Eddie Hearns confirms its likely to be Senchenko

[crusader]

It's not a good fight, but I don't think it's poor either.

Senchenko is probably top 15 or so, has momentum due to his high-profile KO of Hatton, and is arguably among the best 2 fighters that Brook has faced; it's not as if Brook is an established world-beater like Bradley, Pacquiao, Marquez, etc, and dropping a level below where's he tends to fight. I'd like Brook to fight a legitimate world-class opponent, but this isn't bad.

Hatton wasnt even established at welterweight though so that adds to the argument that it's a mediocre fight. Also saying he is arguably among the two best fighters Brook has fought says more about Brook's opposition than anything else.

I think the quality of this fight should be judged partially on how it compares to Brook's previous fights. Senchenko is probably a step-up from the type of opponents Brook usually faces, so I think that adds some quality to the fight. I'd also like Brook to fight better opposition, and a bout against a world class fighter would be rightfully considered a good bout as opposed to an okay bout, but Senchenko is probably only a level below the type of opponents who would make for good bouts.

Hatton was a world champion at 147, but again, Senchenko's win over him was most significant for marketability and momentum, not what it suggests about his quality.

[lefty]

It's not a good fight, but I don't think it's poor either.

Senchenko is probably top 15 or so, has momentum due to his high-profile KO of Hatton, and is arguably among the best 2 fighters that Brook has faced; it's not as if Brook is an established world-beater like Bradley, Pacquiao, Marquez, etc, and dropping a level below where's he tends to fight. I'd like Brook to fight a legitimate world-class opponent, but this isn't bad.

Hatton wasnt even established at welterweight though so that adds to the argument that it's a mediocre fight. Also saying he is arguably among the two best fighters Brook has fought says more about Brook's opposition than anything else.

I think the quality of this fight should be judged partially on how it compares to Brook's previous fights. Senchenko is probably a step-up from the type of opponents Brook usually faces, so I think that adds some quality to the fight. I'd also like Brook to fight better opposition, and a bout against a world class fighter would be rightfully considered a good bout as opposed to an okay bout, but Senchenko is probably only a level below the type of opponents who would make for good bouts.

Hatton was a world champion at 147, but again, Senchenko's win over him was most significant for marketability and momentum, not what it suggests about his quality.

Is Senchenko definietly a better fighter than Carson Jones though? I mean take the Hatton win out of the equation, who has Senchenko beaten? Atleast Jones beat Said Ouali who is a fringe world class fighter and been in with some decent fighters.

[macaca]

He was stopped by a body shot. I dont think he was getting up from that to be fair

I know but unless I dreamed it he said he quit, he could have continued but he just knew

[rio]

So brook is fighting Senchenko......im questions is when is Hearn making the big announcement about Brooks next opponent??? Because this certainly isn't it!!

You can see it now, the promotion for this fight is brook is facing this absolute animal that ended hattons career leaving out the fact it was a shop worn hatton who hadn't fought in nearly 4 years.

This will be 31 fights for Brook and he's faced no one. Joke. Love it how Hearn mentioned Guerrero as a potential opponent, there was never any danger.

[crusader]

Is Senchenko definietly a better fighter than Carson Jones though? I mean take the Hatton win out of the equation, who has Senchenko beaten? Atleast Jones beat Said Ouali who is a fringe world class fighter and been in with some decent fighters.

If you're going to exclude Hatton, you should exclude one of Jones's better opponents too.

I don't think Ouali was much better than Nuzhnenko. I also think Senchenko has a stronger recent resume (Nuzhnenko, Hatton, Klose, Navarro, Avendando > Ouali, Conyers, Clark, Williams Jr. LeHoullier) and he doesn't have losses or draws against fighters like Byrne, Raines, or Pereira. I'd favor Senchenko over Jones, and I believe the latter is greatly flattered by the first Brook encounter.

[lefty]

Is Senchenko definietly a better fighter than Carson Jones though? I mean take the Hatton win out of the equation, who has Senchenko beaten? Atleast Jones beat Said Ouali who is a fringe world class fighter and been in with some decent fighters.

If you're going to exclude Hatton, you should exclude one of Jones's better opponents too.

I don't think Ouali was much better than Nuzhnenko. I also think Senchenko has a stronger recent resume (Nuzhnenko, Hatton, Klose, Navarro, Avendando > Ouali, Conyers, Clark, Williams Jr. LeHoullier) and he doesn't have losses or draws against fighters like Byrne, Raines, or Pereira. I'd favor Senchenko over Jones, and I believe the latter is greatly flattered by the first Brook encounter.

