BoxRec

mrpedigree wrote:Can some one please explain to me what Brook has done to be considered a "genuine world class welterweight" ??
Would i be so wrong in saying surely to be considered a genuine world class welterweight you need to have beaten world class genuine welterweights ?
Surely beating a few names in the top ten might help this cause ??

I don't think he's a "genuine world class welterweight" now. I do think he has the potential to be world level, and fits most PPV criteria should he get there.

Kell, for me, suffers in both areas. Some people talk about him as the second coming, which is of course OTT. Some dismiss him as a "bum" who'll get beat when he steps up, which is just as nonsensical. If Kell's career moves are handled with the sort of timing he displays in the ring, I think he'll be just fine up to world level, and we'll see what happens when he's there. I think Eddie H might want to tone down the Khan comments though. Some fighters become less popular when they and/or their team are seen to throw names about too often, even when they just genuinely want the fight.

JamesH wrote:

mrpedigree wrote: If Kell's career moves are handled with the sort of timing he displays in the ring

Blimey, you ought to do some writing, son - good line

JamesH wrote:

mrpedigree wrote:Can some one please explain to me what Brook has done to be considered a "genuine world class welterweight" ??
Would i be so wrong in saying surely to be considered a genuine world class welterweight you need to have beaten world class genuine welterweights ?
Surely beating a few names in the top ten might help this cause ??

I don't think he's a "genuine world class welterweight" now. I do think he has the potential to be world level, and fits most PPV criteria should he get there.

Kell, for me, suffers in both areas. Some people talk about him as the second coming, which is of course OTT. Some dismiss him as a "bum" who'll get beat when he steps up, which is just as nonsensical. If Kell's career moves are handled with the sort of timing he displays in the ring, I think he'll be just fine up to world level, and we'll see what happens when he's there. I think Eddie H might want to tone down the Khan comments though. Some fighters become less popular when they and/or their team are seen to throw names about too often, even when they just genuinely want the fight.

+2 Good post.

I think Kell will demonstrate and cement himself as world class (I saw the Pole as a gatekeeper), but I'm unsure as to whether Kell will be able to live with the elite fighters out there, hell, even the fighters just below that like Ortiz.

I think Brook has all the attributes to go on and feature in some big fights stateside but as we have seen with Barker and Rhodes stepping up to that next level is a BIG jump. I think Eddie Hearn knows this which is why he is trying to get him on the under card of Froch. Not only to raise Kell's name in the states but just as importantly give him the experience of fighting in the states on a big card.
I can see him fighting Ortiz on the Mayweather vs. Khan undercard next year with the winners squaring off against each other afterwards......

Lloydy wrote:I think Brook has all the attributes to go on and feature in some big fights stateside but as we have seen with Barker and Rhodes stepping up to that next level is a BIG jump. I think Eddie Hearn knows this which is why he is trying to get him on the under card of Froch. Not only to raise Kell's name in the states but just as importantly give him the experience of fighting in the states on a big card.
I can see him fighting Ortiz on the Mayweather vs. Khan undercard next year with the winners squaring off against each other afterwards......

Not a bad shout - Pacman and PBW are running out of opponents. By the way - i am NOT saying that Kell beats Mayweather! I have got a sneaky feeling that PBW v Khan WILL happen, though. Both of them keep talking about it ...

I think Brook only gets Ortiz if it is part of big card in America with the winner getting a big money fight with Mayweather or Khan.
Ortiz doesn't need Brook as much as Brook needs Ortiz so it'll have to be on the undercard of Khan vs. Mayweather which will happen around this time next year IMO

Deserter wrote:

Josh1111 wrote:

danfoster wrote: Borderline racist, this stuff. Tone it down pal - i know you like a wind-up but i think some people could be offended by all this 'black fighter with good rhythm' nonsense.

Agree completely Dan

x2. Really Jon, you're not doing yourself any favours here at all.

On a nicer note, I haven't had an opportunity to see Saturday night's fight, but I'd like to ask a question of those who have - could it be the case that it's a styles make fights issue? To use an analogy, was RJ to Kell as Kotelnik was to Amir? In other words, would Kell always look good against this type of fighter even if they're fringe world-class opponents?
It's not a leading question as I'm just genuinely interested in finding out whether Kell really is that good, or whether he'd potentially have a far tougher time shining if he faced a Maidana equivalent?

I am not at the wind up I stand by what I say and back down from no one.

Imagine they had brought over a Glen Johnson (ala Twoks Owwhatverthefukhisnamewas) or a say a Vince Phillips or Emanuel Augustus type of skillful US black fighter then I think that Brook would have lost, I.E. a top skilled rhythm fighter beats a top skilled herky jerky Ingle fighter 7 days a week.

