BoxRec

ThereByTheGrace wrote:

clopixolacuphase wrote:Based on the Mallinagi fight and Books performance tonight I think Brook beats Broner. Broner doesn't look so great at Welter. We'll see. Maybe he had an off night.

Brook wouldn't beat Broner IMO. Broner's power would be too much. Also the Problem is a World Champ at Welter, something that took him 1 fight and Brook still hasn't fought for this after 31 fights!

He beat the weakest titlist at welter by SD, a guy who was stopped by Khan (who people seem to think is a 'cynical' opponent for Brook), and looked like crap doing so. It's just a belt. Mallinaggi was a cynical fight. Maybe Broner thought he could just walk through Paulie. Anyway, let's see him get past El Chino.

clopixolacuphase wrote:

ThereByTheGrace wrote:

clopixolacuphase wrote:Based on the Mallinagi fight and Books performance tonight I think Brook beats Broner. Broner doesn't look so great at Welter. We'll see. Maybe he had an off night.

Brook wouldn't beat Broner IMO. Broner's power would be too much. Also the Problem is a World Champ at Welter, something that took him 1 fight and Brook still hasn't fought for this after 31 fights!

He beat the weakest guy at welter by SD, a guy who was stopped by Khan (who people seem to think is a 'cynical' opponent for Brook), and looked like crap doing so. It's just a belt. Mallinaggi was a cynical fight. Maybe Broner thought he could just walk through Paulie. Anyway, let's see him get past El Chino.

What exactly wouldn't be cynical about fighting Khan? An unproven fighter at the weight with no title and offers Brook nothing except money.

Brook wouldn't beat Broner IMO. Broner's power would be too much. Also the Problem is a World Champ at Welter, something that took him 1 fight and Brook still hasn't fought for this after 31 fights![/quote]
He beat the weakest guy at welter by SD, a guy who was stopped by Khan (who people seem to think is a 'cynical' opponent for Brook), and looked like crap doing so. It's just a belt. Mallinaggi was a cynical fight. Maybe Broner thought he could just walk through Paulie. Anyway, let's see him get past El Chino.[/quote]

What exactly wouldn't be cynical about fighting Khan? An unproven fighter at the weight with no title and offers Brook nothing except money.[/quote]

Which is the whole point of professional sport.

clopixolacuphase wrote:

ThereByTheGrace wrote:

clopixolacuphase wrote:Based on the Mallinagi fight and Books performance tonight I think Brook beats Broner. Broner doesn't look so great at Welter. We'll see. Maybe he had an off night.

Brook wouldn't beat Broner IMO. Broner's power would be too much. Also the Problem is a World Champ at Welter, something that took him 1 fight and Brook still hasn't fought for this after 31 fights!

He beat the weakest guy at welter by SD, a guy who was stopped by Khan (who people seem to think is a 'cynical' opponent for Brook), and looked like crap doing so. It's just a belt. Mallinaggi was a cynical fight. Maybe Broner thought he could just walk through Paulie. Anyway, let's see him get past El Chino.

What exactly wouldn't be cynical about fighting Khan? An unproven fighter at the weight with no title and offers Brook nothing except money.[/quote]

Not just that but scraped through by the skin off his teeth and put on his arse and hurt on other occassions against an old naturally smaller Diaz.

DMA1987 wrote:Horse mate we are dealing in the here and now, not the past. The fact is that he has just had his best fight after a horrendous year, and now its onwards and upwards. Dont live in the past Horse, its gay.

He beat a guy he was expected to beat like all of his other fights.

I'm not excited.

palooka wrote: Which is the whole point of professional sport.

Is it? Well perhaps Brook should stop talking about world title ambitions and talk about financial ones instead, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to make money obviously, but don't dress the fight up like it means something which is exactly what they'd do. If Brook wants meaningful challenges Khan isn't the opponent.

SNG wrote:

palooka wrote: Which is the whole point of professional sport.

Is it? Well perhaps Brook should stop talking about world title ambitions and talk about financial ones instead, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to make money obviously, but don't dress the fight up like it means something which is exactly what they'd do. If Brook wants meaningful challenges Khan isn't the opponent.

Why, has Brook said he won't be fighting his mandatory for the title?

Horse wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:Horse mate we are dealing in the here and now, not the past. The fact is that he has just had his best fight after a horrendous year, and now its onwards and upwards. Dont live in the past Horse, its gay.

He beat a guy he was expected to beat like all of his other fights.

I'm not excited.

senchenko only lost once and is a former world champ for 3 years, brook hasn't been at this level so no he wasn't expected to beat him, he did on merit, brook deserves credit for a change

DMA1987 wrote:

SNG wrote:

palooka wrote: Which is the whole point of professional sport.

Is it? Well perhaps Brook should stop talking about world title ambitions and talk about financial ones instead, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to make money obviously, but don't dress the fight up like it means something which is exactly what they'd do. If Brook wants meaningful challenges Khan isn't the opponent.

Why, has Brook said he won't be fighting his mandatory for the title?

Who said he did?

