BoxRec

ThereByTheGrace wrote:Out of order mate

Donkey has a slightly...odd sense of humour. He's not being serious.

BigDoofus wrote:

lefty wrote:

BigDoofus wrote:
Mandatory position means short-end of the purse. His team keeps telling Hearn they don't want the fight. Bradley doesn't want the fight yet. Haymon controls the other top welters (including Spence). He hasn't made Brook one offer for any of his fighters.

So when Spence gets himself into a mandatory position, do you think Brook will fulfill his mandatory or do you think he'll drop the IBF belt and keep the WBO strap if he beats Vargas OR move up to 155?

You're ignoring the fact that none of the top welters will fight Brook and criticising Brook for it. Spence could have boxed Brook now. Whether his team will want him to fight Brook within the next 9 months is unknown, but you're still trying to criticise Brook for it.
Brook has already beaten Porter, but Haymon also controls Thurman, Garcia, Spence,Khan and previously Floyd. Given the huge amounts of money that Haymon has invested and that Floyd has claimed the other fighters are swerving Brook, why do you think that Haymon has not offered Brook a fight?
I'm expecting Brook to beat Vargas and perhaps fight Bradley as the others seem reluctant to face Brook.

Brook should sign an advisory deal with Haymon

Here's What Spence said in response to Hearn saying his team had turned down the fight .... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R7bpIhGEBa4

Autobarn wrote:

ALI wrote:

Autobarn wrote:Glad he will remain current.

Remain current, he's a world champion who has been defending his title for the last 2 years against complete unknown no hopers, he is a laughing stock right now, what are you on about man?

Laughing stock?

What are you on about man

Its an expression, a lot of people think his pre porter record was pants and post porter oponents a total joke. Are you seriously disagreeing with this? He is being slagged by a lot of fans around the world for his piss poor defences.

lefty wrote:

BigDoofus wrote:

lefty wrote: So when Spence gets himself into a mandatory position, do you think Brook will fulfill his mandatory or do you think he'll drop the IBF belt and keep the WBO strap if he beats Vargas OR move up to 155?

You're ignoring the fact that none of the top welters will fight Brook and criticising Brook for it. Spence could have boxed Brook now. Whether his team will want him to fight Brook within the next 9 months is unknown, but you're still trying to criticise Brook for it.
Brook has already beaten Porter, but Haymon also controls Thurman, Garcia, Spence,Khan and previously Floyd. Given the huge amounts of money that Haymon has invested and that Floyd has claimed the other fighters are swerving Brook, why do you think that Haymon has not offered Brook a fight?
I'm expecting Brook to beat Vargas and perhaps fight Bradley as the others seem reluctant to face Brook.

Brook should sign an advisory deal with Haymon

Here's What Spence said in response to Hearn saying his team had turned down the fight .... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R7bpIhGEBa4

And after that video Hearn said he contacted Spence's team again and got the same response - "he's not ready yet".

What happens if Thurman absolutely batters Porter?

Suddenly Brooks best win by a million miles gets brought back to earth.

What happens if Porter batters Thurman?

His best win gets enhanced and a Porter rematch becomes the biggest fight in the division.


He needs a good run desperately.

Vargas is a credible opponent, but only if he wins and can use the belts to entice a big name.

BigDoofus wrote:

lefty wrote:

BigDoofus wrote:
You're ignoring the fact that none of the top welters will fight Brook and criticising Brook for it. Spence could have boxed Brook now. Whether his team will want him to fight Brook within the next 9 months is unknown, but you're still trying to criticise Brook for it.
Brook has already beaten Porter, but Haymon also controls Thurman, Garcia, Spence,Khan and previously Floyd. Given the huge amounts of money that Haymon has invested and that Floyd has claimed the other fighters are swerving Brook, why do you think that Haymon has not offered Brook a fight?
I'm expecting Brook to beat Vargas and perhaps fight Bradley as the others seem reluctant to face Brook.

Brook should sign an advisory deal with Haymon

Here's What Spence said in response to Hearn saying his team had turned down the fight .... https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=R7bpIhGEBa4

And after that video Hearn said he contacted Spence's team again and got the same response - "he's not ready yet".

