BoxRec

Spence's body shots were thrown and landed throughout the contest.
Be them straight rights or hooks he piled up the points in that category.

Evander wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:

Evander wrote:Spence won almost every round of the fight.
Brook got the 7th that was it.
Very entertaining and interesting fight.
Spence's jab and bodywork were the business.
Brook took a body shot in the 5th that popped and in the very next round he took some serious incoming downstairs that really swung the fight.
Spence kept it together and looked very comfortable in there, Brook showed signs of wear and tear he should take a long rest.
Overall it was a good fight.

Each to their own, but you are some way off an even respectable score

I watched it twice already.
I'll review it again but Spence looked like he won a wide decision.

Come on mate he clearly didn't just lose 1 round. There were some close to score rounds and there was some clear brook momentum where I actual thought he was starting to make his strength and will tell. Thought maybe spence could be unravelled. Probably 4-6 ish

Then 7 come and everything just fell off for brook and spence stepped on it big

Spence is a quality operator for sure. But this was no one sided beat down

Evander wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:

Evander wrote:Spence won almost every round of the fight.
Brook got the 7th that was it.
Very entertaining and interesting fight.
Spence's jab and bodywork were the business.
Brook took a body shot in the 5th that popped and in the very next round he took some serious incoming downstairs that really swung the fight.
Spence kept it together and looked very comfortable in there, Brook showed signs of wear and tear he should take a long rest.
Overall it was a good fight.

Each to their own, but you are some way off an even respectable score

I watched it twice already.
I'll review it again but Spence looked like he won a wide decision.

And Ive watched it 123, 257 times, so my opinion is superior

Ossyrules wrote:

Evander wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:
Each to their own, but you are some way off an even respectable score

I watched it twice already.
I'll review it again but Spence looked like he won a wide decision.

Come on mate he clearly didn't just lose 1 round. There were some close to score rounds and there was some clear brook momentum where I actual thought he was starting to make his strength and will tell. Thought maybe spence could be unravelled. Probably 4-6 ish

Then 7 come and everything just fell off for brook and spence stepped on it big

Spence is a quality operator for sure. But this was no one sided beat down

Yea Brook did very well. He won a number of the early rounds IMO. Spence was fighting his fight up until midway through. Maybe you got confused Evander and thought Brook was Spence and then after round 6 you remembered that Spence was Spence and not Brook.

great fight. brook showed his class in the first half but spence's relentlesnes, strength and athleticism took over late.
brooks eye swole badly and he seemed to be unable to see out of it at the end. 2 stoppage defeats by surrender in a row is a brutal outcome for such a quality fighter as brook. maybe he has a last hurrah at 154.
spence looks the real deal and a force to be reckoned with for the foreseeable future. they should settle it between thurman / spence / and pac if he is still up for it.
great fight, brave performances by both.

People don't seem, to rate Thurman much... Personally I think he is one of the best boxers I have seen come through in a long time.

Some of these comments are absolutely potato Im not gonna call anyone out, but to suggest that Errol Spence Jnr is even in the p4p consideration or would easily beat Keith Thurman are at best ridiculous.

Thurman is 28-0 after beating Porter, Garcia, Collazo and Guerrero in his last 4 fights. He is boxing at a much higher level and has come through every challenge so far looking very adaptable and in my eyes having the boxing intelligence to adapt to any fighter.

Kell brook is damaged goods after the Golovkin fight and this fight was still close first half with Brook in control. He says he couldn't see from the 7th onwards which even though thats his story it does kind of tie in with the fight turning against him at this point.

For me Thurman would dispatch Spence Jnr with ease, he is maybe 2 or 3 times a better fighter then Brook and is stronger and faster. I also think Crawford would beat Spence Jnr pretty easily as well.

Spence is all wrong for Thurman.

Finally got to a place where I could pick up service, but have only seen it on phone.

My impression of Brook from the get go is that he looked to be more water weight than in the 3G fight. That is no excuse, just an observation.

I had it 95-94 Spence going into round 11.

10-9 Brook
10-9 Brook
10-9 Spence
10-9 Brook
10-9 Brook
10-9 Spence
10-9 Brook
10-9 Spence
10-9 Spence
10-8 Spence

11 was obviously going to be a 10-8 Spence round without the stoppage or Brook turning it around miraculously.

I have to admit that I was very surprised when Brook opted out, given how close I had it, although in retrospect, with another busted orbital, I completely understand the move.

If there was any way for him to finish, I have to believe that Brook would have stayed in there because he had to know that the fight was still close and anything can happen with decisions.

