BoxRec

Emmseegee wrote:I agree that its a very high risk for a very little reward, also agree that it may not assist him in getting a fight with Mayweather but may set him up for a fight with Pacquiao.

A fight against Pacquaio would the most worst possible move from Khan in my estimation. Pacman would not be bamboozled by Amir's speed the way that some of the others would. And Pacman is very accurate with landing his shots with varied angles... As I say, it's not a good idea for the Kahn management team.

Emmseegee wrote:For me Khan is a fighter who on his day could out score anyone over 12 rounds due to the speed of his shots etc but obviously someone like Marquez is a dangerous fight for anyone.

Well said.

Emmseegee wrote:Let's be honest, there aren't many easy fights for Khan at welterweight!

I actually think that there is. Khan is a very good boxer, his management just need to take care with the fights they are giving him.

Though that stated, there is no disrespect in that because every Manager does it to one degree or another.

Would enjoy watching Khan test himself against pretty much any of them. He has the skills to beat most but does he have the discipline and ring craft??

Also I've seen 2 or 3 posts saying "Brook shouldn't be in the top 10" or "Thurman should be in the top 10". Don't worry, Thurman will be soon. But you can't say Brook shouldn't be due to his lack of top opponents and say Thurman should, he's fought an aging ex-lightweight in Diaz & Soto Karass! What's the rush with Thurman? He will prove himself but hasn't beat anyone yet.

danamba7 wrote:Would enjoy watching Khan test himself against pretty much any of them. He has the skills to beat most but does he have the discipline and ring craft??

Also I've seen 2 or 3 posts saying "Brook shouldn't be in the top 10" or "Thurman should be in the top 10". Don't worry, Thurman will be soon. But you can't say Brook shouldn't be due to his lack of top opponents and say Thurman should, he's fought an aging ex-lightweight in Diaz & Soto Karass! What's the rush with Thurman? He will prove himself but hasn't beat anyone yet.

Soto-Karass is arguably better than anyone Brook has fought

black panther wrote:

danamba7 wrote:Would enjoy watching Khan test himself against pretty much any of them. He has the skills to beat most but does he have the discipline and ring craft??

Also I've seen 2 or 3 posts saying "Brook shouldn't be in the top 10" or "Thurman should be in the top 10". Don't worry, Thurman will be soon. But you can't say Brook shouldn't be due to his lack of top opponents and say Thurman should, he's fought an aging ex-lightweight in Diaz & Soto Karass! What's the rush with Thurman? He will prove himself but hasn't beat anyone yet.

Soto-Karass is arguably better than anyone Brook has fought

Diego Chaves is a very good fighter aswell but has fought in Argentina and not had a great deal of profile because of that. I'm willing to wager that Kell would of found Chaves a tougher task than Senchenko to put it into context.

Crease wrote:

Emmseegee wrote:I agree that its a very high risk for a very little reward, also agree that it may not assist him in getting a fight with Mayweather but may set him up for a fight with Pacquiao.

A fight against Pacquaio would the most worst possible move from Khan in my estimation. Pacman would not be bamboozled by Amir's speed the way that some of the others would. And Pacman is very accurate with landing his shots with varied angles... As I say, it's not a good idea for the Kahn management team.

Emmseegee wrote:For me Khan is a fighter who on his day could out score anyone over 12 rounds due to the speed of his shots etc but obviously someone like Marquez is a dangerous fight for anyone.

Well said.

Emmseegee wrote:Let's be honest, there aren't many easy fights for Khan at welterweight!

I actually think that there is. Khan is a very good boxer, his management just need to take care with the fights they are giving him.

Though that stated, there is no disrespect in that because every Manager does it to one degree or another.

See I dont really agree with that (although I think he looked improved in that area against Collazo) ... He's a guy that has tremendous athleticism and throws a high volume of punches which in most cases his opponents just cant get out of the way of because he is that fast. However in a lot of other fights he's left himself wide open in the process.

danamba7 wrote:Also I've seen 2 or 3 posts saying "Brook shouldn't be in the top 10" or "Thurman should be in the top 10". Don't worry, Thurman will be soon. But you can't say Brook shouldn't be due to his lack of top opponents and say Thurman should, he's fought an aging ex-lightweight in Diaz & Soto Karass! What's the rush with Thurman? He will prove himself but hasn't beat anyone yet.

I'd say wins over Quintana, Zaveck, Chaves, Karass & Diaz is enough to put him above Brook.

columbo wrote:See I dont really agree with that (although I think he looked improved in that area against Collazo) ... He's a guy that has tremendous athleticism and throws a high volume of punches which in most cases his opponents just cant get out of the way of because he is that fast. However in a lot of other fights he's left himself wide open in the process.

Khan has left himself wide open during his past fights, and that definitely should be a concern. But he's 27 now and I'd like to think that he's matured and left the rookie mistakes behind him.

