Hearn still waffling on about Khan

[Nightmare Roy]

I take on board what you are saying Wrists,

But for me, I'd generally say that pro boxing has little to do with respect - it's about risk and financial opportunities. When they dont want the fight, suddenly its all about "respect" which isn't true. All proper fights have a beef - and they settle the beef.

Kotelnik "worst champion in the world" - Khan's words, That shot was bought for him, to get a belt at 140.
Malignaggi - handpicked for US debut because he couldn't crack an egg
Judah - got a gift against unfashionable Mattysse and then went on to lose to Malignaggi (see Marco Barrera)
Peterson - handpicked and he lost
Maidana - whom had to sack his own manager because he was in cahoots with GBP to be kept away from Khan and petition WBA
Canelo - sparko
Diaz - dropped and looked awful
Garcia - Sparko

Laughable. Why don't you do the same for Brook's record?

Khan's record pisses all over Brook's.

True dat, Brooks record is piss poor, he's been a pro for donkies years and fought 1 decent fighter.Khan has travelled and fought loads of top guys.

[whiskey]

Laughable. Why don't you do the same for Brook's record?

Khan's record pisses all over Brook's.

Khan has picked and tip-toed around numerous opponents throughout his career. Domestically he avoided Murray & Thatxton to fight unknowns from the Eastern bloc. He even pulled out a British purse bid to avoid them.

Brook's record is generally poor - but his win over Porter arguably surpasses anything on Khan's record. I don't why people give bravery points for fights where you get KTFO.

Brooks smokes Khan and that's the topic at hand.

You know and everybody else knows it - so why be the Khan apologist ?

[Horse]

Khan has picked and tip-toed around numerous opponents throughout his career. Domestically he avoided Murray & Thatxton to fight unknowns from the Eastern bloc. He even pulled out a British purse bid to avoid them.

Brook's record is generally poor - but his win over Porter arguably surpasses anything on Khan's record. I don't why people give bravery points for fights where you get KTFO.

Brooks smokes Khan and that's the topic at hand.

You know and everybody else knows it - so why be the Khan apologist ?

If the fight's such a forgone conclusion: Then why does anyone care about it?

Both Khan and Brook have plenty of other good options.

The fight isn't that great for Brook and Hearn to keep harping on about it.

They should shut up and get Brook some half decent opponents. Khan is only one of many for Brook to fight.

[lefty]

Laughable. Why don't you do the same for Brook's record?

Khan's record pisses all over Brook's.

Khan has picked and tip-toed around numerous opponents throughout his career. Domestically he avoided Murray & Thatxton to fight unknowns from the Eastern bloc. He even pulled out a British purse bid to avoid them.

Brook's record is generally poor - but his win over Porter arguably surpasses anything on Khan's record. I don't why people give bravery points for fights where you get KTFO.

Brooks smokes Khan and that's the topic at hand.

You know and everybody else knows it - so why be the Khan apologist ?

I don't think they do. It's more that it's respectable that khan was willing to take those fights in the first place. Something Brook hasn't been willing to do as of yet. Also I'm not sure it Porter is a better win than Maidana. That's a tough one for me. I know porter has a win over Alexander who Maidana lost too but I think Maidana underperformed that night and also the whole styles make fights.

[BigDoofus]

Khan would go down in the history books as the better fighter.

History shows that Khan was a world champ between 22 and 24 years old. It's 5 years since he won a world title fight and he turns 30 later this year.

[whiskey]

Both Khan and Brook have plenty of other good options.

The fight isn't that great for Brook and Hearn to keep harping on about it.

They should shut up and get Brook some half decent opponents. Khan is only one of many for Brook to fight.

Yep I agree on that point.

If Khan is never going to fight them in a month of sundays then perhaps it is indeed time to move on.

