Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Brook vs. Bradley: who wins?

Poll ended at 03 Aug 2018, 14:23

Brook by KO/TKO
11
16%
Brook by decision
21
30%
Bradley by KO/TKO
2
3%
Bradley by decision
25
36%
Evenly matched, difficult to predict
10
14%
 
Total votes: 69

johnswan1
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 3348
Joined: 27 Feb 2005, 18:03

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by johnswan1 »

caldo2025 wrote:Here you have two WAY different fighters. One is a future HOF'er who clearly wants to fight the best in the world and proves it every year. The other got lucky in a fight with Porter and has now hijacked the title refusing to fight anyone worth a damn.

I'm so sick of boxers like Brook. Boxing is full of these punks that get lucky and grab a title and then they suddenly think that they are God's gift to boxing. This is why we have these lopsided fights nowadays because no one wants the tough fight against a top challenger. Nowadays, winning a title means that you get to showcase yourself and gets punks like Gavin and Dan first.

Kell Brooks a dickhead.
Brook isn't ducking anybody. He wants the big fights. He's realistic in accepting that he was never in the running for Floyd or Pac, and being a relatively unknown name in the States Khan is the obvious big fight for him. Khan is the one scuppering that fight. Who is calling out Brook? I know Thurman mentioned it once, but that was him, not his team, and the PBC decide who he fights.
caldo2025
Super Welterweight
Posts: 4417
Joined: 16 Dec 2014, 07:37

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by caldo2025 »

johnswan1 wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:Here you have two WAY different fighters. One is a future HOF'er who clearly wants to fight the best in the world and proves it every year. The other got lucky in a fight with Porter and has now hijacked the title refusing to fight anyone worth a damn.

I'm so sick of boxers like Brook. Boxing is full of these punks that get lucky and grab a title and then they suddenly think that they are God's gift to boxing. This is why we have these lopsided fights nowadays because no one wants the tough fight against a top challenger. Nowadays, winning a title means that you get to showcase yourself and gets punks like Gavin and Dan first.

Kell Brooks a dickhead.
Brook isn't ducking anybody. He wants the big fights. He's realistic in accepting that he was never in the running for Floyd or Pac, and being a relatively unknown name in the States Khan is the obvious big fight for him. Khan is the one scuppering that fight. Who is calling out Brook? I know Thurman mentioned it once, but that was him, not his team, and the PBC decide who he fights.
What the heck has Brook done to deserve a big fight? He's just another punk that thinks the world is awaiting his every move. What happened to Chaves? He signs on to fight him and then decides "oh wait, nevermind man". It's just another punk move in what has been one punk move after another from this prick. All that he and Khan want to do is call out people every other day and sit around not fighting anyone good.

Like Boxing is really awaiting their every move. Get lost Brook and Khan. GO screw, the two of ya.
danamba7
Middleweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 30 Sep 2013, 09:30

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by danamba7 »

caldo2025 wrote:
johnswan1 wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:Here you have two WAY different fighters. One is a future HOF'er who clearly wants to fight the best in the world and proves it every year. The other got lucky in a fight with Porter and has now hijacked the title refusing to fight anyone worth a damn.

I'm so sick of boxers like Brook. Boxing is full of these punks that get lucky and grab a title and then they suddenly think that they are God's gift to boxing. This is why we have these lopsided fights nowadays because no one wants the tough fight against a top challenger. Nowadays, winning a title means that you get to showcase yourself and gets punks like Gavin and Dan first.

Kell Brooks a dickhead.
Brook isn't ducking anybody. He wants the big fights. He's realistic in accepting that he was never in the running for Floyd or Pac, and being a relatively unknown name in the States Khan is the obvious big fight for him. Khan is the one scuppering that fight. Who is calling out Brook? I know Thurman mentioned it once, but that was him, not his team, and the PBC decide who he fights.
What the heck has Brook done to deserve a big fight? He's just another punk that thinks the world is awaiting his every move. What happened to Chaves? He signs on to fight him and then decides "oh wait, nevermind man". It's just another punk move in what has been one punk move after another from this prick. All that he and Khan want to do is call out people every other day and sit around not fighting anyone good.

