as an amateur over the last couple of years. I don't see him having the tools at the pro level. I just don't see it. Sure, he could win some fights and build up a padded record, but what about the step up in class? I could be wrong. He could completely adapt and become efficient in the pro game.

Henno30

walshb wrote: »

Yes, early on Nevin didn't impress me too much. Recent years he has, and that will be seen in many of my posts. He certainly did improve as an amateur over the last couple of years. I don't see him having the tools at the pro level. I just don't see it. Sure, he could win some fights and build up a padded record, but what about the step up in class? I could be wrong. He could completely adapt and become efficient in the pro game.

Do you think he's not defensively crafty enough?

walshb

Henno30 wrote: »

Do you think he's not defensively crafty enough?

His D is not what would alarm me. He is very slick, neat and cute. I just don't see the volume, punch fluidity, power and aggression that pros need to succeed. Like I said, he could adapt, but he is what he is, and that is a fantastic amateur fencer/boxer.

barney4001

A good decision by Nevin to stay for Rio and make himself available for the WSB series financially he will be far better off i am sure, 60,000 euro grant a year up to Rio plus what the WSB series brings in for him could well run into 500,000 for him well done young Nevin good luck to you

Henno30

walshb wrote: »

His D is not what would alarm me. He is very slick, neat and cute. I just don't see the volume, punch fluidity, power and aggression that pros need to succeed. Like I said, he could adapt, but he is what he is, and that is a fantastic amateur fencer/boxer.

So do you just not think he's physically explosive enough then?

walshb

Henno30 wrote: »

So do you just not think he's physically explosive enough then?

Yes, that is probably it in a nutshell. But, maybe with the training and effort he could do well. I just think that some folks are better suited to the amateur game. He is one that is.

He showed me recently that he is a better overall boxer. More committed, aggressive and fluid with punching. He wasn't so defensive and cagey oriented. He went and won fights, threw the kitchen sink so to speak. He stood his groung, got off first, and even forced the pace and action more; and guess what, he did better. He almost struck gold.

My issue with Nevin was always that he seemed too content to be cautious and negative and happy with just doing ebough. But, that then caused problems when he was behind on points. He wasn't used to forcing the action and being the aggressor.

Jayob10

walshb wrote: »

Yes, that is probably it in a nutshell. But, maybe with the training and effort he could do well. I just think that some folks are better suited to the amateur game. He is one that is.

He showed me recently that he is a better overall boxer. More committed, aggressive and fluid with punching. He wasn't so defensive and cagey orineted. He went and won fights, threw the kitchen sink so to speak. He stood his groung, got off firts, and even forced the pace and action more; and guess what, he did better. He almost struck gold.

My issue with Nevin was always that he seemed too content to be cautious and negative and happy with just doing ebough. But, that then caused problems when he was behind on points. He wasn't used to forcing the action and being the aggressor.

Thats a pretty decent synopsis on Nevin's abilities in fairness, one would be stretching to disagree with any of that.

megadodge

walshb wrote: »

Yes, that is probably it in a nutshell. But, maybe with the training and effort he could do well. I just think that some folks are better suited to the amateur game. He is one that is.

He showed me recently that he is a better overall boxer. More committed, aggressive and fluid with punching. He wasn't so defensive and cagey oriented. He went and won fights, threw the kitchen sink so to speak. He stood his groung, got off first, and even forced the pace and action more; and guess what, he did better. He almost struck gold.

My issue with Nevin was always that he seemed too content to be cautious and negative and happy with just doing ebough. But, that then caused problems when he was behind on points. He wasn't used to forcing the action and being the aggressor.

I agree completely with the highlighted bit and I think that's what lost him the Olympic final. The first time he fought Campbell, he gave him a boxing lesson. The reason - Campbell was the aggressor. You're wasting your time chasing Nevin, he's just such a brilliant defensive fighter. But fair dues to Campbell, both in the World semi (went to countback) and Olympic final, he stayed back and let Nevin come to him and unfortunately Nevin obliged.