[whiskey]

I don't think they do. It's more that it's respectable that khan was willing to take those fights in the first place. Something Brook hasn't been willing to do as of yet. Also I'm not sure it Porter is a better win than Maidana. That's a tough one for me. I know porter has a win over Alexander who Maidana lost too but I think Maidana underperformed that night and also the whole styles make fights.

Let's explore that point for a moment.

It's a cold fact that Maidana fired his manager as he was being kept away from Khan deliberately.

Joe Cortez was practically dragging Maidana off him all night long, and Roach almost pulled him out at one stage. Cortez even docked a point saying Maidana 'deliberately' elbowed him during one exchange when Cortez leapt in without any merit to do so. Another time Khan turned away during an exchange so Cortez leapt in and wagged his finger at Maidana and broke up his flow.

If Smoger had handled things it could well have been a very different result. But at the end of the day, it's obvious why they tried to swerve him. He is game, strong and carries a big punch on him.

Granted it was a great fight, but it only happened because Marcos Maidana pursued it to the hilt and no 'respect' to Khan for being 'willing'. He had to fight him or be stripped.

[lefty]

That's a fair rebuttal.

[Wrists]

Slightly unfair Gomez.

You can pick holes in khans resume as you can with most active fighters.

Fact remains his dance card is substantially better than kell's.

You say Khan swerved certain fighters, I would argue he's stepped up significantly more than brook.

Now I'm not saying brook is ducking, I suspect he isn't but I repeat the facts are the facts, porter aside his resume is bang average and not a patch on khan's.

I do think this should be taken into account when negotiations are happening for this fight.

Khan is the 'A' side here regardless of titles or lack of.

But I repeat - I think brook knocks Khan out.

[Stuffs]

Khan has the better resume I feel.

I think if you were putting together a card of their former opponents, Khan's side would win every bout.

To the topic at hand and who would win. They're both complete chod's, so I'm backing double knockout.

[PredatorHayds]

Khan would go down in the history books as the better fighter.

History shows that Khan was a world champ between 22 and 24 years old. It's 5 years since he won a world title fight and he turns 30 later this year.

Khan was the best in his division for a short period of time at LWW.
Brook has never been the #1 in his division.

[whiskey]

Slightly unfair Gomez.

At the end of the day Khan kept bleeting that nobody knows who Kell brook is.

Fair comment at that time, so Kell goes to America and takes the IBF belt off Shawn Porter whom had just beaten Devon Alexander and blew away Malignaggi.

Next thing Khan is sitting next to Hearn at ringside all smiles, Wembley is provisionally booked, box office reserved, an unbeaten IBF welterweight champion and fellow UK fighter Kell Brook in the opposite corner...

..."Err I want more respect"

I honestly scratch my head why people wouldn't want to see this fight and actually side up with Khan and jump on grenades for him - when he's yet again rinsing the UK out of a good domestic fight (again).

They both clearly don't like each other, so plenty to fight over as it stands - let alone bragging rights, a world title strap and a shit-ton of money on top.

No, let's all compare their records instead of calling out the party that clearly doesn't want to do the fight. That's the bit as a boxing fan that irks me.

[Horse]

Khan's (black) and Brook's (red) best 10 results in order:

Marcos Maidana
Shawn Porter
Andriy Kotelnik
Zab Judah
Paulie Malignaggi
Devon Alexander
Luis Collazo
Lamont Peterson (Lost)
Chris Algieri
Julio Diaz

Vyacheslav Senchenko
Rafal Jackiewicz
Frankie Gavin
Carson Jones I
Matthew Hatton
Ionut Dan Ion
Lovemore Ndou
Paul McCloskey
Michael Jennings
Kevin Bizier


Brook's a joke and he should strongly consider retiring. Boring git!

[Andrew]

No.

I
Yep, I suspect Matt Hatton has a better chin than Khan.

The wider point though is that Hearn and brook have been and continue to be disrespectful towards Khan with little right to do so.