Like Boxing is really awaiting their every move. Get lost Brook and Khan. GO screw, the two of ya.
Did Brook shag a loved one and not call them after or something?
caldo2025
Super Welterweight
Posts: 4417
Joined: 16 Dec 2014, 07:37

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by caldo2025 »

danamba7 wrote: Did Brook shag a loved one and not call them after or something?
Oh here they come...the British invasion again...I forgot how you guys rarely have a boxer that is worth a damn so now Brook is the second coming of Muhammad Ali. My apologies for disparaging your hero.

They have a separate British Board (kids table) set up so you guys can talk nonsense over there, what are you guys doing over here at the big people's table?
danamba7
Middleweight
Posts: 2859
Joined: 30 Sep 2013, 09:30

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by danamba7 »

caldo2025 wrote:
danamba7 wrote: Did Brook shag a loved one and not call them after or something?
Oh here they come...the British invasion again...I forgot how you guys rarely have a boxer that is worth a damn so now Brook is the second coming of Muhammad Ali. My apologies for disparaging your hero.

They have a separate British Board (kids table) set up so you guys can talk nonsense over there, what are you guys doing over here at the big people's table?
You're funny, I like you.
digzee
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1582
Joined: 11 Nov 2008, 13:49

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by digzee »

danamba7 wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
danamba7 wrote: Did Brook shag a loved one and not call them after or something?
Oh here they come...the British invasion again...I forgot how you guys rarely have a boxer that is worth a damn so now Brook is the second coming of Muhammad Ali. My apologies for disparaging your hero.

They have a separate British Board (kids table) set up so you guys can talk nonsense over there, what are you guys doing over here at the big people's table?
You're funny, I like you.
Another caldo classic was when he said David Lemieux was P4P top 20 and Chocolatito wasn't top 20 because he's not a PPV fighter :doh:
caldo2025
Super Welterweight
Posts: 4417
Joined: 16 Dec 2014, 07:37

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by caldo2025 »

digzee wrote: Another caldo classic was when he said David Lemieux was P4P top 20 and Chocolatito wasn't top 20 because he's not a PPV fighter :doh:
Unfortunately, those were two of my better predictions Digzee.
digzee
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1582
Joined: 11 Nov 2008, 13:49

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by digzee »

caldo2025 wrote:
digzee wrote: Another caldo classic was when he said David Lemieux was P4P top 20 and Chocolatito wasn't top 20 because he's not a PPV fighter :doh:
Unfortunately, those were two of my better predictions Digzee.
So you still stand by those comments? Lemieux is P4P top 20 and Chocolatito is not?
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by palooka »

If anyone really believes that Brook's résumé is better than Bradley's then they should either lay off the LSD or explain. Bradley boxed brilliantly on Saturday night and I imagine that if Brook boxed Rios it would be harder work for Kell. The Sheffield boxer holds a title but is not boxing high level fighters, Hearn will probably get him a big payday without him facing anyone really dangerous. It is surprising that many fans applaud how Froch went about things but are silent when a good fighter does the opposite.
caldo2025
Super Welterweight
Posts: 4417
Joined: 16 Dec 2014, 07:37

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by caldo2025 »

digzee wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
digzee wrote: Another caldo classic was when he said David Lemieux was P4P top 20 and Chocolatito wasn't top 20 because he's not a PPV fighter :doh:
Unfortunately, those were two of my better predictions Digzee.
So you still stand by those comments? Lemieux is P4P top 20 and Chocolatito is not?
Let's not get crazy, Digzee. I'm just saying that if you put all of my predictions together, those would have been some of my better ones. lol.

I actually thought that Rios was going to give Bradley a run for his money Saturday. So that should show you the level of my knowledge. It's pretty pathetic.
Counter-puncher
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 39141
Joined: 20 May 2008, 11:41

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by Counter-puncher »

caldo2025 wrote:
Let's not get crazy, Digzee. I'm just saying that if you put all of my predictions together, those would have been some of my better ones. lol.
.
:lol: :TU:
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by palooka »

Counter-puncher wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
Let's not get crazy, Digzee. I'm just saying that if you put all of my predictions together, those would have been some of my better ones. lol.
.
:lol: :TU:
At least you didn't lose a tenner backing Fielding.
SFW
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1246
Joined: 11 Sep 2009, 11:04

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by SFW »

Instead of being honest, people defend Brook's resume and choices. It's pretty pathetic. Even more so given how good he is.

Tim is smaller, weaker, much lighter puncher, way more miles. And he is still far and away more proven, shown much much bigger balls in the ring not hugging and mugging to debatable decisions against the only top guy ever faced, and that's why Tim is looking down on Kell not the other way around.

