Amir Khan
The case of Amir Khan is a strange one. His career has revealed a great deal of unpleasantness, stupidity and hypocrisy.
No British boxer since I've followed the sport has been more reviled and ridiculed. Why is that?
He became famous, aged 17, winning a silver as Britain's only boxer at the 2004 Olympics. His spectacular hand speed saw him almost snatch gold off one of the world's best amateurs, Mario Kindelan of Cuba.
He turned pro the following year, but not before we'd seen the warning signs of him being knocked down in a slightly unedifying fashion by British amateur Craig Watson.
Still, ITV went to town on him, successfully bringing boxing to terrestrial Saturday nights.
The loathing began early and continues to this date - it is fairly common for there to be a little resentment of Olympian boxers getting the fast track to fame and fortune - call it the Audley Harrison factor. Harrison, a 2000 Olympic gold medallist, was also unfairly ridiculed and reviled throughout his professional career, but the (main) difference is he really did vastly underachieve, and, despite some pleasing moments, only ever reached the C level as a boxer.
The lie about Amir Khan is that he hasn't had a fine boxing career, that he is a cowardly, deluded, underachieving con. He is, pretty obviously when you look at the facts, none of those things.
Yet he is widely perceived in those terms. There are popular twitter accounts set up to mock him and boxing comments pages about him are never short on contempt. Even close to the mainstream, there is a steady line of sneering.
It is clear, getting the uncomfortable truth out of the way first, that racism plays a part in how some people have responded to a Muslim Pakistani-Briton. Blatantly, quite often. You don't have to go to far below the line to see it. And not far away from the blatant racism will be the insidious, unthinking, subtle racism. So let's tag that on to any other points.
Well, actually, not tag it on. We've already got a heady brew. Entitled Olympian, chinny, Muslim ... he was going to have to work hard to overcome that. Early on, I felt he'd be able to. Amir always seemed to be a bit of an endearing goof, overenthusiastic and prone to shout his mouth off in a slightly silly way, but in no way unpleasant and generally likeable. But it quickly became clear that Khan's personality would be held against him as much as anything else - full of arrogance and ignorance. I never saw it, certainly no more than many boxers.
Ultimately, how should Khan be judged? - on the fights he's taken, the fights he's avoided, the fights he's sought, the fights he's won, the fights he's lost.
Fights he's taken - after a few gimmes, he was fighting decent domestic level fighters early on, took a huge risk with his first fight on Sky, has fought multiple world champions including several big punchers.
Fights he's avoided - maybe Kell Brook, though they may fight soon. And he fought Saul Alvarez instead of Brook. Hardly cowardly.
Fights he's sought. Pretty much everyone apart from Brook. He's been ridiculed for pursuing a fight with Floyd Mayweather and then Manny Pacquiao, but the unlikely truth is that it was Mayweather who avoided him - Khan won an online poll Mayweather instigated as to who should be his next opponent, but he disregarded it. The strange fact is that Khan has been avoided by Mayweather and Pacquiao because they recognise that he has a higher chance of beating them than most other fighters.
Fights he's won - thus far, 33, including past, current or future world champions St Clair, Barrera, Kotelnik, Malignaggi, Maidana, Judah, Collazo, Alexander, Algieri. Four or five of those were at or close to their peak. Maidana is considered his greatest achievement and rightly so. A 12-round decision against one of the hardest punchers in boxing. That should have put all arguments to bed.
Fights he's lost - Breidis Prescott (1st round KO when he was still a teenager), Lamont Peterson (more to come), Danny Garcia KO, Canelo Alvarez KO. Garcia was a great disappointment, he got silly and got knocked out by a hard-hitting but beatable rival. Alvarez was a foolhardy, outlandishly brave fight to take. He did well for 6 rounds and then was chillingly, inevitably knocked out.
The Peterson fight stands as one of the most layered injustices in the most unjust sport of all. Any other night, any other sport, any other venue, Khan wins, or at least doesn't lose.
It was an even fight, in and of itself a good fight where Peterson outdid himself and Khan was slightly below his best but pretty good. It shouldn't have been that hard to score. Khan won a lot of rounds clearly, Peterson won several clearly. I had Khan taking 7, someone might have given him 8 or 6. He also knocked his opponent down twice. Not massive knockdowns, but knockdowns nevertheless. But one wasn't called, deemed a slip, though it was no more of a slip than the other.
Throughout the fight, Peterson led with his head, Khan tried to steer it away. Somehow or other, this resulted in two penalty points for Khan for pushing down. The ref was an inexperience hometown guy (the fight was in Peterson's hometown Washington).
There was something dodgy about the scorecards, a delay, an unaffiliated guy checking them. Khan lost a narrow split decision. If the fight had been in the UK, he'd have probably won 116-110 on all three cards. If the fight had been on neutral territory, he'd have probably won 115 or 114-111 on all three.
Anyway, all that, all that. And then Peterson failed a drugs test. Failed, admitted the offence. It still stands as a loss on Khan's record and a win on Peterson's.
Somehow. Khan ended up losing and being blamed for losing. Boxing is bullshit sometimes. Bullshit also in the way that it is seen as ludicrous rather than brave to be someone with a "weak chin", susceptible to being knocked out by a blow to the head, and yet to come back from embarrassing knockouts, to find a way to beat strong and powerful opponents.
Boxing is all warped manliness. but the perception of Khan is further warping of warped manliness. There's something obscene and inhuman about it.
