When will you give Brook the respect he deserves?

What respect? By beating Brandon Rios without allowing him to use his gloves? http://i.ytimg.com/vi/w3misMQZil4/maxresdefault.jpg

Do I really have to explain that to you? It was obviously not a snooze fest like you claim Khan fights are. Khan is cringe. I don't pay much attention to what he says. He needs a PR guy. Need to send out some CVs to Khan Promotions. Well, to each his own. I'm sure Brook-Porter was worth staying awake all night. I mean it certainly didn't help with the 661k ratings compared to Garcia-Salka 880k.........ouch! I don't know what the general consensus was tbh. I was more in to Lemeiux-N'dam and I'm not gonna lie I didn't care much of their build up. However, in my opinion I thought Porter would rough Broner up because he doesn't throw enough and if he did lose it's hard not to blame the weight. If anything I looked at it as a lose-lose for Broner. Win and you get no props for beating a weight drained fighter and if you lose, well you got smacked up by someone you've held such a significant advantage over. Edit: There is a reason why I said it is a good win for Porter. The circumstances show he was at a major disadvantage (weight) and of course Broner brings name value due to being hyped for all those years, so over all it makes it a good win. Khan will end his career on a higher note than Hatton and Brook. Kell has 35 wins, 10 year WW and one win that stands out. There is a reason for that with Brook. You can call all the names in the book, but remember one phone call from Khan Promotions office and they will come wagging their tail. That is how it works and it is because Amir is THE MAN and you don't become that by milking one win in a 10 year career. Yet you call Khan a stepping stone in another thread. Cringe. Give Kuggie Bear his props for coming up with that. Yes please explain what viewing figures mean to a great fight please. Mayweather vs Pacquiao was a snoozefest. I've tried to watch it back once. ZzzZZz Yes he's cringe. Mostly becaus he contradicts himself constantly. It was worth it all mate. Watching your countryman win a world title as an underdog in America - worth it all. Should be for all Brits. If Khan gets Mayweather, you best believe I'll be backing him like crazy. Why are you bringing up ratings? Brook wasn't the house fighter :lol1: If anything you can blame those ratings on Porter. Garcia has been at a world level for a long time - I don't see it as a surprise that he pulled good ratings. Khan will end his career on a higher note than Kell? How did you get that logic? :lol1: He's content fighting bums and beg for a payday from his idol. that's how it is right now - because obviously Kell would make history and a lot of money for a Khan fight. So would Khan, he just doesn't have the balls to do it. When Khan loses again - and he will - what will happen then? All of a sudden Kell's a world champion and Khan has 4 losses on his record. Khan is getting to be a little bit like David Haye. He was fun in his prime, but he's like a broken record now that nobody really listens to. But I believe Khan is a stepping stone. Honestly. If he had balls, he'd be a stepping stone for the likes of Brook, Thurman, Porter, Errol Spence. But he doesn't want to take that risk - or his team don't, because ultimately, they have no faith in him.

Brook needs to do more obviously. The Porter win was good but it's a shame he got himself into that stabbing incident which stalled potential fights. The Dan fight was a mandatory and Gavin was a throwaway just to get him out again. I feel he's on the right track. Rios on HBO will do plenty for his profile in America and will lead to the "big fightssshh" he's looking for.

Because he held all night in that fight. It was a close fight. He only beat 1 good fighter when he beats two or three other name high ranked fighters then he'll get respect we don't even know if he can really take a hard punch. Seeing as how Porter is no big puncher. This right here. He did beat Porter but all that holding is a turnoff

As soon as he hooks me up with his fine ass mom.

Resume wars :wank:

It took me a while to get on board with the Brook hype. When he beat Porter I was really high on him. This year has been dissapointing. Dan was a mandatory so understandable. Frankie Gavin was completely pointless and was just used to bulk up the PPV card. He was unfortunate that Khan decided to turn down a huge payday, but now Rios is the 'big' fight for him? Boring. When he fights another contender/ champ I'll start paying attention again.