How do you know that Hearns not lying about that though? Thats not a criticism of brook but it wouldn't surprise me.

Why take Hearn's word over Spence's? How do you decide which party is telling the truth?

crusader wrote:Why take Hearn's word over Spence's? How do you decide which party is telling the truth?

I don't know spence obviously but he doesn't give off a second hand car salesman vibe in regards to authenticity like Hearn does.

lefty wrote:

crusader wrote:Why take Hearn's word over Spence's? How do you decide which party is telling the truth?

I don't know spence obviously but he doesn't give off a second hand car salesman vibe in regards to authenticity like Hearn does.

Then why doesn't Spence's management shout about wanting to fight him.....

crusader wrote:Why take Hearn's word over Spence's? How do you decide which party is telling the truth?

By making a fight offer. Haymon hasn't made Brook an offer to fight Spence, Khan, Garcia or Thurman. Even Mayweather (Haymon fighter) says Brook is being avoided by the other welters.

Hearn has not said Errol is turning it down.

Afterall Eddie wouldn't talk to the fighter himself, but his handlers - and Eddie said it was them who turned it down on his behalf.

Errol should be talking about his managers turning it down, and not Hearn whom is the guy that seems to be actually making the calls to make it happen.

BigDoofus wrote:

crusader wrote:Why take Hearn's word over Spence's? How do you decide which party is telling the truth?

By making a fight offer. Haymon hasn't made Brook an offer to fight Spence, Khan, Garcia or Thurman. Even Mayweather (Haymon fighter) says Brook is being avoided by the other welters.

How do you know that Hearn has made an offer, and how do you know the details of it?

G0mez wrote:Hearn has not said Errol is turning it down.

Afterall Eddie wouldn't talk to the fighter himself, but his handlers - and Eddie said it was them who turned it down on his behalf.

Errol should be talking about his managers turning it down, and not Hearn whom is the guy that seems to be actually making the calls to make it happen.

How do you actually know that Hearn has actually done that though and not just claiming he has to get people off of his back?

lefty wrote:

G0mez wrote:Hearn has not said Errol is turning it down.

Afterall Eddie wouldn't talk to the fighter himself, but his handlers - and Eddie said it was them who turned it down on his behalf.

Errol should be talking about his managers turning it down, and not Hearn whom is the guy that seems to be actually making the calls to make it happen.

How do you actually know that Hearn has actually done that though and not just claiming he has to get people off of his back?

It seems some people on here hate Brook that much that they don't want to believe it.

lefty wrote:

G0mez wrote:Hearn has not said Errol is turning it down.

Afterall Eddie wouldn't talk to the fighter himself, but his handlers - and Eddie said it was them who turned it down on his behalf.

Errol should be talking about his managers turning it down, and not Hearn whom is the guy that seems to be actually making the calls to make it happen.

How do you actually know that Hearn has actually done that though and not just claiming he has to get people off of his back?

He's been on mulitple videos and given multiple accounts of the fact he reached out to Errol's team to discuss making the match-up, whom by return said it was too soon right now (or words to that effect).

Perhaps they want a purse bid to make the fight themselves rather than coming to the UK, perhaps he genuinely isn't ready right now and they sensibly feel he might need a fight or two more. But the conversations have taken place and the replies were given by them.

Errol is now saving face on the matter, it's as plain as day. But like I said, Hearn shouldn't be the focus of his mind right now if he does want the fight - he should look at his own team. They might have a course plotted out for him that may or may not feature Kell Brook in it.

Regarding Brooks win over Porter , lets not forget boxing is subjective and whilst Brook got the recorded win, many felt that Porter did enough to win that fight. The recorded win was the opimion of the ringside judges not everyone.

mark a h wrote:Regarding Brooks win over Porter , lets not forget boxing is subjective and whilst Brook got the recorded win, many felt that Porter did enough to win that fight. The recorded win was the opimion of the ringside judges not everyone.

It was the opinion of the vast majority.

There was no real controversy.