Kell is the definition of an inflated record, Tim is what we call a fighter that earned it the hard way.
IKSRTFO
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 4759
Joined: 09 Dec 2007, 17:14

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by IKSRTFO »

Honestly, no one had Alexander as uncomfortable as Bradley...not Porter or even hart hittng Mattysse. Tim basically owned Alexander in that fight and made him quit. He would beat Brook.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by palooka »

IKSRTFO wrote:Honestly, no one had Alexander as uncomfortable as Bradley...not Porter or even hart hittng Mattysse. Tim basically owned Alexander in that fight and made him quit. He would beat Brook.
Time outclassed Marquez as only Mayweather had done, he's a very skilled fighter. Brook won't take him, he wants a straight crack at Khan.
digzee
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1582
Joined: 11 Nov 2008, 13:49

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by digzee »

caldo2025 wrote:
Let's not get crazy, Digzee. I'm just saying that if you put all of my predictions together, those would have been some of my better ones. lol.
I actually thought that Rios was going to give Bradley a run for his money Saturday. So that should show you the level of my knowledge. It's pretty pathetic.
.
Haha ok fair enough, just give Brook a year and I promise you by the end of next year he will have 3 more top 10 welterweights on his record hopefully 2 top 5, if not I'll feel the same as you.

SFW- Its easier to be proven when your promoted by the same company with the big names, you can get the big fights without having to get into a mandatory position and get paid peanuts like Kell did. Don't you understand this?
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by palooka »

It's difficult to be seen as proven if you fight Gavin and Dan in title defences.

I hope Brook does get in with a really good fighter, I think he'd do pretty well - he's a hard hitter - what I don't like is the hanging around waiting for a mega bout - that goes for Khan as well though he has shown hecwill get in there.
digzee
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1582
Joined: 11 Nov 2008, 13:49

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by digzee »

palooka wrote:
IKSRTFO wrote:Honestly, no one had Alexander as uncomfortable as Bradley...not Porter or even hart hittng Mattysse. Tim basically owned Alexander in that fight and made him quit. He would beat Brook.
Time outclassed Marquez as only Mayweather had done, he's a very skilled fighter. Brook won't take him, he wants a straight crack at Khan.
So you think like Khan that Brook wants him for the retirement payday because he knows he will lose to every other WW?
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by palooka »

No, I don't think that Brook would lose to every other top welter but I do think that he'd sooner sidestep them into a big event like that.
digzee
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1582
Joined: 11 Nov 2008, 13:49

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by digzee »

Doesn't that make the most sense? He could make about £4m for that fight and Khan is still a top 6/7 WW and known in America, so beating Khan has many advantages, what boxer in the world would fight for 80% less then what they could earn?
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by palooka »

digzee wrote:Doesn't that make the most sense? He could make about £4m for that fight and Khan is still a top 6/7 WW and known in America, so beating Khan has many advantages, what boxer in the world would fight for 80% less then what they could earn?
It makes sense as a business man but not as a boxer to be admired by boxing fans. Brook is capable of giving anyone in the division a fight and a scare but it seems the belt he has is seen as a bargaining chip for a multi million pound fight. When you look at boxers who are greatly admired and who achieved big money bouts the main thing on their mind was making a big name for themselves with great performances against excellent opposition. You shouldn't be a world champion facing 10-1 opposition, Brook's reign may be like Eubank Snrs minus the Watson's, Benn's, Collins and Thompson's.

I also think that Brook is a small light middleweight and has too be careful how many times he strips down to welter and I think this is a factor.
digzee
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1582
Joined: 11 Nov 2008, 13:49

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by digzee »

palooka wrote:
digzee wrote:Doesn't that make the most sense? He could make about £4m for that fight and Khan is still a top 6/7 WW and known in America, so beating Khan has many advantages, what boxer in the world would fight for 80% less then what they could earn?
It makes sense as a business man but not as a boxer to be admired by boxing fans. Brook is capable of giving anyone in the division a fight and a scare but it seems the belt he has is seen as a bargaining chip for a multi million pound fight. When you look at boxers who are greatly admired and who achieved big money bouts the main thing on their mind was making a big name for themselves with great performances against excellent opposition. You shouldn't be a world champion facing 10-1 opposition, Brook's reign may be like Eubank Snrs minus the Watson's, Benn's, Collins and Thompson's.
You know the Dan fight was a mandatory and the Gavin fight was just 8 weeks later, since then he had Chaves lined up (a top 10 WW who many believed would give Kell a tough fight) and is planning for a big year next year. If you think Brooks reign will continue with the likes of Dan then there's nothing I can say to change your mind.
caldo2025
Super Welterweight
Posts: 4417
Joined: 16 Dec 2014, 07:37

