Page 2 of 2
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 27 Mar 2016, 09:31
by Syntax Error
Rob Magic wrote:Brook did say after the fight that he had to fight his mandatory or be stripped and that he wants to fight wbc champ Danny Garcia or the winner of Bradley pacquiao. He didn't rule out Khan either. He admitted he doesn't understand the IBF putting Bizier as mandatory.
Also on another note Billy Joe Saunders after the Eubank fight said he offered Eubank near a million for a rematch but he refused and that he wants a GGG fight stating he doesn't know how good he really is until he fights GGG.
That's fair enough.
Brook waited long enough to become a 'world' champion, so he's not going to drop the one bargaining tool he has, especially as he struggles to get big fights to begin with.
I just wish the IBF would stop putting heavy bags in front of him each time; in fact, a heavy bag would have been a better opponent than any of the last 3 opponents Brook has defended against!!
![[icon_witsend.gif] :witzend:](./images/smilies/icon_witsend.gif)
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 27 Mar 2016, 09:34
by Boxerbeetle
Ward was more impressive, simply because he was in a relatively competitive fight whereas Brook had a knock-over job against an opponent who was clearly and comprehensively outmatched.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 27 Mar 2016, 12:06
by Larrylefthook
Was really surprised by the size of Bizier he looked just as big as Brook if not bigger, he kept a high guard but had no upper body lateral movement and Kell's jab was accurate and solid. I love Kell's half step back to give himself room and angle its so classy and his judgement of range is as good as anyone else.
Ward was impressive too and his jab is great as well as his sharp counter punching, he hits harder then people give him credit for and his chin is not as bad as some people think. His defence must be a nightmare if you are fighting him as he's so hard to catch clean.
Ward had a harder test but just because Bizier isn't technically good doesn't mean its easy to stop him (look how long it took Ward to stop Paul Smith, also Spence who most on here think can beat Brook took 5 rounds to beat a guy ranked 63 by BoxRec) Bizier is a big solid lump and for Brook to destroy him in 2 rounds really impressed me so I'd say Brook by a whisker was more impressive.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 27 Mar 2016, 13:52
by Freedom2013
Boxerbeetle wrote:Ward was more impressive, simply because he was in a relatively competitive fight whereas Brook had a knock-over job against an opponent who was clearly and comprehensively outmatched.
Bizier had never been down before, Brook took him out in round 2.
Ward should have been able to KO Barrera, but was afraid to try, so he just went for a decision win.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 27 Mar 2016, 13:59
by Tanzio
Freedom2013 wrote:Boxerbeetle wrote:Ward was more impressive, simply because he was in a relatively competitive fight whereas Brook had a knock-over job against an opponent who was clearly and comprehensively outmatched.
Bizier had never been down before, Brook took him out in round 2.
Ward should have been able to KO Barrera, but was afraid to try, so he just went for a decision win.
And if Ward had taken Barrera out in 1 we all know what you would be saying today

Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 27 Mar 2016, 14:06
by Freedom2013
Tanzio wrote: And if Ward had taken Barrera out in 1 we all know what you would be saying today