Switch hitter wrote:

lefty wrote:

crusader wrote:Why take Hearn's word over Spence's? How do you decide which party is telling the truth?

I don't know spence obviously but he doesn't give off a second hand car salesman vibe in regards to authenticity like Hearn does.

Then why doesn't Spence's management shout about wanting to fight him.....

When has Al haymon been a vocal figure, full stop?! Also, Spence himself has called Brook out after fighta and they're trying to get in the mandatory position.

G0mez wrote:

lefty wrote:

G0mez wrote:Hearn has not said Errol is turning it down.

Afterall Eddie wouldn't talk to the fighter himself, but his handlers - and Eddie said it was them who turned it down on his behalf.

Errol should be talking about his managers turning it down, and not Hearn whom is the guy that seems to be actually making the calls to make it happen.

How do you actually know that Hearn has actually done that though and not just claiming he has to get people off of his back?

He's been on mulitple videos and given multiple accounts of the fact he reached out to Errol's team to discuss making the match-up, whom by return said it was too soon right now (or words to that effect).

Perhaps they want a purse bid to make the fight themselves rather than coming to the UK, perhaps he genuinely isn't ready right now and they sensibly feel he might need a fight or two more. But the conversations have taken place and the replies were given by them.

Errol is now saving face on the matter, it's as plain as day. But like I said, Hearn shouldn't be the focus of his mind right now if he does want the fight - he should look at his own team. They might have a course plotted out for him that may or may not feature Kell Brook in it.

I guess time will tell when he gets in the mandatory position.

When Floyd was here he made it clear that Spence was a long way off being ready for a Brook fight but thought that in the fullness of time he would be the best in the division.
Let's wait and see.
Pointless shout out from both camps.

crusader wrote:Why take Hearn's word over Spence's? How do you decide which party is telling the truth?

I thought it was standard to jump on the Spence bandwagon, given he's an exciting Yank who's just arrived on the scene.

PredatorHayds wrote:What happens if Thurman absolutely batters Porter?

Suddenly Brooks best win by a million miles gets brought back to earth.

What happens if Porter batters Thurman?

His best win gets enhanced and a Porter rematch becomes the biggest fight in the division.


He needs a good run desperately.

Vargas is a credible opponent, but only if he wins and can use the belts to entice a big name.

Before this fight was announced, several forum members, out of cynicism, seemed to have decided already that Brook was fighting Peterson. Extensive reasons why Peterson was not good enough. Excuses to attack Brook, Hearn etc.

Now Vargas is on, and we still get pages and pages on moaning, cynicism and negativity.

Moaning seems to be something you do quite a bit.

How many more times are you going to whine that people are hard on Crolla, Gallagher, Brook, and Hearn?

BigDoofus wrote:

lefty wrote:

G0mez wrote:Hearn has not said Errol is turning it down.

Afterall Eddie wouldn't talk to the fighter himself, but his handlers - and Eddie said it was them who turned it down on his behalf.

Errol should be talking about his managers turning it down, and not Hearn whom is the guy that seems to be actually making the calls to make it happen.

How do you actually know that Hearn has actually done that though and not just claiming he has to get people off of his back?

It seems some people on here hate Brook that much that they don't want to believe it.

I don't hate Brook. I've said on here loads of times that I like his skill set and think he's one of if not the best welterweight in the division. What I do hate is the he won't show that by fighting the likes of Thurman, Spence, etc.

Also to be fair, yourself and parsons and a few others are not exactly unbiased in this matter as you guys personally know Kell.

BigDoofus wrote:

lefty wrote:

G0mez wrote:Hearn has not said Errol is turning it down.

Afterall Eddie wouldn't talk to the fighter himself, but his handlers - and Eddie said it was them who turned it down on his behalf.

Errol should be talking about his managers turning it down, and not Hearn whom is the guy that seems to be actually making the calls to make it happen.

How do you actually know that Hearn has actually done that though and not just claiming he has to get people off of his back?

It seems some people on here hate Brook that much that they don't want to believe it.

Or maybe they're smart enough not to assume that something must be true if Hearn claimed it.