[/quote]What exactly wouldn't be cynical about fighting Khan? An unproven fighter at the weight with no title and offers Brook nothing except money.[/quote]

Dont most people agree that titles are pretty much not worth the paper they're written on nowadays? Go for the money first, secure your future. win that, the rest will come.

SNG wrote:

palooka wrote: Which is the whole point of professional sport.

Is it? Well perhaps Brook should stop talking about world title ambitions and talk about financial ones instead, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to make money obviously, but don't dress the fight up like it means something which is exactly what they'd do. If Brook wants meaningful challenges Khan isn't the opponent.

Of course it is. He could have stayed amateur if his aim was to win cups and titles; the thing about a title is that the television companies are more interested and the purses are therefore higher. Do you imagine anyone would box for a world title if they could get more money for boxing for an area title? It's the money that will pay the bills when they are retired, not the plaudits.

citybluechris wrote:

Horse wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:Horse mate we are dealing in the here and now, not the past. The fact is that he has just had his best fight after a horrendous year, and now its onwards and upwards. Dont live in the past Horse, its gay.

He beat a guy he was expected to beat like all of his other fights.

I'm not excited.

senchenko only lost once and is a former world champ for 3 years, brook hasn't been at this level so no he wasn't expected to beat him, he did on merit, brook deserves credit for a change

He wasnt expected to win? Are you having a laugh?

SNG wrote:

DMA1987 wrote:

SNG wrote: Is it? Well perhaps Brook should stop talking about world title ambitions and talk about financial ones instead, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to make money obviously, but don't dress the fight up like it means something which is exactly what they'd do. If Brook wants meaningful challenges Khan isn't the opponent.

Why, has Brook said he won't be fighting his mandatory for the title?

Who said he did?

Well if he hasn't said anything then why should he not talk about his title ambitions?

citybluechris wrote:senchenko only lost once and is a former world champ for 3 years, brook hasn't been at this level so no he wasn't expected to beat him, he did on merit, brook deserves credit for a change

Brook was a big favourite to win this.

Gavin would beat Senchenko.

palooka wrote:

SNG wrote:

palooka wrote: Which is the whole point of professional sport.

Is it? Well perhaps Brook should stop talking about world title ambitions and talk about financial ones instead, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to make money obviously, but don't dress the fight up like it means something which is exactly what they'd do. If Brook wants meaningful challenges Khan isn't the opponent.

Of course it is. He could have stayed amateur if his aim was to win cups and titles; the thing about a title is that the television companies are more interested and the purses are therefore higher. Do you imagine anyone would box for a world title if they could get more money for boxing for an area title? It's the money that will pay the bills when they are retired, not the plaudits.

what so a fighter would rather be an area champion than a world champion? Seriously.

DMA1987 wrote: Well if he hasn't said anything then why should he not talk about his title ambitions?

What on earth are you on about?

OK forget Khan, who I agree has regressed. Let's have Broner, who got his title by SD against a guy Khan dominated and stopped.

palooka wrote:

SNG wrote:

palooka wrote: Which is the whole point of professional sport.

Is it? Well perhaps Brook should stop talking about world title ambitions and talk about financial ones instead, eh? There is nothing wrong with fighting to make money obviously, but don't dress the fight up like it means something which is exactly what they'd do. If Brook wants meaningful challenges Khan isn't the opponent.

Of course it is. He could have stayed amateur if his aim was to win cups and titles; the thing about a title is that the television companies are more interested and the purses are therefore higher. Do you imagine anyone would box for a world title if they could get more money for boxing for an area title? It's the money that will pay the bills when they are retired, not the plaudits.

So that's the definition of cynical then, eh?

SNG wrote:

DMA1987 wrote: Well if he hasn't said anything then why should he not talk about his title ambitions?

What on earth are you on about?

I'm not entirely sure.

Horse wrote: Gavin would beat Senchenko.

No he wouldn't.

If they got a hundred times as much money for it then yeah; most boxers are very realistic people who haven't a silver spoon, they know that no matter how things look in a record book the thing that really makes a difference after they are retired is the amount of money they've made and saved/invested.

clopixolacuphase wrote:

Horse wrote: Gavin would beat Senchenko.

No he wouldn't.

I reckon he would.

So that's the definition of cynical then, eh?[/quote]

It is realistic and only seems cynical to the nieve; Brook should not box Khan if the opportunity arose for a million pounds and hold out for a title shot first; yeah, what world do you live in where securing your families future comes after winning one of 60 odd world titles?

palooka wrote:So that's the definition of cynical then, eh?

It is realistic and only seems cynical to the nieve; Brook should not box Khan if the opportunity arose for a million pounds and hold out for a title shot first; yeah, what world do you live in where securing your families future comes after winning one of 60 odd world titles?[/quote]
More fools the people who will pay for that shite.

Brook needs to win a world title, he has been fighting has-beens and never-beens for 31 fights. Any decent fighter would have been fighting world class fighters.

he needs to think about winning a title and not about fighting Khan, who won a title after 22 fights

i think he knows his not worldclass so wants to win a large amount of money