Good performance or poor opponent? **spoiler**

[davie]

I thought Brook looked absolutely punch perfect tonight but in the same breath his opponent looked a good few levels below world class.

Now sometimes a great fighter can make a good fighter look very ordinary but on other occasions bad opponents can make good fighter look special.

What was I watching tonight?
because the gulf in class was obvious and makes it very difficult to gauge just how good Brook was based on that showing.

[Boxing Prospect]

A bit of both. Solid performance against an opponent who was totally out of his depth.

[handsofstone]

Both really,Dan was out of his depth but Brook is no3 at least at WW ,he hasn't proved it of course but I see something that makes him more than a one time champ,he'll be hanging with the big guns soon enough

[ALI]

Crap oponent, Dan should not have been anywhere near a world title. Brook did what he had to do, i thought he missed a lot but its hard to rate his performance as Dan was out of his depth and out to spoil from the get go.

[Ian1973]

More poor opponent to be honest. Before the fight I didn't think Dan was any good at genuine world level and the fight pretty much confirmed that. I don't think we learned anything about Brook last night, Dan was not world level and i think most people thought that before the fight.

[Parson Cross]

A mans got to do what a mans got to do.
Kell didn't make him mandatory.
On to the next one

[keirw]

Bit of both, Dan looks Euro level at best, I think Dan vs Gavin would be a 50/50 fight.
Brook destroyed him in good fashion though, hope it is Khan or Marquez next, he needs a proper high level test

[reggaereggae]

I thought Dan shaped up quite well in the first half of round 1... But it seemed like he had no reflexes or timing. He just couldn't react.

Ultimately given Brook's physical injury and the mental issues thereof it was a very good performance.

[handsofstone]

Bit of both, Dan looks Euro level at best, I think Dan vs Gavin would be a 50/50 fight.
Brook destroyed him in good fashion though, hope it is Khan or Marquez next, he needs a proper high level test

Gavin vs Dan would be an awful fight to watch,it'd be a great fight for Frankie personally to gain experience but 2 southpaws who aren't particularly slick,certainly not Jo Jo anyway

For me Gavin still hasn't found his style in the pros yet

[TheGman]

Remember salita vs khan that was more of a mismatch,jo jo dan did look like he had had about 8 pints of stella tho even in round 1 haha

[TheGman]

Bit of both, Dan looks Euro level at best, I think Dan vs Gavin would be a 50/50 fight.
Brook destroyed him in good fashion though, hope it is Khan or Marquez next, he needs a proper high level test

Ill never watch gavin again he is the most boring fighter since junior sh1tter

[davie]

I'm inclined to agree with the view that it was more a poor opponent.

But I think we can still take something from Brooks performance.
Carson Jones was no better an opponent than Jo Jo, yet Kelly really struggled with him.

At the time there was a feeling that Kell was struggling with motivation waiting for the big fights.

The condition he's got himself in and the way he dealt with Jo Jo, in my opinion, is a long way from the Kell of a couple years back.

Does it tell us how he'll deal with a Mayweather or Pacquiao? Or even a Thurman, Khan or Marquez? Probably not.
But we can certainly tell Kell's fighting to his very best now.

[Old Jack J]

A mans got to do what a mans got to do.
Kell didn't make him mandatory.
On to the next one

Absolutely.

[MightyWarrior]

Absolutely hopeless opponent

[Parson Cross]

Take it up with the sanctioning body.
Whoever they made mandatory Kell was ready willing and able.
Getting that mandatory out of the way opens up a whole new pathway.

[sammy95]

Solid performance from Brook, got rid of his mandatory in terrific style a la Froch vs Mack and Frampton vs Avalos.

I was however impressed by Dan's survival skills in the 2nd, 3rd and the first two minutes of the 4th. Someone like Tommy Coyle could learn from it, even if it was on the fringe of illegality. Or perhaps if Derry Matthews gets in trouble early in a few weeks time, especially with Matthew's power, so its not all bad from Dan..... despite being utterly outclassed.

[bigjack]

Bit of both, Dan looks Euro level at best, I think Dan vs Gavin would be a 50/50 fight.
Brook destroyed him in good fashion though, hope it is Khan or Marquez next, he needs a proper high level test

Ill never watch gavin again he is the most boring fighter since junior sh1tter

He's worse than Witter,Junior did put on one or two good shows,but i haven't seen one from Gavin,admittedly i have only watched him about 3 times and that was more than enough for me i'm afraid

[ALI]

Take it up with the sanctioning body.
Whoever they made mandatory Kell was ready willing and able.
Getting that mandatory out of the way opens up a whole new pathway.

Waste of time.
I'm sure he was.
It does.

Jo Jo Dan was garbage.

[ThereByTheGrace]

Shockingly bad no1 contender, waste of time for everyone.

[Parson Cross]

Why is it a waste of time to deal with your mandatory obligations ?
What would you have him do - vacate ?

