Comments Thread For: Kell Brook: Golovkin Fight Damaged Me, It Changed Me, Should Have Withdrew From Spence Bout

[Elastic Recoilz]

Tbh I blame AMIR KHAN for this debacle and for ruining both his + Kell's career's. Let me explain...Khan was always a world class fighter (obviously...he was a unified world champion) but NEVER an elite top 10 p4p fighter at his peak. However, his huge ego couldn't handle that which is why he was constantly chasing fights with p4p #1 fighter's during his career like Mayweather, Pacquiao, Canelo + Crawford etc because if he managed to beat one of those guys, he could look back on his career one day and say 'I was the #1 p4p fighter during my peak'. However, those fights either never materialised and when they did he got his ass handed to him because levels exist for a reason.

Anyhow, after getting knocked out by Garcia, Khan left Roach and hired Hunter where he went on a 5 fight unbeaten streak as a Welterweight with some very one-sided victories over former champions Algieri, Alexander & Collazo. Khan was boxing beautifully and could've had a real shot at becoming a two weight world champion. Following his victory over Algieri in May 2015, it was literally the PERFECT time to make a huge 'Battle of Britain' showdown for newly crowned Brook's IBF Welterweight title. The fight would've been massive in England given their rivalry plus the fact that a world title was on the line. However, instead of facing Kell, Khan got greedy and climbed two weight divisions to fight Canelo who took what was left of his limited punch resistance and a few years out of his career by flattening him like a rolling pin rolling dough. As a result, Kell was forced to look for other opponents and faced the same fate himself at the hands of Golovkin which he admits was a big mistake and ruined his career.

I've always rated Kell as the better fighter of the two so would've fancied him to beat Khan had they both met at 147 in 2015. However, Khan's victory over Alexander was so impressive plus he seemed to handle Brook's punches much better than I thought without going down when they finally did meet that I wouldn't be surprised if he managed to outbox him either. Anyhow, this is just a tale of how one man's greed and ego robbed the fan's of a fantastic fight and ruined both fighter's career's in the process.

Khan and Canelo were both with Golden Boy in 2016, it was an easy in-house fight to make that mainly enabled Canelo to avoid defending his wbc and lineal championships against GGG. Brook was with Matchroom at the time so the Khan fight would've proven more difficult to make.

[Lance98]

Why not just say Kassim ouma made ggg lose his aura and made him decline? Ouma did 10 times better than brook. Not all fights are walks in the park but largely dominating a guy and knocking him out in 5 proves he's not good makes little sense...

brook never had ggg hurt so not sure why you said that. He hit him with some big shots but that doesn't mean he was hurt. And losing to jacobs...not very credible. He clearly won that one he just didn't do as well as some expected but like you have already shown you expected him to be a "monster" and when he was just pretty good you think he lost when he clearly won the boxing match. Same thing happened in the first canelo fight. He wasn't dominant just a clear winner...oh he lost. No. Curse of high standards I suppose.

Brook is a smaller guy coming up 2 weight classes, so it is 10 times more embarrassing for ggg to lose rounds and get tagged up, looking all beat up with bruises after the fight. So what if ggg stopped him? He stopped him looking like s*it.
ggg should have lost to jacobs and derevyanchenko. Canelo outboxed him in the first fight and beat him up in the next 2 fights. ggg never beat canelo, ever.

[Sammy7861992]

He fought three elite guys and lost.

Ya that's true , but 3 of them were p4p top guys in there prime and they would normally dominate fights and go there way, brook was arguably winning all of them before getting stoped , he is as tough as they come,he is not like today's coward top fighters,just because U lose doesn't take away how good he was , people who are unbeaten in the pros are only unbeaten because there to scared to take risks or go against someone with a pulse, they wait it out and pick faded fighter s to take advantage , he had great skills brook in the ring and could compte with anyone

[vital1983]

I like his honesty.

[PRINCEKOOL]

Porter, Golovkin, Spence Junior.

Were all Brook's best fights, and performances.

I would say, that? His fight vs Golovkin as bad match making 'And since then Eddie Hearn has learnt from that period in his career'.

There was completely no need to put Brook up against Golovkin 'Brook should of just stayed at 147 pounds, and in all honesty? Just defended his IBF World Welter Weight Championship, against whoever'.

I believe there was pressure on Brook at the time, to be involved in bigger events 'For me those events would of naturally occurred, long as he stayed Champion at 147 pounds'.

Note: Gennady Golovkin was a great fighter, but? He has never been a superstar like Floyd Mayweather Junior, Canelo Alvarez or Manny Pacquiao 'If Brook was to beat Golovkon, was he going to stay at 160 pounds and defend the belts? Most likely not'.,

The fight was definitely bad matching making from Eddie Hearn, and that fight did effectively destroy the trajectory of Kell Brook's career. Brook may have performed better if he had a few fights at 160 pounds, he would of physiologically accustomed and conditioned himself to the weight class better.