Now lets talk about race...
Have you all lost your minds? What's wrong with black people having a rhythm that whites don't? It's common knowledge,
I believe that rhythm is the best thing that a boxer has and I believe that black people have better rhythm, I say this as a white man and I am no racist, in fact I work closely with a black man and a Chinese girl and I am praising black fighters this is not a negative. There are some great white fighters but they aint exactly jazz supremos are they? though the russian Pirog is down with the groove. (ask Danny Jacobs)

How dare any of you try to drag racism card into this, you CAN talk about race without being racist.

I love my black brothers now shut it.

Jon Saxon wrote:Have you all lost your minds? What's wrong with black people having a rhythm that whites don't? It's common knowledge.

Jon, this is just nonsense. For starters, trying to refer to 'black people' as if they are one common group has no basis in scientific fact - there's tremendous diversity and differentiation.

In terms of the whole nature vs nuture debate (which is essentially what this is), you inadvertently undermine your own argument when you refer to the 'herky-jerky' Ingle style as what you're acknowledging is that the style has been aquired/learnt rather than being innate and based on ethnicity (especially considering that the last time I checked the likes of Nelson and Witter were black).

Jon Saxon wrote:Now lets talk about race...
Have you all lost your minds? What's wrong with black people having a rhythm that whites don't? It's common knowledge,
I believe that rhythm is the best thing that a boxer has and I believe that black people have better rhythm, I say this as a white man and I am no racist, in fact I work closely with a black man and a Chinese girl and I am praising black fighters this is not a negative. There are some great white fighters but they aint exactly jazz supremos are they? though the russian Pirog is down with the groove. (ask Danny Jacobs)

How dare any of you try to drag racism card into this, you CAN talk about race without being racist.

I love my black brothers now shut it.

Definitely one of my favourite posts of all time.

Deserter wrote:considering that the last time I checked the likes of Nelson and Witter were black.

I saw Johnny Nelson on Saturday.

Definitely black.

Good singer too, is Johnny. Soulful.

Jon Saxon wrote:

Deserter wrote:

Josh1111 wrote: Agree completely Dan

x2. Really Jon, you're not doing yourself any favours here at all.

On a nicer note, I haven't had an opportunity to see Saturday night's fight, but I'd like to ask a question of those who have - could it be the case that it's a styles make fights issue? To use an analogy, was RJ to Kell as Kotelnik was to Amir? In other words, would Kell always look good against this type of fighter even if they're fringe world-class opponents?
It's not a leading question as I'm just genuinely interested in finding out whether Kell really is that good, or whether he'd potentially have a far tougher time shining if he faced a Maidana equivalent?

I am not at the wind up I stand by what I say and back down from no one.

Apart from when you snitch on them for cyber bullying (see Mr Pedigree's retort!)

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

Deserter wrote:considering that the last time I checked the likes of Nelson and Witter were black.

I saw Johnny Nelson on Saturday.

Definitely black.

Good singer too, is Johnny. Soulful.

Are you saying you have to be black to sing soul music? You'll be called a racist on here

Jon Saxon wrote:

Deserter wrote:

Josh1111 wrote: Agree completely Dan

x2. Really Jon, you're not doing yourself any favours here at all.

On a nicer note, I haven't had an opportunity to see Saturday night's fight, but I'd like to ask a question of those who have - could it be the case that it's a styles make fights issue? To use an analogy, was RJ to Kell as Kotelnik was to Amir? In other words, would Kell always look good against this type of fighter even if they're fringe world-class opponents?
It's not a leading question as I'm just genuinely interested in finding out whether Kell really is that good, or whether he'd potentially have a far tougher time shining if he faced a Maidana equivalent?

I am not at the wind up I stand by what I say and back down from no one.

Imagine they had brought over a Glen Johnson (ala Twoks Owwhatverthefukhisnamewas) or a say a Vince Phillips or Emanuel Augustus type of skillful US black fighter then I think that Brook would have lost, I.E. a top skilled rhythm fighter beats a top skilled herky jerky Ingle fighter 7 days a week.

Now lets talk about race...
Have you all lost your minds? What's wrong with black people having a rhythm that whites don't? It's common knowledge,
I believe that rhythm is the best thing that a boxer has and I believe that black people have better rhythm, I say this as a white man and I am no racist, in fact I work closely with a black man and a Chinese girl and I am praising black fighters this is not a negative. There are some great white fighters but they aint exactly jazz supremos are they? though the russian Pirog is down with the groove. (ask Danny Jacobs)

How dare any of you try to drag racism card into this, you CAN talk about race without being racist.

I love my black brothers now shut it.

Yes Jon, it IS possible discuss race without being racist. However, you don’t seem to be able to do so.