Horse wrote:

danamba7 wrote:Also I've seen 2 or 3 posts saying "Brook shouldn't be in the top 10" or "Thurman should be in the top 10". Don't worry, Thurman will be soon. But you can't say Brook shouldn't be due to his lack of top opponents and say Thurman should, he's fought an aging ex-lightweight in Diaz & Soto Karass! What's the rush with Thurman? He will prove himself but hasn't beat anyone yet.

I'd say wins over Quintana, Zaveck, Chaves, Karass & Diaz is enough to put him above Brook.

But someone's point was Brook hasn't beaten anyone in the top 10 so doesn't deserve to be there. Neither has Thurman! I think Thurman will go onto great things, just think some people need to chill out a little until he beats someone top class.

Horse wrote:

danamba7 wrote:Also I've seen 2 or 3 posts saying "Brook shouldn't be in the top 10" or "Thurman should be in the top 10". Don't worry, Thurman will be soon. But you can't say Brook shouldn't be due to his lack of top opponents and say Thurman should, he's fought an aging ex-lightweight in Diaz & Soto Karass! What's the rush with Thurman? He will prove himself but hasn't beat anyone yet.

I'd say wins over Quintana, Zaveck, Chaves, Karass & Diaz is enough to put him above Brook.

Yes good point, Quintana was a genuine top ten fighter at the time as he was coming off a KO over Deandre Latimore. Not to mention his past exploits including a (deserved) win over Paul Williams and snatching the unbeaten record of hot prospect/contender Joel Julio.

danamba7 wrote:Would enjoy watching Khan test himself against pretty much any of them. He has the skills to beat most but does he have the discipline and ring craft??

Also I've seen 2 or 3 posts saying "Brook shouldn't be in the top 10" or "Thurman should be in the top 10". Don't worry, Thurman will be soon. But you can't say Brook shouldn't be due to his lack of top opponents and say Thurman should, he's fought an aging ex-lightweight in Diaz & Soto Karass! What's the rush with Thurman? He will prove himself but hasn't beat anyone yet.

You talk complete sense sir Brook gets dug out at the slightest opportunity by certain posters you get used to it.

Instead of just moaning why don't you try to explain why Brook's opposition has been better than Thurman's? I'd say the posts above have been very reasonable wouldn't you?

I'd like to see Khan box Marquez next, I think it'd be a good fight and Khan would have to keep on his toes all night.

palooka wrote:I'd like to see Khan box Marquez next, I think it'd be a good fight and Khan would have to keep on his toes all night.

I think Khan would have to much for Marquez at this stage in the latters career.

Me too - it'd be a good showcase and Marquez is a fantastic name to have on his record. He'd have to prepare well though and keep aware - it'd be good to see how he compares to Bradley etc.

palooka wrote:Me too - it'd be a good showcase and Marquez is a fantastic name to have on his record. He'd have to prepare well though and keep aware - it'd be good to see how he compares to Bradley etc.

I'd fancy Khan to either get a late stoppage, kind of like the Malignaggi fight or win fairly wide on points. Marquez would have to land one of his perfect counter shots to win it I think and that would be pretty tough with Khans speed. I know he's done it with another very fast fighter in Pacqauio but I think the southpaw stance element helped somewhat in that aswell. Marquez is very good against lefties.

Either Pacquaio or Brook for me.

Both would make the most sense financially and profile-wise, both would make massive money and give Khan the big fight he needs instead of continually waiting for Mayweather who might never actually give him the fight.

Brook would clearly be a huge fight in britain and with Eddie and Sky promoting the life out of it and the rivalry that is there I think it could be a pretty successful fight, one that Khan should feel confident he can win. If Khan got beat though it would really put a dent in things so maybe he'll avoid it in the overall risk v reward stakes.

Khan v Pacquaio would be huge obviously, much more risk in this one but probably more reward, i.e. getting beat by Pacquaio is nothing to be ashamed of type of thing and plus he's getting older and much more beatable.

Having said all that, he'll probably tick over with another Collazo type.

TheCobra wrote:Either Pacquaio or Brook for me.

Both would make the most sense financially and profile-wise, both would make massive money and give Khan the big fight he needs instead of continually waiting for Mayweather who might never actually give him the fight.

Brook would clearly be a huge fight in britain and with Eddie and Sky promoting the life out of it and the rivalry that is there I think it could be a pretty successful fight, one that Khan should feel confident he can win. If Khan got beat though it would really put a dent in things so maybe he'll avoid it in the overall risk v reward stakes.

Khan v Pacquaio would be huge obviously, much more risk in this one but probably more reward, i.e. getting beat by Pacquaio is nothing to be ashamed of type of thing and plus he's getting older and much more beatable.

Having said all that, he'll probably tick over with another Collazo type.