Beating Shawn Porter in his own backyard after being wrote off by the entire boxing community was a brilliant performance. NSB was alllllll over Porter before he faced Kell.

So because it had viewers it was a good fight? What kind of logic is that? Mayweather/Pacquiao had infinitely more and it was also a complete stinkfest. Honestly, Khan wouldn't KO any of those guys. He hasn't had a KO since Judah. Stoppage on cuts or whatever, maybe. But not a knockout. He needs to get himself in the shape he was in vs Collazo asap. Then he'd be a force again maybe. Do I really have to explain that to you? It was obviously not a snooze fest like you claim Khan fights are. Winning every round was good. But he talks about power and explosiveness all the time. He had none of those things in his last two fights. Khan is cringe. I don't pay much attention to what he says. He needs a PR guy. Need to send out some CVs to Khan Promotions. But his fights are boring? Since using Virgil Hunter he's become progressively worse and worse to watch. The Algieri fight was almost unwatchable. When he was with Roach I thought he was the most exciting fighter in the world - or at least up there. He's nowhere near as exciting to watch now. Maybe it also has something to do with the standard of opposition and cherrypicking featherfisted guys. Well, to each his own. I'm sure Brook-Porter was worth staying awake all night. I mean it certainly didn't help with the 661k ratings compared to Garcia-Salka 880k.........ouch! Broner is an average fighter. So? the general consenses was that he'd outbox Porter right? Just ask the guy above me. Porter may not have the most pleasing style to watch all the time because he can get tied up quite easily. But he's a top 5-6 welterweight. Something Khan hasn't proven yet. I don't know what the general consensus was tbh. I was more in to Lemeiux-N'dam and I'm not gonna lie I didn't care much of their build up. However, in my opinion I thought Porter would rough Broner up because he doesn't throw enough and if he did lose it's hard not to blame the weight. If anything I looked at it as a lose-lose for Broner. Win and you get no props for beating a weight drained fighter and if you lose, well you got smacked up by someone you've held such a significant advantage over. Edit: There is a reason why I said it is a good win for Porter. The circumstances show he was at a major disadvantage (weight) and of course Broner brings name value due to being hyped for all those years, so over all it makes it a good win. Khan will end his career on a higher note than Hatton and Brook. Kell has 35 wins, 10 year WW and one win that stands out. There is a reason for that with Brook. You can call all the names in the book, but remember one phone call from Khan Promotions office and they will come wagging their tail. That is how it works and it is because Amir is THE MAN and you don't become that by milking one win in a 10 year career. Yet you call Khan a stepping stone in another thread. Cringe. But it wasn't really close. He won with 5 rounds on one card and 4 on the other. the british judge was obviously sleeping. There's no way you can make a case for Porter winning the fight, he didn't land 3 clean punches all night. From a tweet last night. "before Brook, Porter = beast. After Brook, Porter = Bum. Before Broner, Porter = ?, After Broner, Porter = Beast" Brook takes a fine punch. I don't think he'll go out of his way to take a punch square on the nose to prove a point to you though :lol1: But he's taken punches that shows you he can take a punch. Unlike another British "welterweight". Give Kuggie Bear his props for coming up with that.