Ward isn't capable of taking out even a fringe contender.
He'd need to be fighting a clubfighter or someone badly weight-drained to get a KO.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 27 Mar 2016, 14:07
by gilgamesh
Brook
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 27 Mar 2016, 15:48
by crusader
Is Barrera even that much better than Bizier? What exactly has he done to make it clear that he's a level above?
I think Ward not having much power compared to Brook (P4P of course) helps explain why one fight was an early blowout and the other wasn't. If a guy can simply go rounds and throw punches, even if he's not effective, it can give the impression of a bout being less of a mismatch (and hence more credible) than an early stoppage in which the loser was quickly overwhelmed.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 27 Mar 2016, 16:40
by Tanzio
Ward did what was expected. Brook surprised most by getting Bizier out in 2. Therefore, I agree that Kell was a bit more impressive.
Also, I wouldn't favor any WW over Brook at this point. I'm not ready to make Ward the same sort of favorite at lhw as yet.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 27 Mar 2016, 16:48
by Horse
Neither was impressive.
They both need to stop messing around and fight a top level fighter.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 29 Mar 2016, 13:44
by Freedom2013
Horse wrote:Neither was impressive.
They both need to stop messing around and fight a top level fighter.
But Brook did what an elite fighter is supposed to do with a fringe contender, while Ward wasn't able to.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 29 Mar 2016, 14:49
by Freedom2013
Why do some say Ward hasn't lost since he was 12? Not true.
Ward had 5 amateur losses.
He only fought ONCE at world amateur level, in the weak light heavyweight division in the 2004 Olympics (he avoided talented middleweights like GGG and Dirrell).
Amateur Record: 114-5
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 29 Mar 2016, 15:33
by ikorolev
Freedom2013 wrote:Why do some say Ward hasn't lost since he was 12? Not true.
Ward had 5 amateur losses.
He only fought ONCE at world amateur level, in the weak light heavyweight division in the 2004 Olympics (he avoided talented middleweights like GGG and Dirrell).
Amateur Record: 114-5
Those 5 losses could be before the age of 13. I do agree that he had very few amateur fights on top level. Also, I think that he lost the Olympic semi-final and was gifted that win.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 29 Mar 2016, 15:37
by Freedom2013
ikorolev wrote:Freedom2013 wrote:Why do some say Ward hasn't lost since he was 12? Not true.
Ward had 5 amateur losses.
He only fought ONCE at world amateur level, in the weak light heavyweight division in the 2004 Olympics (he avoided talented middleweights like GGG and Dirrell).
Amateur Record: 114-5
Those 5 losses could be before the age of 13.
No, the losses came later, in his late teens and early 20s.
Ward had an amateur loss in 2004 to Edgar Muñoz:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_AIBA_ ... Tournament
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 29 Mar 2016, 15:55
by ikorolev
Freedom2013 wrote:ikorolev wrote:Freedom2013 wrote:Why do some say Ward hasn't lost since he was 12? Not true.
Ward had 5 amateur losses.
He only fought ONCE at world amateur level, in the weak light heavyweight division in the 2004 Olympics (he avoided talented middleweights like GGG and Dirrell).
Amateur Record: 114-5
Those 5 losses could be before the age of 13.
No, the losses came later, in his late teens and early 20s.
Ward had an amateur loss in 2004 to Edgar Muñoz:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1st_AIBA_ ... Tournament
Ward didn't lose that fight. He was no show claiming injury.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 29 Mar 2016, 15:59
by Freedom2013
ikorolev wrote:Ward didn't lose that fight. He was no show claiming injury.
Chickened out.

Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 29 Mar 2016, 16:03
by ikorolev
Freedom2013 wrote:ikorolev wrote:Ward didn't lose that fight. He was no show claiming injury.
Chickened out.

No. As it was already established, Ward just doesn't like to fight. He only does it when he has to for money. In order to get to Olympics, he had to be in top two, so he didn't want that unnecessary fight.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 29 Mar 2016, 16:06
by Freedom2013
ikorolev wrote:Freedom2013 wrote:ikorolev wrote:Ward didn't lose that fight. He was no show claiming injury.
Chickened out.

No. As it was already established, Ward just doesn't like to fight. He only does it when he has to for money. In order to get to Olympics, he had to be in top two, so he didn't want that unnecessary fight.
So he wasn't really injured, just pretending to be.
Why does he call himself the Son of God? He's obviously not a real Christian.
"God hates a lying tongue" - Proverbs
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 29 Mar 2016, 16:17
by ikorolev
Stop hating. There are so many people including boxers deserving that more than Ward.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 29 Mar 2016, 22:47
by diddy
Kell Brook knocks over a trashman but has a better performance than Ward against a guy with actual talent? Gotta love the anti-american bias. Quite simply a thread so retarded on a cellular level. What's it like to live with so much hate in one's heart? I cant relate to this mindset. Tell me what it's like.
Re: Who was more impressive: Kell Brook or Andre Ward?
Posted: 30 Mar 2016, 01:35
by crusader
What has Barrera done to show that he's significantly better than Bizier? Do you rate Karo Murat (couldn't win a round against Cleverly) that highly? How about the great, shot to utter shitt Jeff Lacy, who Barrera fought just last year? Or is it the win over Hakim Zoulika that tickles your fancy?
Barrera is a fringe contender at best. He was an okay opponent for Ward's first contest against a career LHW, but if Bizier is trash let's not suggest that Barrera is a top guy or even close to it. He was dropped by some 9-2 nobody (who was battered by Mohammedi) not long ago as well.
Brook winning by blowout doesn't mean his opponent was significantly worse; it speaks more to him being a much better puncher than Ward, who although not a Paulie M pillowfists doesn't have much pop and can't stop most non-scrubs early in the same way.