I think that whilst the Brook fight would make Khan big money, I think Khan sees Kell as not helping his cause in terms of getting the Mayweather fight as he has very little profile in the states. Kell that is obviously.

columbo wrote:

palooka wrote:I'd like to see Khan box Marquez next, I think it'd be a good fight and Khan would have to keep on his toes all night.

I think Khan would have to much for Marquez at this stage in the latters career.

I agree given the trouble Bradley gave him.

I actually think that Khan could use a Brook fight in his favour for negotiating a Mayweather fight. (Should he beat Brook)

Obviously a loss would destroy any possibility of a Mayweather fight since Brook isnt big in the states but Khan v Brook would be a huge fight in britain. Sell decent PPV numbers and potentially even generate more PPV future sales for a Khan v Mayweather fight which he would be entitled to a % of.

TJ77 wrote:

columbo wrote:

palooka wrote:I'd like to see Khan box Marquez next, I think it'd be a good fight and Khan would have to keep on his toes all night.

I think Khan would have to much for Marquez at this stage in the latters career.

I agree given the trouble Bradley gave him.

I think Khan would pepper straight shots off Marquez's blooded face into the late rounds and the final result would really depend on Khans reaction when Marquez did have some success.

Lenny wrote:Instead of just moaning why don't you try to explain why Brook's opposition has been better than Thurman's? I'd say the posts above have been very reasonable wouldn't you?

Is that directed at me? Hard to tell with no quotes! I didn't say Brooks opposition has been better. My point is why everyone seems to want to push Thurman into the top 10 when he's not beat anyone in the top 10 but also say Brook doesn't belong in the top 10 because he's not beat anyone in the top 10. It's a bit contradictory that's all. Thurman will prove himself when he gets the chance though.

danamba7 wrote:

Lenny wrote:Instead of just moaning why don't you try to explain why Brook's opposition has been better than Thurman's? I'd say the posts above have been very reasonable wouldn't you?

Is that directed at me? Hard to tell with no quotes! I didn't say Brooks opposition has been better. My point is why everyone seems to want to push Thurman into the top 10 when he's not beat anyone in the top 10 but also say Brook doesn't belong in the top 10 because he's not beat anyone in the top 10. It's a bit contradictory that's all. Thurman will prove himself when he gets the chance though.

Not at all mate, there seem to be a certain amount of posters who think the forum is against Brook when all most posters want it to see him tested. They usually appear when Brook's name is mentioned with a witty retort such as "yawn".

I agree Thurman isn't nailed on top 10 yet, but I'd say he has more of a shout than Brook at present. Looking forward to seeing one of them against Porter

Lenny wrote:

danamba7 wrote:

Lenny wrote:Instead of just moaning why don't you try to explain why Brook's opposition has been better than Thurman's? I'd say the posts above have been very reasonable wouldn't you?

Is that directed at me? Hard to tell with no quotes! I didn't say Brooks opposition has been better. My point is why everyone seems to want to push Thurman into the top 10 when he's not beat anyone in the top 10 but also say Brook doesn't belong in the top 10 because he's not beat anyone in the top 10. It's a bit contradictory that's all. Thurman will prove himself when he gets the chance though.

Not at all mate, there seem to be a certain amount of posters who think the forum is against Brook when all most posters want it to see him tested. They usually appear when Brook's name is mentioned with a witty retort such as "yawn".

I agree Thurman isn't nailed on top 10 yet, but I'd say he has more of a shout than Brook at present. Looking forward to seeing one of them against Porter

True. I hope Brook goes far, but agree with most that Thurman will probably go further.

Dear good looking Lenny I have at length gone into the Kell Brook debate with an open mind and acknowlkedged the farcical way his career has been managed at times.
This is always met with digs and posts from experienced knowledgeable posters who want to slag Kell.
Don't judge me or my opinion on a couple of cocky remarks I have made after years of reading hate and trying to defend my opinion.
Its bad enough the powers that be ruin top fighters careers without having to repeat yourself when you know the facts on a subject pass these facts on and get slated for it.
Kell Brook is no angel and has at times taken things lightly and lost interest let things slip ie Carson Jones 1.
Eddie Hearn has been at fault for hyping opponents and not delivering on promises.
Sky have stuffed Kell down peoples throats at times and over hyped limited opposition.
Add in injuries and governing bodies allowing champions teams to manipulate the situation to benefit financially and or deny the mandatory a fight for whatever reason.
And you end up with a situation that would frustrate the most loyal of fans let alone the haters I get it believe me I get it.
Kell Brook has not been tested your right I wish to god he had cos its purgatory for him and us who believe he can be a champion.
But it works both ways untested is untested not a reason to question his bottle or write him off.
Go back through the threads if you don't believe me but don't say I moan without fighting my corner there comes a time to wait to see how it pans out cos no matter what's said its hypothectical.
I have no beef with you just look at the whole picture is all im saying.

And there are certain posters who just wanna slag him its not my opinion its a fact mate.