Well, may be if Khan fought Alvaro Robles or Yo Yo Man, he would. Stink fest? Bruh Khan-Algieri was over million viewers on a Friday night in a non-World title fight. The fight itself and not the card. Oh so it is Khan's fault he can win every single round in a fight against a guy like Alexander? :lol1: The fact you now think Khan's fights are boring says it all as to how far you've gone with your devotion to Brook. Khan struggled with Limonds and the Gomezes and there were doubts about his chin, but Prescott sealed our opinion on it. Now many thought Broner was hype, but there were many who felt otherwise because it hadn't been proven in the ring. Maidana did, so to the victor goes the spoil. I still think it is a good win for Porter, but Broner is an average fighter. However, it is difficult for me to see how Porter beating him is the same as Maidana. Again given the circumstances around each bout. So because it had viewers it was a good fight? What kind of logic is that? Mayweather/Pacquiao had infinitely more and it was also a complete stinkfest. Honestly, Khan wouldn't KO any of those guys. He hasn't had a KO since Judah. Stoppage on cuts or whatever, maybe. But not a knockout. He needs to get himself in the shape he was in vs Collazo asap. Then he'd be a force again maybe. Winning every round was good. But he talks about power and explosiveness all the time. He had none of those things in his last two fights. But his fights are boring? Since using Virgil Hunter he's become progressively worse and worse to watch. The Algieri fight was almost unwatchable. When he was with Roach I thought he was the most exciting fighter in the world - or at least up there. He's nowhere near as exciting to watch now. Maybe it also has something to do with the standard of opposition and cherrypicking featherfisted guys. Broner is an average fighter. So? the general consenses was that he'd outbox Porter right? Just ask the guy above me. Porter may not have the most pleasing style to watch all the time because he can get tied up quite easily. But he's a top 5-6 welterweight. Something Khan hasn't proven yet.

Since David Haye is unlikely to return to the ring, LacedUp has moved his allegiance to another hyped Brit. I look forward to the fall.

Well, may be if Khan fought Alvaro Robles or Yo Yo Man, he would. Stink fest? Bruh Khan-Algieri was over million viewers on a Friday night in a non-World title fight. The fight itself and not the card. Oh so it is Khan's fault he can win every single round in a fight against a guy like Alexander? :lol1: The fact you now think Khan's fights are boring says it all as to how far you've gone with your devotion to Brook. Khan struggled with Limonds and the Gomezes and there were doubts about his chin, but Prescott sealed our opinion on it. Now many thought Broner was hype, but there were many who felt otherwise because it hadn't been proven in the ring. Maidana did, so to the victor goes the spoil. I still think it is a good win for Porter, but Broner is an average fighter. However, it is difficult for me to see how Porter beating him is the same as Maidana. Again given the circumstances around each bout. Solid post. :fing02:

Well it was certainly a better fight than the stinkfests Khan has given us lately. Do you think Khan will ever get a KO again? Well, may be if Khan fought Alvaro Robles or Yo Yo Man, he would. Stink fest? Bruh Khan-Algieri was over million viewers on a Friday night in a non-World title fight. The fight itself and not the card. Oh so it is Khan's fault he can win every single round in a fight against a guy like Alexander? :lol1: The fact you now think Khan's fights are boring says it all as to how far you've gone with your devotion to Brook. OK so you're saying Broner was an average win for Porter but a massive win for Maidana? That's what I took from what you said. The same Broner who struggled with Ponce de leon and Paulie Malignaggi. Exactly the same fighter who fought Maidana and was exactly the same that fought Porter. Khan struggled with Limonds and the Gomezes and there were doubts about his chin, but Prescott sealed our opinion on it. Now many thought Broner was hype, but there were many who felt otherwise because it hadn't been proven in the ring. Maidana did, so to the victor goes the spoil. I still think it is a good win for Porter, but Broner is an average fighter. However, it is difficult for me to see how Porter beating him is the same as Maidana. Again given the circumstances around each bout.

Because he held all night in that fight. It was a close fight. He only beat 1 good fighter when he beats two or three other name high ranked fighters then he'll get respect we don't even know if he can really take a hard punch. Seeing as how Porter is no big puncher. But it wasn't really close. He won with 5 rounds on one card and 4 on the other. the british judge was obviously sleeping. There's no way you can make a case for Porter winning the fight, he didn't land 3 clean punches all night. From a tweet last night. "before Brook, Porter = beast. After Brook, Porter = Bum. Before Broner, Porter = ?, After Broner, Porter = Beast" Brook takes a fine punch. I don't think he'll go out of his way to take a punch square on the nose to prove a point to you though :lol1: But he's taken punches that shows you he can take a punch. Unlike another British "welterweight".

