BoxRec

Just wondering (I haven't seen it) - did Brook get it automatically (old rules), or was it a scorecards job (new rules)?

Looks like old rule - automatically.

Bit unlucky for Jennings then. :(

The new rules aren't in force yet.

I think if you'd never seen Kell Brook box before the magnificent 7 show you'd wonder what all the fuss was about because during the Jennings fight he looked average at best. Jennings was getting more and more into the fight shame about the cut.

It was via a punch anyway (as officially declared) - so it wouldn't have mattered.

As this was a WBO intercontinental title fight... wouldn't this have gone to the cards, ala Barrera vs Khan, Murray vs that guy for the WBC Youth title.

The corner stopped it though, you can see on TV that he [Hughes] just shakes his head and says stop the fight.

tsmithy50 wrote: Jennings was getting more and more into the fight shame about the cut.

did you see the expression on his face when he got hit?

No I didn't. Do you think it was a good performance then? Especially after Nazs build-up I know Brooks his friend but Pacman? Not in this century.

tsmithy50 wrote:I think if you'd never seen Kell Brook box before the magnificent 7 show you'd wonder what all the fuss was about because during the Jennings fight he looked average at best. Jennings was getting more and more into the fight shame about the cut.

jennings is cagey and makes fighters look bad, but brook won the rounds and showed a great jab and good defence, then hurt jennings in the 5th. you will see his class in december when somebody actually comes to fight him ;;-)

Counter-puncher wrote:

tsmithy50 wrote: Jennings was getting more and more into the fight shame about the cut.

did you see the expression on his face when he got hit?

exactly what i am saying brook snapped his head back with that jab numerous times, outworked him and didn't get hit apart frm a few jabs, then in the 5th when brook unleashed that combo jennings didn't want to be in that ring!

Brook does get hit a little too often for my liking.

However, Jennings was doing what he does best and being lively, quick and creating angles.

As soon as Brook opened up though, you could tell the difference. The cut saved him from being broken up a bit, in my view.

tsmithy50 wrote:No I didn't. Do you think it was a good performance then? Especially after Nazs build-up I know Brooks his friend but Pacman? Not in this century.

no i din't think Brook was that good.

was just saying, Jennings eyes opened up saucer-wide when he got hit.

Brook was just getting into his stride when the fight was stopped on the cut......... bring on Pacman

HomeOfBritishBoxing wrote:

tsmithy50 wrote:I think if you'd never seen Kell Brook box before the magnificent 7 show you'd wonder what all the fuss was about because during the Jennings fight he looked average at best. Jennings was getting more and more into the fight shame about the cut.

jennings is cagey and makes fighters look bad, but brook won the rounds and showed a great jab and good defence, then hurt jennings in the 5th. you will see his class in december when somebody actually comes to fight him ;;-)

You are kidding? He did fornicate all in that fight to prove he is the best young fighter in Britain.

The guy is so overhyped and I was disgusted with his comments about being sorry he didn't lay him out "unconscious"

He is disrespectful. Naz could be as well, but Brook does not have 50% of what Hamed had...

Captain Hook wrote:

HomeOfBritishBoxing wrote:

tsmithy50 wrote:I think if you'd never seen Kell Brook box before the magnificent 7 show you'd wonder what all the fuss was about because during the Jennings fight he looked average at best. Jennings was getting more and more into the fight shame about the cut.

jennings is cagey and makes fighters look bad, but brook won the rounds and showed a great jab and good defence, then hurt jennings in the 5th. you will see his class in december when somebody actually comes to fight him ;;-)

You are kidding? He did eff all in that fight to prove he is the best young fighter in Britain.

The guy is so overhyped and I was disgusted with his comments about being sorry he didn't lay him out "unconscious"

He is disrespectful. Naz could be as well, but Brook does not have 50% of what Hamed had...

Brook doesn't have 5% of what Naz had. And the 5% is a lack of tact at certain times. I think there has been a little too much of this craving for unconcious outcomes by fighters....Haye kicked it off just lately, and theme has grown from there. Even if a fighter uses phrases like "spark you out", "batter you" or "put you on your arse" or "lights out" it just doesn't feel as chilling as "unconscious", do we really need to be that gutteral to sell fights?

Well said, it made me cringe.

He sounds like a fornicating Wakefield hairdresser and has absolutely no class.

He has a lot of talent but is NOWHERE NEAR as good as he, and some of the posters on here, think he is.

We're all used to the gutter talk but this kid just oozes petulance and disrespect.

I was also pissed off the commentators were talking about Jennings as if he was some journeyman there to give Brook a workout. He lost to Muttley, which was a huge shock, and then to Miguel Cotto, and he didn't disgrace himself in that one. His record is solid and he's beaten some very good boxers.

So what makes people think he's worth nothing more than cannon fodder for Brook?

Jennings has class in and out of the ring, he deserved better....

DavidPayne wrote:Brook doesn't have 5% of what Naz had.

Strange how you think this yet Naz himself disagrees. Coincidentally, he does have 5% of the body fat which Naz currently has.