Nuzhnenko is probably his best win outside of Hatton and he lost to Matthew Hatton who's hardly a world beater. Also I wouldnt exclude one of Jones's opponents because they wernt completely over the hill and hadnt fought in over 3 years like when Senechenko fought Ricky.

[crusader]

Nuzhnenko was a solid EBU-level fighter and Senchenko beat him fairly easily and more convincingly than Hatton did. Collectively, and when accounting for losses and draws, I think Senchenko clearly has a better resume than Jones does and he hasn't shown limitations to the extent Jones has.

Ricky was definitely not his best against Senchenko, but I think he was still better than most of Jones's top victims, such as Conyers, Clark, and Williams Jr., who were likely post-prime too and not as good to start with.

[lefty]

Nuzhnenko was a solid EBU-level fighter and Senchenko beat him fairly easily and more convincingly than Hatton did. Collectively, and when accounting for losses and draws, I think Senchenko clearly has a better resume than Jones does and he hasn't shown limitations to the extent Jones has.

Ricky was definitely not his best against Senchenko, but I think he was still better than some of Jones's top victims, such as Conyers, Clark, and Williams Jr., who were likely post-prime too and not as good to start with.

Senchenko was still losing on the cards against Hatton though until that body shot. That doesnt bode well for fighting Brook.

[crusader]

He was losing until he won by KO, and he would've been ahead if Hatton arose.

Obviously Senchenko has limitations and isn't a great opponent, but that doesn't mean this is a joke fight.

[jameswilson]

I dont see what the fuss is to be honest, i think the senchenko fight is a good one for brook, obviously there is better out there but this is far from a joke fight IMO. If brook beats senchenko then im sure a big american name will be around the corner

I think that most people don't see what the fuss is about to be honest. But columbo's been on the warpath for a while with regards Kell Brook now and until he gets his title shot that won't change.

[jameswilson]

Nuzhnenko was a solid EBU-level fighter and Senchenko beat him fairly easily and more convincingly than Hatton did. Collectively, and when accounting for losses and draws, I think Senchenko clearly has a better resume than Jones does and he hasn't shown limitations to the extent Jones has.

Ricky was definitely not his best against Senchenko, but I think he was still better than some of Jones's top victims, such as Conyers, Clark, and Williams Jr., who were likely post-prime too and not as good to start with.

Senchenko was still losing on the cards against Hatton though until that body shot. That doesnt bode well for fighting Brook.

Carl Froch was losing going into the 12th v Taylor. People might say that doesn't bode well, but Froch aint done bad has he?

You have effectively just said 'he was losing until he won.'

So he won then? Good, glad that is settled.

[lefty]

Nuzhnenko was a solid EBU-level fighter and Senchenko beat him fairly easily and more convincingly than Hatton did. Collectively, and when accounting for losses and draws, I think Senchenko clearly has a better resume than Jones does and he hasn't shown limitations to the extent Jones has.

Ricky was definitely not his best against Senchenko, but I think he was still better than some of Jones's top victims, such as Conyers, Clark, and Williams Jr., who were likely post-prime too and not as good to start with.

Senchenko was still losing on the cards against Hatton though until that body shot. That doesnt bode well for fighting Brook.

Carl Froch was losing going into the 12th v Taylor. People might say that doesn't bode well, but Froch aint done bad has he?

You have effectively just said 'he was losing until he won.'

So he won then? Good, glad that is settled.

Yeah but Taylor wasnt shot worn like Hatton. Im glad that's settled

[lefty]

I dont see what the fuss is to be honest, i think the senchenko fight is a good one for brook, obviously there is better out there but this is far from a joke fight IMO. If brook beats senchenko then im sure a big american name will be around the corner

I think that most people don't see what the fuss is about to be honest. But columbo's been on the warpath for a while with regards Kell Brook now and until he gets his title shot that won't change.

Because he fights medicore opposition time after time.

[youngrell]

While Senchenko is a bit of anti climax after Hearn saying a 'big name', I don't think it's a bad fight at all.

Most people were praising Hatton for going in with someone as tough as Senchenko on his return, Senchenko goes on to take everything Ricky could throw at him, bided his time and then pounced at the right moment, yet Senchenko is now a stroll in the park for Brook?