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by caldo2025 »

digzee wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
Let's not get crazy, Digzee. I'm just saying that if you put all of my predictions together, those would have been some of my better ones. lol.
I actually thought that Rios was going to give Bradley a run for his money Saturday. So that should show you the level of my knowledge. It's pretty pathetic.
.
Haha ok fair enough, just give Brook a year and I promise you by the end of next year he will have 3 more top 10 welterweights on his record hopefully 2 top 5, if not I'll feel the same as you.

SFW- Its easier to be proven when your promoted by the same company with the big names, you can get the big fights without having to get into a mandatory position and get paid peanuts like Kell did. Don't you understand this?
I'm sorry, I don't understand this. Brook has been all over the place calling out this guy or telling us why he's not fighting that guy. Since winning the title (which was awesome btw and I loved it), Brook has been a joke. I'm sorry, I know you love him and all but either shut up or fight. I let up on my criticism when he signed on to fight Diego Chaves because that's not an easy fight even when he's a bit undersized for Brook. Chaves is a tough out and a full nights work for any WW. Then all of a sudden the fights called off out of nowhere and here we are scratching our head yet again about this guy and his future fights. It's a joke man. Now we can look forward to Brook and Khan slugging it out over news columns instead of inside the ring.

It's old man. Brook is junk until he proves otherwise. Gavin and Dan since winning the belt off Porter. That's beyond pathetic to me. Nothing you can say will change my mind about that. He's part of what's wrong with Boxing. Shut up and take a fight....and follow through on the fight. The guy tied up Chaves from making other fights when his star was pretty bright. Pathetic.
palooka
Light Heavyweight
Posts: 15698
Joined: 20 Jan 2012, 15:31

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by palooka »

I really hope he doesn't continue in that vein and understand the issues after he was attacked, he comes across as a really decent man and if he faced a top welter he'd probably come out with more respect than when he went in. I do think that Bradley has more skills and has shown that he will face top opposition and I'd put a quid on Bradley if he were to face Brook.
digzee
Heavyweight
Heavyweight
Posts: 1582
Joined: 11 Nov 2008, 13:49

Re: Kell Brook vs. Timothy Bradley: who would win?

Post by digzee »

caldo2025 wrote:
digzee wrote:
caldo2025 wrote:
Let's not get crazy, Digzee. I'm just saying that if you put all of my predictions together, those would have been some of my better ones. lol.
I actually thought that Rios was going to give Bradley a run for his money Saturday. So that should show you the level of my knowledge. It's pretty pathetic.
.
Haha ok fair enough, just give Brook a year and I promise you by the end of next year he will have 3 more top 10 welterweights on his record hopefully 2 top 5, if not I'll feel the same as you.

SFW- Its easier to be proven when your promoted by the same company with the big names, you can get the big fights without having to get into a mandatory position and get paid peanuts like Kell did. Don't you understand this?
I'm sorry, I don't understand this. Brook has been all over the place calling out this guy or telling us why he's not fighting that guy. Since winning the title (which was awesome btw and I loved it), Brook has been a joke. I'm sorry, I know you love him and all but either shut up or fight. I let up on my criticism when he signed on to fight Diego Chaves because that's not an easy fight even when he's a bit undersized for Brook. Chaves is a tough out and a full nights work for any WW. Then all of a sudden the fights called off out of nowhere and here we are scratching our head yet again about this guy and his future fights. It's a joke man. Now we can look forward to Brook and Khan slugging it out over news columns instead of inside the ring.

It's old man. Brook is junk until he proves otherwise. Gavin and Dan since winning the belt off Porter. That's beyond pathetic to me. Nothing you can say will change my mind about that. He's part of what's wrong with Boxing. Shut up and take a fight....and follow through on the fight. The guy tied up Chaves from making other fights when his star was pretty bright. Pathetic.
The Chaves fight has been postponed not cancelled due to injury (not a fake injury before you say it), it will likely take place in February then a big fight in the summer...
Post Reply