Donaire vs. Montiel: Nonito wants to fight Kameda in unification bout if victorius over Fernando

By Boxing News - 01/03/2011 - Comments

By Chris Williams: Former IBF flyweight champion Nonito Donaire (25-1, 17 KO’s) has a lot of ambition and dreams for the future which go beyond his fight against WBC/WBO bantamweight champion Fernando Montiel (44-2-2, 34 KO’s) on February 19th at the Mandalay Bay Resort & Casino, in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Donaire, 28, just hope and pray that he gets through that fight on his feet and doesn’t wind up another one of Montiel’s many knockout victims. But Donaire is looking at taking on World Boxing Association (WBA) bantamweight champion Koki Kameda (24-1, 15 KO’s) in a unification bout in the near future if Donaire can beat Montiel.

Kameda is someone that Donaire would beat without any problems, as Kameda isn’t that great of fighter and is easy to hit with shots. He’s not very powerful, but he’s tough to beat if you fight him in Japan, because you have to deal with the judging and Donaire would have to likely knock Kameda out to ensure that he gets a win.

However, this is all just blather, because Donaire has his hands full against a much better fighter in Montiel. Donaire can worry about taking on and beating paper champions like Kameda later on if he’s able to beat Montiel.

I don’t rate Kameda at all, and see him as the ultimate paper champion. I see him as like number #16 or #17 in the bantamweight division far below guys like Montiel, Joseph Agbeko, Abner Mares, Yonnhy Perez, Vic Darchinyan, Anselmo Moreno, Chistian Mijares, Silence Mabuz, Eric Morel, Wladimir Sidorenko and many more. Donaire, if he wants to accomplish something, he needs to go after these guys rather than someone like Kameda.

That’s a waste of time to collect paper titles. If Donaire wants to be like Manny Pacquiao, he should keep moving up in weight instead of wasting time collecting titles against fighters that aren’t even nearly the best in the division. Although come to think of it, Pacquiao does this kind of thing too, so I stand corrected.



Comments are closed.