When you fight the Kevin Biziers of this world in the back of jo jo Dan and frankie Gavin (good fighter but not world level) you really can't have a pop at a guy who at the last count has fought kotelnik, mallignaggi, Judah, Peterson, maidana, canelo, Diaz, Alexander, Garcia and collazo, all of which shawn porter aside are MILES better than anyone brook has fought.

I actually think brook knocks Khan out. But the fact remains brook needs Khan more than the other way around and the attitude of those involved should reflect that.

I take on board what you are saying Wrists,

But for me, I'd generally say that pro boxing has little to do with respect - it's about risk and financial opportunities. When they dont want the fight, suddenly its all about "respect" which isn't true. All proper fights have a beef - and they settle the beef.

Kotelnik "worst champion in the world" - Khan's words, That shot was bought for him, to get a belt at 140.
Malignaggi - handpicked for US debut because he couldn't crack an egg
Judah - got a gift against unfashionable Mattysse and then went on to lose to Malignaggi (see Marco Barrera)
Peterson - handpicked and he lost
Maidana - whom had to sack his own manager because he was in cahoots with GBP to be kept away from Khan and petition WBA
Canelo - sparko
Diaz - dropped and looked awful
Garcia - Sparko

I'd pick Shawn porter over all of them accept Canelo due to size, and even then he'd probably put up a better fight than Khan.

We can go round the houses all day, but the conclusion is Khan cannot face losing to anyone in the UK. Kell Brook would crush him - infact Matt Hatton said he's as big a puncher as Canelo was.

Team Khan are self-interested on every level. It's not about us, the fans or boxing in general.

If Brook had just 2KO wins on his unbeaten record, they'd rip their hands off for a 60/40 split of a Wembley date.

Not sure about Porter beating Maidana tbh.

I know Maidana was at 140 then and improved a lot under Robert Garcia later but Porter v Maidana at 147 ( from Broner to Floyd fights) is very 50/50. Real shame Khan and Maidana never rematched at 147.

[Wrists]

Slightly unfair Gomez.

At the end of the day Khan kept bleeting that nobody knows who Kell brook is.

Fair comment at that time, so Kell goes to America and takes the IBF belt off Shawn Porter whom had just beaten Devon Alexander and blew away Malignaggi.

Next thing Khan is sitting next to Hearn at ringside all smiles, Wembley is provisionally booked, box office reserved, an unbeaten IBF welterweight champion and fellow UK fighter Kell Brook in the opposite corner...

..."Err I want more respect"

I honestly scratch my head why people wouldn't want to see this fight and actually side up with Khan and jump on grenades for him - when he's yet again rinsing the UK out of a good domestic fight (again).

They both clearly don't like each other, so plenty to fight over as it stands - let alone bragging rights, a world title strap and a shit-ton of money on top.

No, let's all compare their records instead of calling out the party that clearly doesn't want to do the fight. That's the bit as a boxing fan that irks me.

You argue your point very well.

Of course they should fight, and I don't think any fan with any brains would decide they didn't want this fight to happen.

I think the demonising of Khan is what irks people. Listen, I don't think he's a stellar guy. He acts like a bell end at times.

But I think Hearn and brook have played it all wrong. If they want the fight they should have thought concession and respect not acting like the billy big plums when your second best win is an ageing Carson Jones.



My onl

[BigDoofus]

Khan would go down in the history books as the better fighter.

History shows that Khan was a world champ between 22 and 24 years old. It's 5 years since he won a world title fight and he turns 30 later this year.

Khan was the best in his division for a short period of time at LWW.
Brook has never been the #1 in his division.

Timothy Bradley was unbeaten at LWW until he moved up and "beat" Pacquiao - Khan lost to Peterson.
The Ring magazine have had Brook #1 for a long time.

[PredatorHayds]

The ring rankings are a joke and have been for the last few years.

[Horse]

The ring rankings are a joke and have been for the last few years.

True.