I think if he can take Brooks best in the early stages like he did with Hatton, Senchenko could make the second half of the fight quite interesting.

The fight isn't that bad, just a lil disappointing after expecting a 'big' name.

[lefty]

While Senchenko is a bit of anti climax after Hearn saying a 'big name', I don't think it's a bad fight at all.

Most people were praising Hatton for going in with someone as tough as Senchenko on his return, Senchenko goes on to take everything Ricky could throw at him, bided his time and then pounced at the right moment, yet Senchenko is now a stroll in the park for Brook?

I think if he can take Brooks best in the early stages like he did with Hatton, Senchenko could make the second half of the fight quite interesting.

The fight isn't that bad, just a lil disappointing after expecting a 'big' name.

I guarantee Brook will deal with him fairly comfortably. He got completely outboxed by Malignaggi who surprisingly *jk* lost to a prime Hatton.

[jameswilson]

I dont see what the fuss is to be honest, i think the senchenko fight is a good one for brook, obviously there is better out there but this is far from a joke fight IMO. If brook beats senchenko then im sure a big american name will be around the corner

I think that most people don't see what the fuss is about to be honest. But columbo's been on the warpath for a while with regards Kell Brook now and until he gets his title shot that won't change.

Because he fights medicore opposition time after time.

He has had injury problems. He is treading water at the mo because he is mandatory for the IBF. No promoter in their right mind is gonna stick a guy who's got a guaranteed shot at a World title in with a real enormous name like a Guererro or Maidana. When the names were mentioned I knew it was gonna be Lopes or Senchenko.

Kell's mandatory, hasn't fought for a World title before and is coming back from injury. The mediocre guys he fought before his injury were selected by the IBF, if you were Kell's promoter I'd love to see the conversation you'd have with the IBF saying 'ah well you see IBF we are sorry but we aren't happy with your selection of Carson Jones or Victor Saldiva......'

Another example of someone who is going to tread water now is Pulev. He's been fighting tough fights really early in his career, but now he is mandatory (or will be announced as the mandatory soon) so I can tell you now he aint gonna go near anyone remotely dangerous.

[lefty]

I dont see what the fuss is to be honest, i think the senchenko fight is a good one for brook, obviously there is better out there but this is far from a joke fight IMO. If brook beats senchenko then im sure a big american name will be around the corner

I think that most people don't see what the fuss is about to be honest. But columbo's been on the warpath for a while with regards Kell Brook now and until he gets his title shot that won't change.

Because he fights medicore opposition time after time.

He has had injury problems. He is treading water at the mo because he is mandatory for the IBF. No promoter in their right mind is gonna stick a guy who's got a guaranteed shot at a World title in with a real enormous name like a Guererro or Maidana. When the names were mentioned I knew it was gonna be Lopes or Senchenko.

Kell's mandatory, hasn't fought for a World title before and is coming back from injury. The mediocre guys he fought before his injury were selected by the IBF, if you were Kell's promoter I'd love to see the conversation you'd have with the IBF saying 'ah well you see IBF we are sorry but we aren't happy with your selection of Carson Jones or Victor Saldiva......'

Another example of someone who is going to tread water now is Pulev. He's been fighting tough fights really early in his career, but now he is mandatory (or will be announced as the mandatory soon) so I can tell you now he aint gonna go near anyone remotely dangerous.[/quote]


The difference is that Pulev has been willing to fight tough opposition. He was going to fight Fury in a final eliminator before Fury pulled out to fight Haye. It's completely different situation. Also, how many fights has Pulev had in comparison to Brook? Less than half.

[jameswilson]

The difference is that Pulev has been willing to fight tough opposition. He was going to fight Fury in a final eliminator before Fury pulled out to fight Haye. It's completely different situation.

The difference is the IBF ordered Brook to fight a patsy, and ordered Pulev to fight Tyson Fury. That aint Kell Brook or Eddie Hearn's fault it's the IBF's fault for ordering it. You can sit and say Hearn and Brook would have relinquished their ranking with the IBF if the IBF ordered Brook to fight Maidana but that'll just be opinion rather than fact.

[lefty]

The difference is that Pulev has been willing to fight tough opposition. He was going to fight Fury in a final eliminator before Fury pulled out to fight Haye. It's completely different situation.