I still think you are on the wind up and i still think you are linked to someone with an agenda.

And i dont mean Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck!

danfoster wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:

Deserter wrote: x2. Really Jon, you're not doing yourself any favours here at all.

On a nicer note, I haven't had an opportunity to see Saturday night's fight, but I'd like to ask a question of those who have - could it be the case that it's a styles make fights issue? To use an analogy, was RJ to Kell as Kotelnik was to Amir? In other words, would Kell always look good against this type of fighter even if they're fringe world-class opponents?
It's not a leading question as I'm just genuinely interested in finding out whether Kell really is that good, or whether he'd potentially have a far tougher time shining if he faced a Maidana equivalent?

I am not at the wind up I stand by what I say and back down from no one.

Imagine they had brought over a Glen Johnson (ala Twoks Owwhatverthefukhisnamewas) or a say a Vince Phillips or Emanuel Augustus type of skillful US black fighter then I think that Brook would have lost, I.E. a top skilled rhythm fighter beats a top skilled herky jerky Ingle fighter 7 days a week.

Now lets talk about race...
Have you all lost your minds? What's wrong with black people having a rhythm that whites don't? It's common knowledge,
I believe that rhythm is the best thing that a boxer has and I believe that black people have better rhythm, I say this as a white man and I am no racist, in fact I work closely with a black man and a Chinese girl and I am praising black fighters this is not a negative. There are some great white fighters but they aint exactly jazz supremos are they? though the russian Pirog is down with the groove. (ask Danny Jacobs)

How dare any of you try to drag racism card into this, you CAN talk about race without being racist.

I love my black brothers now shut it.

Yes Jon, it IS possible discuss race without being racist. However, you don’t seem to be able to do so.

I still think you are on the wind up and i still think you are linked to someone with an agenda.

And i dont mean Sarah Palin or Glenn Beck!

And sorry Jon, i just think you're a prick

Josh1111 wrote:
And sorry Jon, i just think you're a prick

Yeah, but I bet you're only saying that because he's Scottish.

Jon Saxon wrote:I am no racist, in fact I work closely with a black man and a Chinese girl

Funniest line of the thread.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

Deserter wrote:considering that the last time I checked the likes of Nelson and Witter were black.

I saw Johnny Nelson on Saturday.

Definitely black.

Good singer too, is Johnny. Soulful.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

Josh1111 wrote:
And sorry Jon, i just think you're a prick

Yeah, but I bet you're only saying that because he's Scottish.

erm.......... yea why not haha

King Geedorah wrote:

JamesH wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:I am no racist, in fact I work closely with a black man and a Chinese girl

Funniest line of the thread.

He forgot to mention that the guy is his slave and the girl's an opium addled pleasure GELF.

The BEST post EVER EVER EVER on here.

You da man! (what a classic I'm still laughing out loud) King Geedorah!

danfoster wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:

Deserter wrote: x2. Really Jon, you're not doing yourself any favours here at all.

On a nicer note, I haven't had an opportunity to see Saturday night's fight, but I'd like to ask a question of those who have - could it be the case that it's a styles make fights issue? To use an analogy, was RJ to Kell as Kotelnik was to Amir? In other words, would Kell always look good against this type of fighter even if they're fringe world-class opponents?
It's not a leading question as I'm just genuinely interested in finding out whether Kell really is that good, or whether he'd potentially have a far tougher time shining if he faced a Maidana equivalent?

I am not at the wind up I stand by what I say and back down from no one.

Apart from when you snitch on them for cyber bullying (see Mr Pedigree's retort!)

Now now Dan go get the sand out of your 'vagine' as you well know I was having fun with your friend cakes.
BTW where is "Mr Pedigree's retort!"? and hey relax on the propaganda he's a GOOD fighter but the Shefield mafia dont own boxrec.

King Geedorah wrote:I think Kell’d beat Ortiz and Berto,

At conkers?

King Geedorah wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:

King Geedorah wrote: He forgot to mention that the guy is his slave and the girl's an opium addled pleasure GELF.

The BEST post EVER EVER EVER on here.

You da man! (what a classic I'm still laughing out loud) King Geedorah!

Nice to meet a fellow Red Dwarf fan

;;-)

He's not genuine world class proven yet. I think he is but we need to see him beat the likes of Berto yet.

danfoster wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:

I am not at the wind up I stand by what I say and back down from no one.

Apart from when you snitch on them for cyber bullying (see Mr Pedigree's retort!)

mrpedigree wrote:

danfoster wrote:

Jon Saxon wrote:

I am not at the wind up I stand by what I say and back down from no one.

Apart from when you snitch on them for cyber bullying (see Mr Pedigree's retort!)

Again more pungent smegma.