[GreenLightning]

Kotelnik "worst champion in the world" - Khan's words, That shot was bought for him, to get a belt at 140.
Malignaggi - handpicked for US debut because he couldn't crack an egg
Judah - got a gift against unfashionable Mattysse and then went on to lose to Malignaggi (see Marco Barrera)
Peterson - handpicked and he lost
Maidana - whom had to sack his own manager because he was in cahoots with GBP to be kept away from Khan and petition WBA
Canelo - sparko
Diaz - dropped and looked awful
Garcia - Sparko

I'd pick Shawn porter over all of them accept Canelo due to size

Except Porter lost to Diaz before Khan beat him, so what does that say about Brooks best win?

Also, Judah Matthysse was very close actually

[GreenLightning]

Khan's (black) and Brook's (red) best 10 results in order:

Marcos Maidana
Shawn Porter
Andriy Kotelnik
Zab Judah
Paulie Malignaggi
Devon Alexander
Luis Collazo
Lamont Peterson (Lost)
Chris Algieri
Julio Diaz

Vyacheslav Senchenko
Rafal Jackiewicz
Frankie Gavin
Carson Jones I
Matthew Hatton
Ionut Dan Ion
Lovemore Ndou
Paul McCloskey
Michael Jennings
Kevin Bizier


Brook's a joke and he should strongly consider retiring. Boring git!

Diaz beat Porter

[Taansend]

Brook's record is generally poor - but his win over Porter arguably surpasses anything on Khan's record.

I'm a fan of both fighters, Gomez & don't want to diss either one* but I would say that Khans win over a prime Maidana is better than Brook's win over Porter.

Or, at the very least, equals it.

* - on the subject of not dissing either one I am now going to Both are supremely talented (Brook is sturdier while Khan is faster) and both should have done so much more than they have. Brook has fought utter garbage other than Porter & Khan just keeps talking about Mayweather & Pacquiao then winning one & losing one against so-so opposition (not including Canelo). I like both but just shut up & fight.

[freddydoesdallas]

Khan would go down in the history books as the better fighter.

History shows that Khan was a world champ between 22 and 24 years old. It's 5 years since he won a world title fight and he turns 30 later this year.

Khan was the best in his division for a short period of time at LWW.
Brook has never been the #1 in his division.

When was this? It must have been a very small window.

[Oiky]

you'd think he'd sit down and shut up now wouldn't ya

[whiskey]

Brook's record is generally poor - but his win over Porter arguably surpasses anything on Khan's record.

I'm a fan of both fighters, Gomez & don't want to diss either one* but I would say that Khans win over a prime Maidana is better than Brook's win over Porter.

Or, at the very least, equals it.

At the risk of sounding like I'm trying to win or lose an argument (and I'm genuinely not bud)

But was it a comparable win?

Khan sunk him early with a great boy shot, then it was largely one-way traffic.

Joe Cortez was appalling , docking points after claiming Maidana elbowed him. He was dragging him every time he pinned Khan and was unloading.

And this is arguably a version of Maidana that was far cruder and clumsy than the one that Robert Diaz fine-tuned to do battle at welterweight.

That version of Maidana, the one that defeated Broner - and minus Joe Cortez for protection - would hammer Khan into the floor.

[mike john]

At the risk of sounding like I'm trying to win or lose an argument (and I'm genuinely not bud)

But was it a comparable win?

Khan sunk him early with a great boy shot, then it was largely one-way traffic.

Joe Cortez was appalling , docking points after claiming Maidana elbowed him. He was dragging him every time he pinned Khan and was unloading.

And this is arguably a version of Maidana that was far cruder and clumsy than the one that Robert Diaz fine-tuned to do battle at welterweight.

That version of Maidana, the one that defeated Broner - and minus Joe Cortez for protection - would hammer Khan into the floor.

if you cast that same critical eye over brooks win over porter, you must concede that a lot of observers think porter did enough to beat brook, myself included. so, yeah the wins are comparable, khans victory over maidana is clearly superior in my eyes.