Since IBF champ and #1 Welterweight Kell Brook beat Shawn Porter 117-111 or 116-112, people have been saying Porter is just average and it wasn't nothing special. This of course comes primarily from deluded Amir 'chin' Khan fans who are looking for every excuse in the book as to why Brook doesn't 'deserve' Khan (lol, cringe). But some people were also saying before Porter fought Brook that he didn't stand a chance and that Porter would be competitive with Mayweather.. Hell, some even picked him to beat Mayweaher *cough* New England *cough*. Some of those same people turned around and said Porter was just average after Brook mastered him. Now some people are talking about Porter fighting Mayweather in September smh. What about Brook? He showed the difference between a strong welterweight with skill, balance, movement and and a strong inside game and someone like Adrien Broner tonight. And Porter for that matter. People, when will you start paying Kell Brook the respect he deserves? He's clearly on another level to these supposed top 10 guys like Porter, Khan, Guerrero, Maidana and Broner for that matter - or whoever you want to mention that's fought Mayweather or might fight him. Because he held all night in that fight. It was a close fight. He only beat 1 good fighter when he beats two or three other name high ranked fighters then he'll get respect we don't even know if he can really take a hard punch. Seeing as how Porter is no big puncher.

I'll just address the bold and then leave you to watch Brook-Porter, which you probably have on a loop since, last year. Broner was hyped to the max, undefeated, 3 weight champ and there were believers as much as there were doubters unlike after that loss when we saw how he can't handle fighters of that caliber. "AFTER" Maidana it was sealed the fact he isn't special. Before that he had not lost, so you could argue "he young doe" and what not. Well it was certainly a better fight than the stinkfests Khan has given us lately. Do you think Khan will ever get a KO again? OK so you're saying Broner was an average win for Porter but a massive win for Maidana? That's what I took from what you said. The same Broner who struggled with Ponce de leon and Paulie Malignaggi. Exactly the same fighter who fought Maidana and was exactly the same that fought Porter.

Not saying Maidana didn't have a good win against Ortiz. But they were both just prospects. It's nowhere near the level of Brook vs Porter. I said Maidana looked like crap against Chop Chop which he absolutely did and arguably lost to a blinded Morales - which he absolutely did. Typical Khan fans trying to put words into my mouth. Trying to big up a 37 year old Corley who was 6-9 in his last 15 against limited to average competition. What's the word I'm looking for?... Deluded - that's the one. It's not besides the point at all. He was absolute crap and Maidana did not look good. Where did I go by what happened afterwards? :lol1: The only time I've said that is Paulie looked exactly the same as he always did and never EVER showed he was "shot" which you've continuously claimed to discredit Brook his win. Maidana two weight world champion? :lol1: Ffs the retardness is strong here. He was given a "regular" championship belt. And no Maidana is in no way a better win than Porter, stop being idiotic. You go on to say Maidana exposed Broner and say he's a better win than Porter - and then proceeds to say he's nothing special in the same sentence. Can you not see the double standards? That was embarrassing. You're thing about Paulie in the end was shameless. If anything he looked way more sharp after beating Khan. Brook's win over Porter is better than any win Khan has in his career and is better than what Khan has done COMBINED since getting absolutely fuking destroyed by Garcia. If Khan hadn't fought any of those guys since Garcia - would it have made his resume significantly worse or better? No. I'll just address the bold and then leave you to watch Brook-Porter, which you probably have on a loop since, last year. Broner was hyped to the max, undefeated, 3 weight champ and there were believers as much as there were doubters unlike after that loss when we saw how he can't handle fighters of that caliber. "AFTER" Maidana it was sealed the fact he isn't special. Before that he had not lost, so you could argue "he young doe" and what not.