However, I disagree with your opinion on him being negative. You just love aggressive boxers (don't we all) but you always have a problem with the defensive types (with one fat, foul-mouthed exception - I don't even want to mention his name for fear you'll start another lovefest ). Nevin is an expert in the 'hit and don't get hit' style. It's served him brilliantly. He has been Ireland's most consistent male boxer ever. I thoroughly enjoy watching him put on masterclasses in defensive boxing and hopefully he'll continue in that mould and not make the mistake of 'pleasing the fans' ie. ending up losing great fights.

It's all about winning.

walshb

megadodge wrote: »

It's all about winning.

Hey, when he's winning it was never an issue, that is the whole point. I made this point. It was when a fight was maybe very close or when he was a point or two behind that the problem with Nevin was clear to me. He seemed that bit too content to maybe hope for the best. To keep doing what he was doing. Now, and recently recently he has went for the win, become more assertive and still maintained that slick brilliance. To me he is now a much more rounded fighter due to him being more assertive and attacking. He can be attacking and assertive without being reckless. That he is!

BTW, I thought he boxed wonderfully throughout the games. He has improved and has become a more rounded and complete amatuer boxer. I think it's clear to see now.

Syferus

For me the divide between amateur and pro is like rugby league and rugby union, the same essential elements but different tactics and training. It really is speculative judging any world-class amateurs that don't exhibit knockout power beyond saying they have the raw talent to be successful pros. Almost any good amateur with the right trainer and the right mentality can make a serious impact in the pros, especially given that in plenty of cases the level of competition you're facing as an amateur is better than most of the people you'll face as a pro.

I think the most interesting aspect of Nevin's choice is how much the amateur system is encroaching on the fractured pro ranks. Twenty years ago this wouldn't have even been a descion for him.

walshb

Syferus wrote: »

For me the divide between amateur and pro is like rugby league and rugby union, the same essential elements but different tactics and training. It really is speculative judging any world-class amateurs that don't exhibit knockout power beyond saying they have the raw talent to be successful pros. Almost any good amateur with the right trainer and the right mentality can make a serious impact in the pros, especially given that in plenty of cases the level of competition you're facing as an amateur is better than most of the people you'll face as a pro.

I think the most interesting aspect of Nevin's choice is how much the amateur system is encroaching on the fractured pro ranks. Twenty years ago this wouldn't have even been a descion for him.

But regardless of how good you are as an amteur you may not stylistically suit the pros. We have had many very good amatuers who couldn't make it at pro level. To be a very good pro requires that innate something extra.

I could list off many boxers that IMO would not be suited stylistically for the intense and heavy hitting pro game. Irish: Kenneth Egan is/was one. Nevin is two. I would add Conlon to the list. Carruth was one great amatuer who was never pro material, even had he went pro pre Barcelona. His style is just not suited for the game.

I could be wrong about Nevin, but from what I see I don't think he is suited to the game. A guy like Frampton is.

Jayob10

walshb wrote: »

But regardless of how good you are as an amteur you may not stylistically suit the pros. We have had many very good amatuers who couldn't make it at pro level. To be a very good pro requires that innate something extra.

I could list off many boxers that IMO would not be suited stylistically for the intense and heavy hitting pro game. Irish: Kenneth Egan is/was one. Nevin is two. I would add Conlon to the list. Carruth was one great amatuer who was never pro material, even had he went pro pre Barcelona. His style is just not suited for the game.

I could be wrong about Nevin, but from what I see I don't think he is suited to the game. A guy like Frampton is.

this is a prime example of the point you are making. Nevin is the far better amateur fighter, whereas Frampton is the far better pro. They are just cut from different cloth.

Basically, amateurs are concerned with winning rounds. Some pros with less skill and more power, aggression etc.. are confident giving up rounds in order to walk down their opponent looking for a stoppage in the second half of the fight.

We can have no idea how Nevin would deal with this. To carry out his style of fighting you need to fight a punch perfect fight to keep his man off.