Brook looked to be in control to me until round 6 when Spence turned up the heat. I believe that Brook spent himself in round 7 for two reasons:

1. Spence, while behind on the cards had properly invested the body work and had determined to cash it in starting in round 6. In order to combat that increase in intensity, Brook went pretty much all in round 7, winning the round but losing the war.

2. With no intention of minimalizing Spence's accomplishment, I do believe that the weight drain in order to return to 147 after the 3G fight absolutely had significant effects on Brook's stamina and his physical ability to absorb punishment to the body. I believe that this fight may have been different at 160.

Congratulations to Errol Spence Jr! Terrific, hardfought, deserved victory.

I am not sure how Brook moves forward with his career, given his skull issues and the effects of moving up and down in weight. I think that his best course is to cash out with the Khan fight, and live happily ever after.

tonymaccaroni wrote:People don't seem, to rate Thurman much... Personally I think he is one of the best boxers I have seen come through in a long time.

Some of these comments are absolutely potato Im not gonna call anyone out, but to suggest that Errol Spence Jnr is even in the p4p consideration or would easily beat Keith Thurman are at best ridiculous.

Thurman is 28-0 after beating Porter, Garcia, Collazo and Guerrero in his last 4 fights. He is boxing at a much higher level and has come through every challenge so far looking very adaptable and in my eyes having the boxing intelligence to adapt to any fighter.

Kell brook is damaged goods after the Golovkin fight and this fight was still close first half with Brook in control. He says he couldn't see from the 7th onwards which even though thats his story it does kind of tie in with the fight turning against him at this point.

For me Thurman would dispatch Spence Jnr with ease, he is maybe 2 or 3 times a better fighter then Brook and is stronger and faster. I also think Crawford would beat Spence Jnr pretty easily as well.

Either would have a chance but nobody beats Spence easily at this juncture in his career.

crusader wrote:

Evander wrote:

Ossyrules wrote:
Each to their own, but you are some way off an even respectable score

I watched it twice already.
I'll review it again but Spence looked like he won a wide decision.

And Ive watched it 123, 257 times, so my opinion is superior

I never said it was superior.
Froch said he had Brook up by 5 after 6 rounds why are you sweating me not him ?

This is crazy. How in the world anyone can think Brook won more than 3 maybe 4 rounds is beyond me. And even those were competitive rounds none were dominant. What in God's name were you watching? Once again KB gets massive credit for missing shots and doing extremely little effective work.It's a big reason his fans are so awful, completely bias, irrational. Kell Brook brings out the worst scoring of anyone since the great Floyd Mayweather. People used to act like Floyd wins every fight 12-0 regardless of what the truth was. Most annoying shit there is. Take a step back, watch the fight again removing bias sound distraction whatever. Down 5 points at the time of submission is a much more accurate assessment than the shit I've been reading.

SFW wrote:This is crazy. How in the world anyone can think Brook won more than 3 maybe 4 rounds is beyond me. And even those were competitive rounds none were dominant. What in God's name were you watching? Once again KB gets massive credit for missing shots and doing extremely little effective work.It's a big reason his fans are so awful, completely bias, irrational. Kell Brook brings out the worst scoring of anyone since the great Floyd Mayweather. People used to act like Floyd wins every fight 12-0 regardless of what the truth was. Most annoying poo there is. Take a step back, watch the fight again removing bias sound distraction whatever. Down 5 points at the time of submission is a much more accurate assessment than the poo I've been reading.

I have only watched it on my phone. I also attempt to be as objective as possible, sometimes to a fault, when I am favoring one of the fighters. I had it 95-94 Spence going into 11. I think that the 96-93 card was probably the most objective. I gave Brook the majority of the close rounds.

But I don't get your outrage over this. It was close through 8, any way you look at it.

The crowd played a factor in how the judges scored it, as most predicted. Many of the shots the crowd went wild over were blocked by Spence's gloves, as was showed on replays in slomo. Who you gave the close rounds to depends on where you are from, or who you were rooting for. Compubox clearly showed Spence was more effective. How beat up their faces at the end told a good part of the story in this fight. Spence admitted the long layoff affected his performance. He is the kind of boxer that performs better when busier. At the end of the day, if one fighter quits, the rest of the "who was ahead" part doesn't matter.

I'm not convinced Crawford takes Spence to school like some have said. My money would be on Spence. Pretty substantial size advantage, probably reach too. Arum will avoid that match-up as long as possible. Spence will beat Thurman, but not an easy fight.