[bripez]

A mans got to do what a mans got to do.
Kell didn't make him mandatory.
On to the next one

Are you sure ? - maybe not Kell himself, but I am see that somebody close to him had a hand in it.

The word mandatory implies that the boxer is the best ranked opponent - eg the bodies number 2 ranked fighting the champion.

This word is used by the promoter to sell the fight to a wider audience who are likely to be led to believe that they are seeing a fight between the 2 top ranked boxers.

I would like to understand how he was made mandatory for this fight - it is not as if he had boxed in any eliminator or held some IBF Silver title or something ?

Eddie hasa track record of doing deals with the IBF, who are not exactly the most virtuous of the sanctioning bodies based on their history.

I can understand the promoter wanting this level of opponent for a first defence (particularly given his out if the ring problems) but to sell this fight as a champion v mandatory (in the true sense) is misleading.

Queue people coming out with the usual "Kell can only fight who is in front of him" or "ask the body why he was mandatory" but this is just a cop out answer that is deliberately avoiding the true issue that the boxing fans are being deliberately misled yet again.

If the fight was sold as Kell having a bit of an easy first defence then I don't have problem with that - I have a problem with the various spin doctors trying to tell me that it is something that it is not.

[expe]

A mans got to do what a mans got to do.
Kell didn't make him mandatory.
On to the next one

Are you sure ? - maybe not Kell himself, but I am see that somebody close to him had a hand in it.

The word mandatory implies that the boxer is the best ranked opponent - eg the bodies number 2 ranked fighting the champion.

This word is used by the promoter to sell the fight to a wider audience who are likely to be led to believe that they are seeing a fight between the 2 top ranked boxers.

I would like to understand how he was made mandatory for this fight - it is not as if he had boxed in any eliminator or held some IBF Silver title or something ?

Eddie hasa track record of doing deals with the IBF, who are not exactly the most virtuous of the sanctioning bodies based on their history.

I can understand the promoter wanting this level of opponent for a first defence (particularly given his out if the ring problems) but to sell this fight as a champion v mandatory (in the true sense) is misleading.

Queue people coming out with the usual "Kell can only fight who is in front of him" or "ask the body why he was mandatory" but this is just a cop out answer that is deliberately avoiding the true issue that the boxing fans are being deliberately misled yet again.

If the fight was sold as Kell having a bit of an easy first defence then I don't have problem with that - I have a problem with the various spin doctors trying to tell me that it is something that it is not.

The Bizier fights were eliminators, winning those two made him mandatory. The IBF generally don't make anyone mandatory without winning at least one eliminator, usually two, but at times the standard of the fighters in the eliminators leaves something to be desired, there's far better fighters at welterweight that were much more deserving of an eliminator than Bizier and Dan.

[Switch hitter]

Not a bad "comeback " opponent because of the leg.Lets not forget Dan had never been stopped and Kel did a job on him and looked very good doing it.....lets hope there's a bigger test next time out

[Andrew]

A mans got to do what a mans got to do.
Kell didn't make him mandatory.
On to the next one

Are you sure ? - maybe not Kell himself, but I am see that somebody close to him had a hand in it.

The word mandatory implies that the boxer is the best ranked opponent - eg the bodies number 2 ranked fighting the champion.

This word is used by the promoter to sell the fight to a wider audience who are likely to be led to believe that they are seeing a fight between the 2 top ranked boxers.

I would like to understand how he was made mandatory for this fight - it is not as if he had boxed in any eliminator or held some IBF Silver title or something ?

Eddie hasa track record of doing deals with the IBF, who are not exactly the most virtuous of the sanctioning bodies based on their history.

I can understand the promoter wanting this level of opponent for a first defence (particularly given his out if the ring problems) but to sell this fight as a champion v mandatory (in the true sense) is misleading.

Queue people coming out with the usual "Kell can only fight who is in front of him" or "ask the body why he was mandatory" but this is just a cop out answer that is deliberately avoiding the true issue that the boxing fans are being deliberately misled yet again.

If the fight was sold as Kell having a bit of an easy first defence then I don't have problem with that - I have a problem with the various spin doctors trying to tell me that it is something that it is not.

The Bizier fights were eliminators, winning those two made him mandatory. The IBF generally don't make anyone mandatory without winning at least one eliminator, usually two, but at times the standard of the fighters in the eliminators leaves something to be desired, there's far better fighters at welterweight that were much more deserving of an eliminator than Bizier and Dan.

Was due to be Bundu fighting the final eliminator v Dan but he pulled out to fight Thurman

[bripez]

Not a bad "comeback " opponent because of the leg.Lets not forget Dan had never been stopped and Kel did a job on him and looked very good doing it.....lets hope there's a bigger test next time out

I don't disagree - it is just annoying when the fight is sold as champion v mandatory which implies something that it isn't.