Paul McCloskey employs the style of fighting (tries to fight without having a glove laid upon him) and its successful to a certain level. At world level you need to engage, its not enough to simply not get hit.

If I was to put my house on it, i'd say Nevin is all wrong for the pro game but he could surprise everyone. Definately needs to alter his style though and when you have to do that then anything can happen.

endswell

Jayob10 wrote: »

this is a prime example of the point you are making. Nevin is the far better amateur fighter, whereas Frampton is the far better pro. They are just cut from different cloth.

Basically, amateurs are concerned with winning rounds. Some pros with less skill and more power, aggression etc.. are confident giving up rounds in order to walk down their opponent looking for a stoppage in the second half of the fight.

We can have no idea how Nevin would deal with this. To carry out his style of fighting you need to fight a punch perfect fight to keep his man off.

Paul McCloskey employs the style of fighting (tries to fight without having a glove laid upon him) and its successful to a certain level. At world level you need to engage, its not enough to simply not get hit.

If I was to put my house on it, i'd say Nevin is all wrong for the pro game but he could surprise everyone. Definately needs to alter his style though and when you have to do that then anything can happen.

mccloskey has split with breen btw so will be interesting to see develops style a bit and maybe even doubles up on combos.

there have been so many different successful styles in pro game, i dont think its possible to box nevin off as someone who wont be able to. if you can apply your strengths better than your opponent can, why not.

just looking at jamie kavanagh the other night, i mean, if he can, why not nevin...he's taking SO much punishment (dangerous long term too) but scoring just a bit more than opponent.

also, if nevin finds himself behind in a 6/8/10 rounder, he doesnt need to worry as much as if he was in a 3 rounder. usb 5 rounder prob a help

megadodge

Jayob10 wrote: »

this is a prime example of the point you are making. Nevin is the far better amateur fighter, whereas Frampton is the far better pro. They are just cut from different cloth.

And how exactly can you prove that?

Nevin has never fought pro!

walshb

endswell wrote: »

just looking at jamie kavanagh the other night, i mean, if he can, why not nevin...he's taking SO much punishment (dangerous long term too) but scoring just a bit more than opponent.

also, if nevin finds himself behind in a 6/8/10 rounder, he doesnt need to worry as much as if he was in a 3 rounder. usb 5 rounder prob a help

Yes, but I did make a point that Nevin could build up a winning and padded record. My issue is that I don't see his style being one that could cut it near the top. Jamie Kavanagh has fought nobody. I am not writing Nevin off here, just not near ready to commit to thinking that he could be a good to very good pro. It's just a prediction. Far out, I know, but a prediction nonetheless!

Another prediction I would make is that IF Nevin was swamped and put under heavy PRO pressure, I don't think his style and body and constitution would handle it all that well.

As Jayob10 says, pros are cut from a different cloth. Sure, many great pros were good to great amateurs. I do realsie this. But many great amateurs were not cut out for the heavy and intense pro game.

endswell

walshb wrote: »

Yes, but I did make a point that Nevin could build up a winning and padded record. My issue is that I don't see his style being one that could cut it near the top. Jamie Kavanagh has fought nobody. I am not writing Nevin off here, just not near ready to commit to thinking that he could be a good to very good pro. It's just a prediction. Far out, I know, but a prediction nonetheless!

Another prediction I would make is that IF Nevin was swamped and put under heavy PRO pressure, I don't think his style and body and constitution would handle it all that well.

As Jayob10 says, pros are cut from a different cloth. Sure, many great pros were good to great amateurs. I do realsie this. But many great amateurs were not cut out for the heavy and intense pro game.

i think everyone at amateur, if they are good enough, can adapt to deal with whats put on front of them in pro game, even if not reaching the same success as before. the biggest problem is dealing with the complete independence , managing your own training, finding your own fights - its not a case of billy walsh giving you your work timetable at beginning of year and you turning up for every session...thats the bigger issue for nevin imo, i think he would struggle to make that transition himself, maybe the wsb wil give some guidance. also interesting, can successful amateur coaches make transition to pro game?

good news on joe ward if true on that other thread.

walshb

endswell wrote: »

i think everyone at amateur, if they are good enough, can adapt to deal with whats put on front of them in pro game, even if not reaching the same success as before..