My outrage lies in undue credit, but it's a mute point now . I just don't see the effective work Brook got credit for, seen the fight half a dozen times now. All these people talking about Kell winning through 8 were and still are ludicrous, he was getting battered to the body and hit flush every single round, even what he did manage to land got returned. So how in the world he was winning I can't even guess. I didn't see that close of a fight, Spence did more the majority of the rounds, and gave Brook his worst beating as a pro. Broke his will. The credit belongs to Spence. He was clearly the better fighter on the night. And has a ways to go before he's at his best.

But maybe I'm too harsh. I just didn't see Kell actually landing near what some want to believe. That's why I watched it 6 times.

Badhusker wrote:The crowd played a factor in how the judges scored it, as most predicted. Many of the shots the crowd went wild over were blocked by Spence's gloves, as was showed on replays in slomo. Who you gave the close rounds to depends on where you are from, or who you were rooting for. Compubox clearly showed Spence was more effective. How beat up their faces at the end told a good part of the story in this fight. Spence admitted the long layoff affected his performance. He is the kind of boxer that performs better when busier. At the end of the day, if one fighter quits, the rest of the "who was ahead" part doesn't matter.

I'm not convinced Crawford takes Spence to school like some have said. My money would be on Spence. Pretty substantial size advantage, probably reach too. Arum will avoid that match-up as long as possible. Spence will beat Thurman, but not an easy fight.

That crowd factor or whatever other factors work like a charm EVERY TIME in the U.K. Name one time in the last 5 years when a British fighter didn't get a win against a foreigner in a close fight. If Brook didn't take the knee and lasted 4 more minutes, he had good chances to get a nod.

Tanzio wrote:

tonymaccaroni wrote:People don't seem, to rate Thurman much... Personally I think he is one of the best boxers I have seen come through in a long time.

Some of these comments are absolutely potato Im not gonna call anyone out, but to suggest that Errol Spence Jnr is even in the p4p consideration or would easily beat Keith Thurman are at best ridiculous.

Thurman is 28-0 after beating Porter, Garcia, Collazo and Guerrero in his last 4 fights. He is boxing at a much higher level and has come through every challenge so far looking very adaptable and in my eyes having the boxing intelligence to adapt to any fighter.

Kell brook is damaged goods after the Golovkin fight and this fight was still close first half with Brook in control. He says he couldn't see from the 7th onwards which even though thats his story it does kind of tie in with the fight turning against him at this point.

For me Thurman would dispatch Spence Jnr with ease, he is maybe 2 or 3 times a better fighter then Brook and is stronger and faster. I also think Crawford would beat Spence Jnr pretty easily as well.

Either would have a chance but nobody beats Spence easily at this juncture in his career.

I think Crawford would. Crawford has shown a better ability to adapt than Spence has. Spence in the Brook fight simply fought the same way until the fight turned his way. Crawford adapts from round to round, and if something doesn't work he changes it up immediately. Crawford would negate Spence's southpaw stance I believe.

Baby Face Finster wrote:

Tanzio wrote:

tonymaccaroni wrote:People don't seem, to rate Thurman much... Personally I think he is one of the best boxers I have seen come through in a long time.

Some of these comments are absolutely potato Im not gonna call anyone out, but to suggest that Errol Spence Jnr is even in the p4p consideration or would easily beat Keith Thurman are at best ridiculous.

Thurman is 28-0 after beating Porter, Garcia, Collazo and Guerrero in his last 4 fights. He is boxing at a much higher level and has come through every challenge so far looking very adaptable and in my eyes having the boxing intelligence to adapt to any fighter.

Kell brook is damaged goods after the Golovkin fight and this fight was still close first half with Brook in control. He says he couldn't see from the 7th onwards which even though thats his story it does kind of tie in with the fight turning against him at this point.

For me Thurman would dispatch Spence Jnr with ease, he is maybe 2 or 3 times a better fighter then Brook and is stronger and faster. I also think Crawford would beat Spence Jnr pretty easily as well.

Either would have a chance but nobody beats Spence easily at this juncture in his career.

I think Crawford would. Crawford has shown a better ability to adapt than Spence has. Spence in the Brook fight simply fought the same way until the fight turned his way. Crawford adapts from round to round, and if something doesn't work he changes it up immediately. Crawford would negate Spence's southpaw stance I believe.

I think it could be a case when a bigger good fighter eventually dominates a smaller one.

boxing_rocks wrote:

Baby Face Finster wrote:

Tanzio wrote:
Either would have a chance but nobody beats Spence easily at this juncture in his career.