No British boxer since I've followed the sport has been more reviled and ridiculed. Why is that?
He became famous, aged 17, winning a silver as Britain's only boxer at the 2004 Olympics. His spectacular hand speed saw him almost snatch gold off one of the world's best amateurs, Mario Kindelan of Cuba.
He turned pro the following year, but not before we'd seen the warning signs of him being knocked down in a slightly unedifying fashion by British amateur Craig Watson.
Still, ITV went to town on him, successfully bringing boxing to terrestrial Saturday nights.
The loathing began early and continues to this date - it is fairly common for there to be a little resentment of Olympian boxers getting the fast track to fame and fortune - call it the Audley Harrison factor. Harrison, a 2000 Olympic gold medallist, was also unfairly ridiculed and reviled throughout his professional career, but the (main) difference is he really did vastly underachieve, and, despite some pleasing moments, only ever reached the C level as a boxer.
The lie about Amir Khan is that he hasn't had a fine boxing career, that he is a cowardly, deluded, underachieving con. He is, pretty obviously when you look at the facts, none of those things.
Yet he is widely perceived in those terms. There are popular twitter accounts set up to mock him and boxing comments pages about him are never short on contempt. Even close to the mainstream, there is a steady line of sneering.
It is clear, getting the uncomfortable truth out of the way first, that racism plays a part in how some people have responded to a Muslim Pakistani-Briton. Blatantly, quite often. You don't have to go to far below the line to see it. And not far away from the blatant racism will be the insidious, unthinking, subtle racism. So let's tag that on to any other points.
Well, actually, not tag it on. We've already got a heady brew. Entitled Olympian, chinny, Muslim ... he was going to have to work hard to overcome that. Early on, I felt he'd be able to. Amir always seemed to be a bit of an endearing goof, overenthusiastic and prone to shout his mouth off in a slightly silly way, but in no way unpleasant and generally likeable. But it quickly became clear that Khan's personality would be held against him as much as anything else - full of arrogance and ignorance. I never saw it, certainly no more than many boxers.
Ultimately, how should Khan be judged? - on the fights he's taken, the fights he's avoided, the fights he's sought, the fights he's won, the fights he's lost.
Fights he's taken - after a few gimmes, he was fighting decent domestic level fighters early on, took a huge risk with his first fight on Sky, has fought multiple world champions including several big punchers.
Fights he's avoided - maybe Kell Brook, though they may fight soon. And he fought Saul Alvarez instead of Brook. Hardly cowardly.
Fights he's sought. Pretty much everyone apart from Brook. He's been ridiculed for pursuing a fight with Floyd Mayweather and then Manny Pacquiao, but the unlikely truth is that it was Mayweather who avoided him - Khan won an online poll Mayweather instigated as to who should be his next opponent, but he disregarded it. The strange fact is that Khan has been avoided by Mayweather and Pacquiao because they recognise that he has a higher chance of beating them than most other fighters.
Fights he's won - thus far, 33, including past, current or future world champions St Clair, Barrera, Kotelnik, Malignaggi, Maidana, Judah, Collazo, Alexander, Algieri. Four or five of those were at or close to their peak. Maidana is considered his greatest achievement and rightly so. A 12-round decision against one of the hardest punchers in boxing. That should have put all arguments to bed.
Fights he's lost - Breidis Prescott (1st round KO when he was still a teenager), Lamont Peterson (more to come), Danny Garcia KO, Canelo Alvarez KO. Garcia was a great disappointment, he got silly and got knocked out by a hard-hitting but beatable rival. Alvarez was a foolhardy, outlandishly brave fight to take. He did well for 6 rounds and then was chillingly, inevitably knocked out.
The Peterson fight stands as one of the most layered injustices in the most unjust sport of all. Any other night, any other sport, any other venue, Khan wins, or at least doesn't lose.
It was an even fight, in and of itself a good fight where Peterson outdid himself and Khan was slightly below his best but pretty good. It shouldn't have been that hard to score. Khan won a lot of rounds clearly, Peterson won several clearly. I had Khan taking 7, someone might have given him 8 or 6. He also knocked his opponent down twice. Not massive knockdowns, but knockdowns nevertheless. But one wasn't called, deemed a slip, though it was no more of a slip than the other.
Throughout the fight, Peterson led with his head, Khan tried to steer it away. Somehow or other, this resulted in two penalty points for Khan for pushing down. The ref was an inexperience hometown guy (the fight was in Peterson's hometown Washington).
There was something dodgy about the scorecards, a delay, an unaffiliated guy checking them. Khan lost a narrow split decision. If the fight had been in the UK, he'd have probably won 116-110 on all three cards. If the fight had been on neutral territory, he'd have probably won 115 or 114-111 on all three.
Anyway, all that, all that. And then Peterson failed a drugs test. Failed, admitted the offence. It still stands as a loss on Khan's record and a win on Peterson's.
Somehow. Khan ended up losing and being blamed for losing. Boxing is bullshit sometimes. Bullshit also in the way that it is seen as ludicrous rather than brave to be someone with a "weak chin", susceptible to being knocked out by a blow to the head, and yet to come back from embarrassing knockouts, to find a way to beat strong and powerful opponents.
Boxing is all warped manliness. but the perception of Khan is further warping of warped manliness. There's something obscene and inhuman about it.
Comments
Post a Comment