how to motivate yourself against almost entire career of deadbeats(eg kell brook)?

When youre in the hot seat facing another guy trying to knock your head off you dont think of them as deadbeats, there is a invisible front to boxing and boxers that is all about selling macho, and then there is the reality of throwing down where 1 punch can end your world. and the reality is also that other titlists face better.

Take a look at the top 10 in any division and see how many of those guys have fought each other. Even in the unlikely event that one guy fought everyone in the top 10, that's still only 9 fights. With the exception of Lomachenko and maybe a few others, no one starts off fighting top 10 opponents. So to answer your question, one would have to keep the motivation to develop and hone their craft against journeymen and fringe contenders (or "bums", which is what a lot of fans call anyone who's isn't a world champion on the P4P list) The same logic applies for any fight because a lot of people thought that Andy Ruiz Jr. was there to fall over too and we all know how that worked out. he has had one good fight that was a victory in his career. Its the resume of a weak contender.

the top ten changes though, especially over a 10 fight period. What matters is how many were top ten at the time the fight happened. There is a long list of this It does change over time, and yes it does matter as far as who was in the top 10 when the fight happened. My point is that a fighter will probably have 10-20 fights before they fight someone who currently is or was recently in the top 10. It's interesting though because I did some research and the Ring magazine top 10 at heavyweight from 2010 to 2019 was less than 30 fighters altogether. That means that the top 10 over a 3-year period might only include 15 different fighters.

Take a look at the top 10 in any division and see how many of those guys have fought each other. Even in the unlikely event that one guy fought everyone in the top 10, that's still only 9 fights. With the exception of Lomachenko and maybe a few others, no one starts off fighting top 10 opponents. So to answer your question, one would have to keep the motivation to develop and hone their craft against journeymen and fringe contenders (or "bums", which is what a lot of fans call anyone who's isn't a world champion on the P4P list) The same logic applies for any fight because a lot of people thought that Andy Ruiz Jr. was there to fall over too and we all know how that worked out. the top ten changes though, especially over a 10 fight period. What matters is how many were top ten at the time the fight happened. There is a long list of this

He has been managed terribly by Eddie. Never capitalised on the win in America versus Porter properly. Then all the time Kell and Eddie wasted so much energy in chasing Khan, then Khan used them to get a much bigger fight leaving egg on their face. The worst was yet to come when Eddie took Khan onboard , poor Kell , lol, then Khan just jumped ship without giving them anything from that arrangement, then here we have Kell in Sheffield fighting again. I thin kell needs to go to a smaller pond he will never be a priority in Hearns stable, just too many bigger names.

not saying kell brook is a deadbeat, just wondering how one keeps up the motivation to fight so many one after another LIKE Kell does. I wouldnt be able to get excited for them opponents who are there to fall over. I'd fall asleep. Take a look at the top 10 in any division and see how many of those guys have fought each other. Even in the unlikely event that one guy fought everyone in the top 10, that's still only 9 fights. With the exception of Lomachenko and maybe a few others, no one starts off fighting top 10 opponents. So to answer your question, one would have to keep the motivation to develop and hone their craft against journeymen and fringe contenders (or "bums", which is what a lot of fans call anyone who's isn't a world champion on the P4P list) The same logic applies for any fight because a lot of people thought that Andy Ruiz Jr. was there to fall over too and we all know how that worked out.

Brook shouldn't have capitulated his eye sockets.

not saying kell brook is a deadbeat, just wondering how one keeps up the motivation to fight so many one after another LIKE Kell does. I wouldnt be able to get excited for them opponents who are there to fall over. I'd fall asleep. When youre in the hot seat facing another guy trying to knock your head off you dont think of them as deadbeats, there is a invisible front to boxing and boxers that is all about selling macho, and then there is the reality of throwing down where 1 punch can end your world.

its kell brook accuracy. You dont like accuracy? I dont like little weirdo,s if that helps you little ****in wierdo.

After the Zerafa fight Brook likely decided that there was an easier way to make a living, fight bums but pretend that they are not. And then pretend that he was good for a world title.

So this is a Kel Brook hate thread? ( i knew that anyway from the title) LOL why even bother? its kell brook accuracy. You dont like accuracy?

he won one title level fight, is the accurate way to say it. good job in locking Porter out, credit where credit is due, not credit for NOT doing something - thats what is considered unfair (to other champions). Giving credit for not doing things is ridiculous. So this is a Kel Brook hate thread? ( i knew that anyway from the title) LOL why even bother?

I think you're being woefully unfair. People forget that most PPV / top tier prize fighters record's are full of people they were supposed to beat. Yes there are exceptions to the rules but for the most part, fighters only have a handful of signature fights. This is largely because by the time they reach stardom, they're only fighting twice a year and if they lose, they are likely to have a recovery period. Brook lost big (in terms of the damage they caused) in 2 of his signature fights, go easy on him :D he won one title level fight, is the accurate way to say it. good job in locking Porter out, credit where credit is due, not credit for NOT doing something - thats what is considered unfair (to other champions). Giving credit for not doing things is ridiculous.

I think you're being woefully unfair. People forget that most PPV / top tier prize fighters record's are full of people they were supposed to beat. Yes there are exceptions to the rules but for the most part, fighters only have a handful of signature fights. This is largely because by the time they reach stardom, they're only fighting twice a year and if they lose, they are likely to have a recovery period. Brook lost big (in terms of the damage they caused) in 2 of his signature fights, go easy on him :D

he couldnt hold onto his title when making decent defences. Exposed as what? Exposed as not being quite as good as Spence? Does that really fall under the category of being exposed? All Spence fans claimed they knew Spence would win, some Kel Brook fans said it too, me included. So when it happened it didnt really feel like so much of an exposure. Brook lost. He was competitive and took his share of the rounds until it ended. His eye socket also went which is more than a good enough reason to stop the fight. As a Brook fan i accept Spence was the better fighter over all and i predicted Spence would win anyway, he was the bookies favourte. Im not quite sure about this exposure.

Exposed as what? he couldnt hold onto his title when making decent defences.

to be fair yes but only when he was exposed Exposed as what?

Hes fought porter golovkin and spence. Hes literally fought 3 tougher opponents than peoples p4p number 1 Crawford. Amd crawford would have same number of losses as brook if he fought them 3 (maybe more) to be fair yes but only when he was exposed did he face the two greater opponents there.

It seems to of worked just fine for Wilder. And to be fair Wilder has faced more bums than Kel Brook has had fights.

He probably puts a picture of Mike Tyson in the gym and pretend that’s who he would be fighting.