I disagree. Being good enough at amateur is not near a guarantee that they will be a success, or decent success in the pros. By success I mean winning titles or really a challenger and a competitor for titles. I see what you are saying.

Paul McCloskey was a decent amatuer, but his style is all wrong for the pro game. He just is not all that good. No power, little fluidity, no jab, and not near explosive or busy enough. Now, is he a successful pro? I think not.

Andy Murray is another example. I feel Nevin too will be an example.

endswell

walshb wrote: »

I disagree. Being good enough at amateur is not near a guarantee that they will be a success, or decent success in the pros. By success I mean winning titles or really a challenger and a competitor for titles. I see what you are saying.

Paul McCloskey was a decent amatuer, but his style is all wrong for the pro game. He just is not all that good. No power, little fluidity, no jab, and not near explosive or busy enough. Now, is he a successful pro? I think not.

Andy Murray is another example. I feel Nevin too will be an example.

McCloskey has been successful, but no, hasnt achieved 'the success' people expect of top amateurs. he's managed the success he has had because he's got a business head, can sell himself and independent enough. very few 'dependent' top pros

walshb

endswell wrote: »

McCloskey has been successful, but no, hasnt achieved 'the success' people expect of top amateurs. he's managed the success he has had because he's got a business head, can sell himself and independent enough. very few 'dependent' top pros

Hey, a fantastic amatuer was Amir Khan, who also went to the top at the pro game, but really, he is not suited all that well for the pros. His style and movement and tactics just aren't pro material. And I believe that Kahn would not have made it as far as he did had he been in another era. I mean, look at the opposition. Kotelnik, Malignaggi, Judah......Can you imagine Khan competeing with a Mosley, Oscar, JCC, Whitaker; or even a Gatti. He would be nowhere near good enough.

BTW, not sure Paul was a top amatuer in the world sense. Very good amateur here in Ireland. Nevin is a top rated world amatuer for the past few years.

barney4001

walshb wrote: »

Hey, a fantastic amatuer was Amir Khan, who also went to the top at the pro game, but really, he is not suited all that well for the pros. His style and movement and tactics just aren't pro material. And I believe that Kahn would not have made it as far as he did had he been in another era. I mean, look at the opposition. Kotelnik, Malignaggi, Judah......Can you imagine Khan competeing with a Mosley, Oscar, JCC, Whitaker; or even a Gatti. He would be nowhere near good enough.

BTW, not sure Paul was a top amatuer in the world sense. Very good amateur here in Ireland. Nevin is a top rated world amatuer for the past few years.

i see McCluskey has ditched the breen stable no surprise that was

megadodge

walshb wrote: »

I disagree. Being good enough at amateur is not near a guarantee that they will be a success, or decent success in the pros. By success I mean winning titles or really a challenger and a competitor for titles. I see what you are saying.

Paul McCloskey was a decent amatuer, but his style is all wrong for the pro game. He just is not all that good. No power, little fluidity, no jab, and not near explosive or busy enough. Now, is he a successful pro? I think not.

Andy Murray is another example. I feel Nevin too will be an example.

In fairness, as an amateur, Nevin's achievments and ability are miles above both these lads. It's a very bad comparison.

And to put it into perspective, McCloskey was a European champion and challenged for a 'world' title. Relatively speaking, that's quite a successful career.

walshb

megadodge wrote: »

In fairness, as an amateur, Nevin's achievments and ability are miles above both these lads. It's a very bad comparison.
.

Well, I never compared their amateur careers. I even said that Nevin was a top world amateur. I never said that Paul or Andy were. I said Paul was not a top world amateur.

Regardless of Nevin's amateur success I still feel that his style, lie Paul's and Andy's, does not lend itself all that well to the pro game.

swiftman

nevin is not turning pro. he's going to rio in 2016.