I think Crawford would. Crawford has shown a better ability to adapt than Spence has. Spence in the Brook fight simply fought the same way until the fight turned his way. Crawford adapts from round to round, and if something doesn't work he changes it up immediately. Crawford would negate Spence's southpaw stance I believe.

I think it could be a case when a bigger good fighter eventually dominates a smaller one.

Crawford has that Thomas Hearns frame where it looks like he can fill out pretty well if he so likes. He was pretty huge at Lightweight. I don't think Welterweight is a weight too big for him. Postol had a longer reach than Spence has and it didn't help him much.

Baby Face Finster wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:

Baby Face Finster wrote:
I think Crawford would. Crawford has shown a better ability to adapt than Spence has. Spence in the Brook fight simply fought the same way until the fight turned his way. Crawford adapts from round to round, and if something doesn't work he changes it up immediately. Crawford would negate Spence's southpaw stance I believe.

I think it could be a case when a bigger good fighter eventually dominates a smaller one.

Crawford has that Thomas Hearns frame where it looks like he can fill out pretty well if he so likes. He was pretty huge at Lightweight. I don't think Welterweight is a weight too big for him. Postol had a longer reach than Spence has and it didn't help him much.

Spence is a huge and a very strong WW. Definitely stronger than Crawford.

boxing_rocks wrote:

Baby Face Finster wrote:

boxing_rocks wrote:
I think it could be a case when a bigger good fighter eventually dominates a smaller one.

Crawford has that Thomas Hearns frame where it looks like he can fill out pretty well if he so likes. He was pretty huge at Lightweight. I don't think Welterweight is a weight too big for him. Postol had a longer reach than Spence has and it didn't help him much.

Spence is a huge and a very strong WW. Definitely stronger than Crawford.

Spence has not shown an ability to adapt. Let's see what happens when his pressure tactics don't work. I think Crawford can and would frustrate him to death. If and when this fight ever gets made maybe we can do some kind of bet.

Crawford would definitely need to try to run and sting. The question is if he can do it for 12 rounds.

boxing_rocks wrote:Crawford would definitely need to try to run and sting. The question is if he can do it for 12 rounds.

Crawford could run all 12 if he has to. I think the main advantage I have seen is a slight speed advantage and lateral movement advantage for Crawford. Spence has advantages with 2" of height and reach, strength/punching power, and has proven he has great stamina too. Spence also does much better at attacking the body, and cutting off the ring. I would lean toward Spence. He is naturally about 10lbs+ bigger I am guessing. Not sure if Crawford would hold up with the hard shots. Didn't Gamboa rock him when they fought? Great fight....a Canelo vs GGG type fight in the making.

boxing_rocks wrote:

Badhusker wrote:The crowd played a factor in how the judges scored it, as most predicted. Many of the shots the crowd went wild over were blocked by Spence's gloves, as was showed on replays in slomo. Who you gave the close rounds to depends on where you are from, or who you were rooting for. Compubox clearly showed Spence was more effective. How beat up their faces at the end told a good part of the story in this fight. Spence admitted the long layoff affected his performance. He is the kind of boxer that performs better when busier. At the end of the day, if one fighter quits, the rest of the "who was ahead" part doesn't matter.

I'm not convinced Crawford takes Spence to school like some have said. My money would be on Spence. Pretty substantial size advantage, probably reach too. Arum will avoid that match-up as long as possible. Spence will beat Thurman, but not an easy fight.

That crowd factor or whatever other factors work like a charm EVERY TIME in the U.K. Name one time in the last 5 years when a British fighter didn't get a win against a foreigner in a close fight. If Brook didn't take the knee and lasted 4 more minutes, he had good chances to get a nod.

Brook was down on all cards, he wasn't getting anything.

Evander wrote:Spence's body shots were thrown and landed throughout the contest.
Be them straight rights or hooks he piled up the points in that category.

Not only were Spence's body shots piling up points but their debilitating effect clearly contributed to Brook's demise, which became visible about the 7th round. That's about the time that they were slowing Brook enough to make him more susceptible to Errol's head shots.

The judging was fine, and the 97-92 card was more questionable than the 95-94 one. Spence got outboxed and outsped over the first half and it took a while for his work to accumulate. I had no preferred outcome and watched with the sound off, though I guess I lack credibility because I didnt (claim to) rewatch a million times.

Spence got the stoppage and impressed, showing he's a world class, 12 round fighter; no need to spin things because it wasnt a cakewalk for him.