The night Brook fought Golovkin, it was not the skill level of Golovkin which he could not compete with 'It was the power and brute strength'. I don't think the power and brute strength would of been such a dramatic shock, if Brook would of had 1 to 2 fights at 160 pounds before fighting Gennady Golovkin.

Kell Brook skill for skill has never really be out competed in my opinion, by any fighter he has stepped inside the ring with 'Brook was right there with Crawford, skill for skill. Until the stoppage'.

Those three fights Porter, Golovkin, Spence Junior, are Kell Brooks best performances 'And I can personally his potential and ability in all three of those fights'.

Since the retirement of Joe Calzaghe, the best fighters athletically and skill for skill the UK has produced were David Haye for sure and possibly Kell Brook 'On pure ability in their best form, those are the best two fighters the UK has produce since Joe Calzgahe' Amir Khan is up there as well.

The best overall fighters since Joe Calzaghe's retirement have been David Haye, and Carl Froch 'When you really compare their feats of achievement against fighters in and around their era, they were the best. Tyson Fury to date has for me not really surpassed them' etc.

[garfios]

Ya that's true , but 3 of them were p4p top guys in there prime and they would normally dominate fights and go there way, brook was arguably winning all of them before getting stoped , he is as tough as they come,he is not like today's coward top fighters,just because U lose doesn't take away how good he was , people who are unbeaten in the pros are only unbeaten because there to scared to take risks or go against someone with a pulse, they wait it out and pick faded fighter s to take advantage , he had great skills brook in the ring and could compte with anyone

I don't remember much, I recall he was competitive, but winning? I'll have to watch it again, and yes he was good.

[theface07]

Errol also had problems going into that fight, he had the flu and was fighting overseas, it was a battle no doubt about that.

Brook's eye socket was busted against Golovkin and was clearly vulnerable going up two weight classes and then immediately going back down two weight classes after the loss to GGG. Any "problems" Errol had going into that fight were not even close to comparable to Brook's. I agree with Brook that he would've had a much better chance of winning had he not fought Golovkin.

[theface07]

Some rewriting Brook's career here. He was constantly plagued by injuries and fighting lower tier fighters, the fight with Porter that he won he held an average of 14 times per round.

He was one of those fighters that could had been in the mix with Pac and Floyd at the time but his career stagnated. Lets not forget when he got stabbed on vacation asking for kisses.

Solid fighter but never won the big one and all he did was chase Amir.

I think you should stop downplaying Brook's accomplishments. He was a hell of a fighter and showed no cowardice or hesitation in wanting to take on the best challenges possible even if he was naive to think he would beat Golovkin.
I find it funny how some people always find ways of nitpicking the pro careers of high level athletes that have in all likelihood achieved far more than they themselves ever would.
It just sounds like needless trolling and complaining for the sake of it. It's easy to criticize someone in the public eye because ever mistake they make in their life and career is under the microscope.
Are you the perfect specimen who has never done anything ill advised before? Clearly not, so maybe you should show a bit of respect instead of getting on like a whiny little keyboard warrior who's likely never had the cojones to test himself in such a way that Brook did.

[brettWall]

The tragic part is that he had a real excuse for not taking the fight, and he was pressured to fight, they might told him that he was going to lose his belt, look at the Charlo's and Company, take them years to defend their titles and nothing happens.

They can pretty much do whatever they want with no consequences. Jermell is avoiding Tzsyu, Jermall has been avoiding Adames. It's as if they own the sport. Avoid fights they don't want.

[STREET CLEANER]

I think you should stop downplaying Brook's accomplishments. He was a hell of a fighter and showed no cowardice or hesitation in wanting to take on the best challenges possible even if he was naive to think he would beat Golovkin.
I find it funny how some people always find ways of nitpicking the pro careers of high level athletes that have in all likelihood achieved far more than they themselves ever would.
It just sounds like needless trolling and complaining for the sake of it. It's easy to criticize someone in the public eye because ever mistake they make in their life and career is under the microscope.
Are you the perfect specimen who has never done anything ill advised before? Clearly not, so maybe you should show a bit of respect instead of getting on like a whiny little keyboard warrior who's likely never had the cojones to test himself in such a way that Brook did.

Never said he was a coward or avoided fighters because he didn't. His career had too many setbacks due to injuries or cancelling matches. Learn to read and interpret what you are reading instead of getting emotional.

His best win is a majority decision against Porter and every time he stepped up he got stopped.