Which match up is worse? Brook-Gavin or Khan-Algieri?

[Box-Office]

He had one gift decision over an unskilled brawler.

Gavin defeated many opponents in the amateurs who were better than Provodnikov.

One more than Frankie Gavin. Gift? It was close, but to each his own. It was certainly no robbery. He also holds a win over a respectable contender Emmanuel Taylor who gave Broner a Fight of the Year candidate, but Chris took care of business without letting it become one.

Are we really going to compare amateur wins with the pros now?

Well, Provodnikov could've gotten a decision against Tim Bradley in what was Fight of the Year, so not so unskilled after all. That beating he gave Tim had Bradley with a slurred speech for a month or so.

[Pugilist95]

Both are rubbish matchups. Elite level cherry picking at its finest.

[Box-Office]

Because I'd say the world championships is distinctly harder - just has much less prestige - obviously.

The same people are fighting in the world championships as in the Olympics, but in the WC there's an extra round in the stages + there's usually less days break between fights.

Also, Gavin absolutely was a good amateur. He amongst others beat Aleksei Tishchenko who is like a double olympic gold medalist and overall top top amateur.

He didn't breeze his way through easy opposition. He's just not as suited to the pro game as he was the amateurs.

Both the days break and extra round can be a hit and miss. Can work for some and vice versa. I didn't know that btw, so thanks for the heads up.

Olympics would be harder imo because World Amateurs is a pit stop towards that destination. Winning World Amateurs or getting a medal there is part of the Olympics process where you'll have to repeat that feat once again and not to mention you'll be fighting most likely an ever higher caliber opposition right from the beginning.

[lefthook2daliva]

Brook vs Gavin is far worse.

C'mon, fkn Broner beat up Gavin at 135 two years ago?

Now Gavin's a credible opponent for the very-highly-estimated-at-least-by-the-Brits, Kell "Special K" Brook ?

I am disappoint.

Frowny face.

Retracted for being incorrect.

[LacedUp]

Brook vs Gavin is far worse.

C'mon, fkn Broner beat up Gavin at 135 two years ago?

Now Gavin's a credible opponent for the very-highly-estimated-at-least-by-the-Brits, Kell "Special K" Brook ?

I am disappoint.

Frowny face.

You know Frankie gavin is not gavin rees right?

[LacedUp]

Both the days break and extra round can be a hit and miss. Can work for some and vice versa. I didn't know that btw, so thanks for the heads up.

Olympics would be harder imo because World Amateurs is a pit stop towards that destination. Winning World Amateurs or getting a medal there is part of the Olympics process where you'll have to repeat that feat once again and not to mention you'll be fighting most likely an ever higher caliber opposition right from the beginning.

The extra round and fewer days is definitely harder. Many amateurs who fought in both said the world championships were harder. All I'm saying is that without the glamour etc it is not really a more impressive feat to win the Olympics in boxing terms.

Well if you look at the fighters who go into the last 16 of the Olympics - they are usually the same as the WCs. But in between they would have a hard fight on top of the one they had in the Olympics. Fighting every couple of days is hard man - especially for Brits as they aren't used to that.

One of the reasons why the Russians and the Cubans are so successful in the amateurs is exactly down to that point. They have 100s of fights and do a lot of tournaments. the UK system is completely different which is why we aren't prepared to fight 5 times in a short space of time.

Look at David Haye in 2001. He was leading Solis in the final - but then completely gassed because he wasn't used to the system whereas Solis were.

[lefthook2daliva]

You know Frankie gavin is not gavin rees right?

Oh ****! I did mix them up. Thank you! I stand corrected.

[LacedUp]

Oh ****! I did mix them up. Thank you! I stand corrected.

I mean, Frankie Gavin isn't a particularly good fight. But if he was fighting Gavin Rees on PPV. Haha.

That would have been great.

[HEND]

Brook-Gavin is obviously worse but Brook at least wanted to fight Khan before he chose Gavin but Khan (Haymon) ducked that and chose Algieri.
However Brook could easily took on Thurman, Bradley, Chavez. All of them would be better than Algieri. And after they picked Gavin Hearn had the nerves to say that they will fight Rios after it...

[LacedUp]

Brook-Gavin is obviously worse but Brook at least wanted to fight Khan before he chose Gavin but Khan (Haymon) ducked that and chose Algieri.
However Brook could easily took on Thurman, Bradley, Chavez. All of them would be better than Algieri. And after they picked Gavin Hearn had the nerves to say that they will fight Rios after it...

Except that he couldn't because Thurman was 1) healing from the headbutt 2) didn't want to come to UK 3) isn't ranked by the IBF.

Bradley is fighting an eliminator for his title I believe?

The only one that could have been made was Chaves - but honestly. Dude is horrible and brings nothing to the table.