His unconscious quote was a bit remiss and simply daft as he followed it immediately with a very respectful comment about how everybody in boxing knows what a nice kid Jennings is.

I know what you mean about him being overhyped. But if you look at his record since March 2008, he's smashed a load of domestic level opposition - some of them good too - Darren Gethin, Barrie Jones, Kevin McIntyre, Stuart Elwell, Michael Lomax. Bienias boxed like a clam and didn't make him look great yet was still stopped in six and now Jennings was beaten in five, in an unsatisfactory manner which again wasn't Brook's fault.

Jennings did deserve more respect than to be talked about as if he was merely an opponent. But for anyone believing that there was going to be anything else than a Brook win, you're way off. As soon as Brook opened up, different gravy, I'm afraid.

We'll only really tell how good he is when he fights someone right up there.

Stylistically, this fight was likely to make Brook look a bit shoddy. Jennings wasn't there to trade leather in the middle of the ring. I was disappointed that Brook didn't target Jenning's body, as Cotto had looked like a beast in doing so, but at least it was a comfortable fight for Brooks. He never looked in danger of not winning. Also, I don't think it was a match up to motivate Brook.

Ian 'Mr' McNeilly wrote:

DavidPayne wrote:Brook doesn't have 5% of what Naz had.

Strange how you think this yet Naz himself disagrees. Coincidentally, he does have 5% of the body fat which Naz currently has.

His unconscious quote was a bit remiss and simply daft as he followed it immediately with a very respectful comment about how everybody in boxing knows what a nice kid Jennings is.

I know what you mean about him being overhyped. But if you look at his record since March 2008, he's smashed a load of domestic level opposition - some of them good too - Darren Gethin, Barrie Jones, Kevin McIntyre, Stuart Elwell, Michael Lomax. Bienias boxed like a clam and didn't make him look great yet was still stopped in six and now Jennings was beaten in five, in an unsatisfactory manner which again wasn't Brook's fault.

Jennings did deserve more respect than to be talked about as if he was merely an opponent. But for anyone believing that there was going to be anything else than a Brook win, you're way off. As soon as Brook opened up, different gravy, I'm afraid.

We'll only really tell how good he is when he fights someone right up there.

As you imply Ian, Naz is better placed than me to comment. And perhaps in terms of work-ethic he's having Naz's career in reverse. Maybe, I am just reaching that crucial watershed in age where the old-uns were always better than the new ones. However, I would say this, though I have a great deal of time for mick and hoped, thought he'd win, Naz would have demolished a similar level of fighter with aplomb. Maybe Kel did that....didn't see it myself, maybe I've just taken an unhinged, illogical dislike to the guy. Its all possible.

I would have liked to see Brook show some of the ringcraft that Cotto showed in cutting the ring down to get to Jennings

The end of the fight was very inconclusive, Jennings was coming back into the fight and who knows what might have happened if it lasted to the later rounds. Might be worth a re-match.

I was a little dissapointed in Brook I must say. I do agree with David in that Naz would have demolished a Featherweight version of Michael Jennings, and beat the equivalent (solid EBU level) fighters quickly and early. The fighter I have in mind is Billy Hardy.

What I was a little bit dissapointed in, was the power. I think I bought the hype a little bit, with the Elwell, Lomax and McIntyre performances - he seemed as strong as an ox that night... flooring them with jabs etc.

I know I'm doing Michael a big disservice but I expected Brook to be hurting Michael far more easily than he did. I really couldn't see anything Michael's game to worry Kell. I didn't think he carried the fire power or the punch resistance to worry Kell. Michael is excellent at what he does, and usually has the workrate and speed to outwork domestic level opponents. However, there has been a few times where he has been badly hurt in fights and it's a little alarming for the future that it seemed like Kell couldn't hurt him.

He's still very strong for the weight, but he needs to be matched carefully before going into PROPER world class. Maybe a couple of fights against domestic level Light Middles, to see what he is going to be like when he cannot bully his opponent. If he cannot really stun Jennings, then what is someone like Berto going to be like.

dr_devious wrote:The end of the fight was very inconclusive, Jennings was coming back into the fight and who knows what might have happened if it lasted to the later rounds. Might be worth a re-match.

This is the type of thing that is counting against Brook. It was inconclusive - but that wasn't really Brook's fault. Jennings started to hold his own, Brook opened up, it was all over - but from a cut. Had he not been cut, I'm really sure Brook would have won - but that won't convince anyone.

kell did what he could and personally from seeing him spar and train i think he could have put on the pace even early on but likes to take his time and look for openings and land a clean shot rather than combinations more jabs and counters and single bursts of 1 2 or 3 shots.. wasnt finished in impressive style but he cut him up bad with a punch not an elbow as i read in the telegraph claims jennings.. i think brook is yet to impress but most boxing experts know his time will come to hit the big stage and in the big fights he will have to prove so just a matter of time and you cant think kell has no chance of beating paqaio me personally see no reason why he cant given a few fights down the line..