Laced up working overtime tonight lol

Brooks Porter win was absolutely crap. Brook hugged his way to victory. Also, Porter is a tiny Welter. A midget of a welter. When Brook fights a good fighter his own size, then we will all sing a different tune. No more Frankie Gavins for christ sake. And Rios is a blown up light weight. Why is Brook so allergic to fighting Thurman? Why not target Thurman? Brooks resume is completely garbage. Full of bums. I really don't know why we have to compare his resume to Khans. I think Brook would beat Khan, but it's f*cking asinine to say Brook has a better resume than Khan. Khan's resume is infinitely better than Brooks. You know, I think Brook's name is not big enough to fight Thurman. Khan mentioned Thurman though - for the first time in his life - the other day. Khan the international superstar should target Thurman. Brook should stick to fighting guys he deserves to fight like Chris Algieri maybe. Or wait.. That was a "top top name" according to Khan. Maybe Collazo will be nice and give Brook a payday sometime soon.

Maidana beat an undefeated Victor Ortiz, which was huge given the circumstances of being brought in to be laid out. Corley was an interim fight before Khan and while he may have troubled Maidana he didn't get a Draw or "arguably" beat him. Can't say the same about Porter-Julio Diaz 1 now can we? Not to mention Corley is a former World champ and was fighting Cotto-Mayweather opposition and while he had long fallen off he clearly retained some of that shine, but that's besides the point. I agree that Maidana is on par with beating Porter, but since you like to claim things that happened afterwards, well by your logic: Maidana exposed an undefeated Broner, became a 2 weight champon and was good enough to get a fight with Mayweather twice. So, in fact Marcos is a better win than Porter. You're losing it at this point if you actually think Paule lost to Diaz. Both were one sided for Malignaggi. "Meh. Nothing special" For a second I thought you were talking about Broner. A guy who was practically handed everything except his WBC title win. Diaz was a 3 belt World Champon and held wins over a fresh Katsidis or a unification win over Acelino Freitas to name a couple. Diaz was that one good world level win before Khan for Paulie. Just like Porter had one good world level win against Alexander before Porter. Of course now that it suits you you'll talk about how one was a World title fight. Paule got the benefit of the doubt that Champs get against contenders in their own hometowns. His legs weren't there and haven't been for some time. Senchenko just was a robot, so Paulie got away. Cano is tough, but so are most Mexican fighters, but he is a fringe contender. Emanuel Augustus was also slick, but he was a journeyman at the end of the day. Not saying Maidana didn't have a good win against Ortiz. But they were both just prospects. It's nowhere near the level of Brook vs Porter. I said Maidana looked like crap against Chop Chop which he absolutely did and arguably lost to a blinded Morales - which he absolutely did. Typical Khan fans trying to put words into my mouth. Trying to big up a 37 year old Corley who was 6-9 in his last 15 against limited to average competition. What's the word I'm looking for?... Deluded - that's the one. It's not besides the point at all. He was absolute crap and Maidana did not look good. Where did I go by what happened afterwards? :lol1: The only time I've said that is Paulie looked exactly the same as he always did and never EVER showed he was "shot" which you've continuously claimed to discredit Brook his win. Maidana two weight world champion? :lol1: Ffs the retardness is strong here. He was given a "regular" championship belt. And no Maidana is in no way a better win than Porter, stop being idiotic. You go on to say Maidana exposed Broner and say he's a better win than Porter - and then proceeds to say he's nothing special in the same sentence. Can you not see the double standards? That was embarrassing. You're thing about Paulie in the end was shameless. If anything he looked way more sharp after beating Khan. Brook's win over Porter is better than any win Khan has in his career and is better than what Khan has done COMBINED since getting absolutely fuking destroyed by Garcia. If Khan hadn't fought any of those guys since Garcia - would it have made his resume significantly worse or better? No.