Juniors talents made him a world champion but he was largely very unlucky and is still fighting today to make a living.
These Brook injuries. Is he heading the same way?
Discuss. ( if you want to)
How can you conclude the injuries are preventable and through a lack of self-care?Horse wrote:Witter had his chances in the limelight and he blew it.
Brook shouldn't be injuring himself in training. He should look after himself more.
Neither has really been unlucky.
Why should I not be able to?Finch wrote:How can you conclude the injuries are preventable and through a lack of self-care?
He said how. As do I.Horse wrote:Why should I not be able to?Finch wrote:How can you conclude the injuries are preventable and through a lack of self-care?
Injuries are totally unpreventable are they?DMA1987 wrote:He said how. As do I.
How?
Whatyoutalkingabouthorse?Horse wrote:
Neither has really been unlucky.
Err... perhaps because you have zero insight, knowledge or evidence on which to base your conclusion...Horse wrote:Why should I not be able to?Finch wrote:How can you conclude the injuries are preventable and through a lack of self-care?
Uh ohDeserter wrote:Err... perhaps because you have zero insight, knowledge or evidence on which to base your conclusion...Horse wrote:Why should I not be able to?Finch wrote:How can you conclude the injuries are preventable and through a lack of self-care?
Witter was utterly pathetic and unwilling to take any risks against a shot to pieces Corley for the vacant WBC title. In that fight he should have been looking to put on a show to try to get a fight against Hatton.Ratchet Exits Nu wrote:Whatyoutalkingabouthorse?
Hello, bullyboy.Deserter wrote:Err... perhaps because you have zero insight, knowledge or evidence on which to base your conclusion...
I think it completely depends on an entire series of variables, none of which we're privvy to, which is why you can't make a definitive conclusion at this stage. Someone like Darren Barker suffers far more than someone like Marvin Hagler in terms of injuries, doesn't make them any less valid.Horse wrote:Hello, bullyboy.Deserter wrote:Err... perhaps because you have zero insight, knowledge or evidence on which to base your conclusion...![]()
Do you not think a fighter is capable of training for a fight without getting injured twice?
But he won?Horse wrote:Witter was utterly pathetic and unwilling to take any risks against a shot to pieces Corley for the vacant WBC title. In that fight he should have been looking to put on a show to try to get a fight against Hatton.Ratchet Exits Nu wrote:Whatyoutalkingabouthorse?
Hatton was in the studio dumbfounded by Witter's spineless performance. Witter's performance was a disgrace.
Brook should be watching where he steps. Brook has had two seperate injuries in the lead up to this fight, that is unusual.Deserter wrote:I think it completely depends on an entire series of variables, none of which we're privvy to, which is why you can't make a definitive conclusion at this stage. Someone like Darren Barker suffers far more than someone like Marvin Hagler in terms of injuries, doesn't make them any less valid.
What do you know about Brooks training regime that has led you to this conclusion? The fact is you don't. For example, if one of the two injuries was caused by tripping up in the street one morning when he wasn't training, would you still maintain your conclusion that his set-up is at fault?
He beat Corley in a safety first performance. So what?Ratchet Exits Nu wrote:But he won?
Witter made it an easy fight to avoid.Ratchet Exits Nu wrote:Didnt Hatton avoid Witter for a while?
His cowardly performance against Corley significantly reduced the chances of Hatton vs Witter taking place.Ratchet Exits Nu wrote:After all the obstacles I am not surprised it was a cautious fight.
I actually agree with what you're saying here, both in terms of it being unusual and in terms of losing the benefit of the doubt from some of us. All I'm saying is that you can't definitively conclude what it is, as it's not impossible that it's all completely genuine. Hopefully the truth will come out in the wash...Horse wrote:Brook should be watching where he steps. Brook has had two seperate injuries in the lead up to this fight, that is unusual.Deserter wrote:I think it completely depends on an entire series of variables, none of which we're privvy to, which is why you can't make a definitive conclusion at this stage. Someone like Darren Barker suffers far more than someone like Marvin Hagler in terms of injuries, doesn't make them any less valid.
What do you know about Brooks training regime that has led you to this conclusion? The fact is you don't. For example, if one of the two injuries was caused by tripping up in the street one morning when he wasn't training, would you still maintain your conclusion that his set-up is at fault?
He has lost my benefit of the doubt, others can make what they will of his predicament.
Horse wrote:He beat Corley in a safety first performance. So what?Ratchet Exits Nu wrote:But he won?
Witter made it an easy fight to avoid.Ratchet Exits Nu wrote:Didnt Hatton avoid Witter for a while?
His cowardly performance against Corley significantly reduced the chances of Hatton vs Witter taking place.Ratchet Exits Nu wrote:After all the obstacles I am not surprised it was a cautious fight.
Do you remember his stupid fighting stance in that fight?
Hatton didn't need Witter. At that time, he moved on to face Castillo in Vegas and to take of Mayweather. Much more appealing options than fighting an extremely tricky fighter who is a level belowRatchet Exits Nu wrote:
Nayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!
Hatton conned the public, he lies, he dodged and moved goal posts.
Thank God for the Benns and Eubanks who did it for the uk fans.
As the saying goes, you can lead a HORSE to water but you can't make him DR(TH)INK!
Nahhhaaayyy!
last time it was achilles related, this time its meta-tarsal/navicular related, might be on the end of the same limb, but completely different injuries!!winkveron wrote:From what I gather it's the same injury that has recurred (or at least related to the last one) and that it wasn't properly diagnosed last time out. It's not like he's clocking up a load of different injuries due to lack of care. I also don't think he's "ducking" Alexander as a few people have suggested. This is the 3rd postponement. If he was ducking him they had a perfect chance after the first 2 to go another route.
PS Hatton vs Witter talk on every single thread zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
does not always work like that, a marathon runner can get a stress fracture even though they have doen the same training for 12 marathons before. its like spraining an ankle or jarring an achilles or a hamstring. injuries happen, they are part of sport im afraid. looks like the brook alexander fight is destined not to happen. maybe kell should change his line of attack to knocking amir khan out! this would give kell mega incentive as im sure he is well fed up of the alexander scenario.expe wrote:It's Brook or his teams fault that he's had to pull out, a stress fracture is down to overuse, so he's trained too hard and his body hasn't been able to take the load.