Tweet
Stop basing this on ifs, buts and maybes.
Let's look at what has happened. Khan moved straight from 135 to 140 and beat a highly regarded champ in the division, he then beat a challenger he was supposed to duck (who gave Mayweather his hardest fight in years), then he beat a guy with the longest unbeaten run in european boxing at the time and also a mandated challenger, then he went onto unify titles against a former 2 divisin world champ and undisputed, lineal welterweight champion. He also thoroughly dominated a man who would go onto hold yet another world title, which 2 fights later would have Mayweather fighting over it.
That's Khans achievements. Plus it's not just the wins but the fact that Khan thoroughly put a beating on most of those guys.
You can **** on them if you want, that's fine (sense has long since deserted people like you) but Brook hasn't even achieved a tenth of that. His best win is a guy with 2 world title fights, Brook himself has only 4 world title fights and only 2 of them (Porter and GGG) against guys recognised as genuine top 10s in the division(s).
So it amuses me that the counter argument to Khan being greater than Brook is the resume but Brooks resume is only slightly better than the average domestic fighter. Oh wait, theres also you thinking he'd beat Khan because of so many skills...that maybe so but again, thats all ifs,buts and maybes.
On cold, hard boxing facts, Brook isn't even close.
Let's look at what has happened. Khan moved straight from 135 to 140 and beat a highly regarded champ in the division, he then beat a challenger he was supposed to duck (who gave Mayweather his hardest fight in years), then he beat a guy with the longest unbeaten run in european boxing at the time and also a mandated challenger, then he went onto unify titles against a former 2 divisin world champ and undisputed, lineal welterweight champion. He also thoroughly dominated a man who would go onto hold yet another world title, which 2 fights later would have Mayweather fighting over it.
That's Khans achievements. Plus it's not just the wins but the fact that Khan thoroughly put a beating on most of those guys.
You can **** on them if you want, that's fine (sense has long since deserted people like you) but Brook hasn't even achieved a tenth of that. His best win is a guy with 2 world title fights, Brook himself has only 4 world title fights and only 2 of them (Porter and GGG) against guys recognised as genuine top 10s in the division(s).
So it amuses me that the counter argument to Khan being greater than Brook is the resume but Brooks resume is only slightly better than the average domestic fighter. Oh wait, theres also you thinking he'd beat Khan because of so many skills...that maybe so but again, thats all ifs,buts and maybes.
On cold, hard boxing facts, Brook isn't even close.
Just hilarious. He is boxing's whipping boy. Always chasing bigger fights than he's entititled to and gets beat by most contenders he does step up to.
Comment