Tweet
U lost bruh
-
-
I'm not a fan of either dude....and yeah I thought Porter was better groomed for this fight than Brook....thought he'd stop Brook....what happened last night was something I call a boxing eye drop....dudes should be able to see clearly now!!
ninjas not trashing Porter...he lost, the fight wasn't close....dude still can beat a few good WWs...we just found out that Brook wasn't one of them....that's all!!Comment
-
If you think what Brook did last night is what Wlad does then stop watching boxing please.
Wlad incorporates the hit and hold tactic even when he's the aggressor and the one moving forward.
Last night Brook had no other choice as porter was literally rushing into him like a linebacker.Comment
-
I have no issue with the decision. What I do have a problem with is that Brook took this champions belt and the champion who just lost his belt has to earn his rematch? WTF...seriously? Mandatories are usually by far and large the most dangerous opponent a champion can face at that time but there is no rematch clause involved simply because he's the mandatory? That's hella suspect to me. We know brook is going to be looking for an Amir, Floyd, or Manny fight so now Porter has to go a different route? That's crazy.Comment
-
Wow... That is a huge exaggeration. I think Brook had a good game plan and he used his physical advantages strategically. But it was still a close fight. A very dull, tedious, ugly and boring fight because of the excessive holding that Brook was allowed to get away with but still a close fight. I thought that the right man won though. He timed Porter well with his counters, used his length and his jab well and stunted Porter's offense with the clinch. Had the referee been a little more strict about not allowing so much holding I think we would have seen a different fight possibly. He didn't hold as much as a Carlos Molina does but he had a free pass on using that tactic and he used it excessively.Comment
-
People who are implying that Brook is a habitual holder clearly haven't seen many, if any, of his fights.
He isn't a fighter known for holding. He did it last night because he had to and the ref wasn't penalising him for it.
Same reason why Porter was rabbit punching so often. But I'm not gonna go and call Porter a habitual rabbit puncher because that was the first fight of his I'd seen.
Boxing scene posters love some hyperbole.Comment
-
I agree, it was a close fight, it wasn't a great performance from Brook. I was actually kind of disappointed in his performance. It was very Amir Khan in the level of holding that went on.
I was impressed by Brooks accuracy and composition tagging Porter coming in while he was moving his head so well, but Porter was definitely getting in some good body work and his first few punches on the inside were usually good.
Its really hard to say say that Porter was causing the clinches since he was the one trying to punch out of them every time.
I was disappointed with porters lack of an effective uppercut, it was there for him all night, but he just tried to flail over the top all night to little effect.
I didn't score the fight, but it felt drawish or maybe a point for Brook, no way dominating or exposing of porter. Porter has never looked like a world beater, he was always just a strong solid worker.Comment
-
you lost big dawg... learn to box a lil more, and anyone complaining about the clinching needs to understand clinching is a technique used more often vs wild aggressive fighters once u take that wild ish away they usually have no plan B as seen with porterComment
Comment