The difference is the IBF ordered Brook to fight a patsy, and ordered Pulev to fight Tyson Fury. That aint Kell Brook or Eddie Hearn's fault it's the IBF's fault for ordering it. You can sit and say Hearn and Brook would have relinquished their ranking with the IBF if the IBF ordered Brook to fight Maidana but that'll just be opinion rather than fact.

What so Hearn and Brook couldnt of made a fight with the likes of a Maidana, Malignaggi, Guerrero or Ortiz then?

[jameswilson]

The difference is that Pulev has been willing to fight tough opposition. He was going to fight Fury in a final eliminator before Fury pulled out to fight Haye. It's completely different situation.

The difference is the IBF ordered Brook to fight a patsy, and ordered Pulev to fight Tyson Fury. That aint Kell Brook or Eddie Hearn's fault it's the IBF's fault for ordering it. You can sit and say Hearn and Brook would have relinquished their ranking with the IBF if the IBF ordered Brook to fight Maidana but that'll just be opinion rather than fact.

What so Hearn and Brook couldnt of made a fight with the likes of a Maidana, Malignaggi, Guerrero or Ortiz then?

For this fight? Or before Brooks injury when they were at the eliminator and final eliminator stage?

If you mean for this fight, yeah of course they could, but it would be huge risk for no reward (except for Mallinagi, I don't think his name was ever mentioned for this fight.) There would be no World title win if they did win and it would be a hell of a tough fight being just the one fight back since the injury. Those risks at the mo are only worthwhile for Kell with a World title on the line.

If you mean before Brooks injury then no they can't dictate to the IBF who they fight a final eliminator against. The sanctioning body decides that based on their rankings. And if their rankings are poor then you get an easy final eliminator and if not you get a tough one.

[ajwesty13]

i didnt know that brook was to fight Senchenko when commenting about Brooks career and defending the fact that its more frustrating than boring... i am a fan of Kell and MR but i have to be honest i feel quite let down .... the reason for the disappointment is that we were led a merry dance after the way eddie was talking like a big title shot was on the horizon... maybe there was some sort of big title fight and then it led nowhere but alas not the fight i was expecting ....

[rio]

The difference is that Pulev has been willing to fight tough opposition. He was going to fight Fury in a final eliminator before Fury pulled out to fight Haye. It's completely different situation.

The difference is the IBF ordered Brook to fight a patsy, and ordered Pulev to fight Tyson Fury. That aint Kell Brook or Eddie Hearn's fault it's the IBF's fault for ordering it. You can sit and say Hearn and Brook would have relinquished their ranking with the IBF if the IBF ordered Brook to fight Maidana but that'll just be opinion rather than fact.

What so Hearn and Brook couldnt of made a fight with the likes of a Maidana, Malignaggi, Guerrero or Ortiz then?

You think Hearn even tried to make any of those fights?? No chance. All to dangerous.

[tallsdav]

Aside from probably maidana because he fought khan, senchenko is by far the biggest name that has been mentioned. Because biggest means known by the masses.

Who actually cares about fans like us who can quote the smallest details about a boxers careers?! How many casual fans will have heard of lopes or even guerro?!

They can market this as brook taking revenge for his pal Ricky's defeat. It's all marketing hype an bollox. They're hoping kell can pick up a load of hattons fans from this. Good business but as a boxer will we know anymore about brook after this fight? Probably not.

It seems some on here think its all about seeing who the best fighter is and nothing to do with cashing in on fighters at the fans expense. We are the mugs for hoping for decent fights.

[lefty]

Aside from probably maidana because he fought khan, senchenko is by far the biggest name that has been mentioned. Because biggest means known by the masses.

Who actually cares about fans like us who can quote the smallest details about a boxers careers?! How many casual fans will have heard of lopes or even guerro?!

They can market this as brook taking revenge for his pal Ricky's defeat. It's all marketing hype an bollox. They're hoping kell can pick up a load of hattons fans from this. Good business but as a boxer will we know anymore about brook after this fight? Probably not.

It seems some on here think its all about seeing who the best fighter is and nothing to do with cashing in on fighters at the fans expense. We are the mugs for hoping for decent fights.

Na im totally aware of that. Doesnt mean I have to like it though.

[squared circle]

Its an OK fight.

Not great, not terrible.

Eddie is getting shit purely cos of his rhetoric over last few weeks on it. He should have just said we are waiting for kells mandatory situation to become clearer, so we're looking at another Jones level fighter to keep kell ticking over as he continues to recover from injury.

And this fight promotes itself now and should earn kell some £££