Since when has being wanting to fight another day considered quitting or cowardly?

[b00g13man]

Brook was a heavy underdog? News to me.

[Mike D]

It's the age of the internet, where anonymity let's couch potatoes call fighters quitters without the fighter punching them in the mouth.

so true my friend, so true

[The Big Dunn]

It's the age of the internet, where anonymity let's couch potatoes call fighters quitters without the fighter punching them in the mouth.

I disagree with this. Saying brook quit is just being honest. He took a knee on 2 separate occasions. It was clear he was about to get ktfo or stopped so he quit instead because that was the lesser of 2 evils.

I don't see the problem with just calling it as we saw it.

[BrometheusBob.]

The sport has never really been kind to people quitting. Even if you take blatantly giving up like Walters did out of the equation, the response is usually unforgiving. It's not really new or surprising.

Matthysse had the same injury against Postol and most of the feedback about his decision to stay down was also negative.

[tomwalker]

Well....
Exactly.....
Kell Brook gave tough time to Errol Spence....
But unfortunately he lost the fight...
In match of two fighters....there is one winner and second one is defeated by the first one...
So i dont think so that Kell Brook is a quitter....He played well...
On the basis of personal anger or hate may be people are calling him as a quitter.....

[Eddie-Hearn]

Listen guys, I've spoken with Kell and we're going to make a great match up with young up and comer Sam Eggington. a true 50/50 fight with it all on the line & a real treat for the fans!

- Eddie

[Eff Pandas]

Brook was a heavy underdog? News to me.

Yea heavy might be overstating it. He was a solid dog at +180ish the day of the fight.

Although that is a pretty big dog for being the more proven guy plus the title holder and being at home I will say. Brook was a bigger dog then I expected him to be. I thought it'd be a pick em fight. I suspect he's not all that liked or appreciated in the UK cuz I often notice a lil UK bump UK fighters get in the UK vs other countries fighters.

Well....
Exactly.....
Kell Brook gave tough time to Errol Spence....
But unfortunately he lost the fight...
In match of two fighters....there is one winner and second one is defeated by the first one...
So i dont think so that Kell Brook is a quitter....He played well...
On the basis of personal anger or hate may be people are calling him as a quitter.....

Adding the er to the end of quit makes it seem like a more much offensive term, but I think it's more simple than all that. Brook quit. Whatever reason he quit it's a fact. If someone is the type who thinks that's a ***** move whatever the circumstances or if you are the type to not codemn the action so much when a guy isn't likely to win and/or just getting beat up is the only thing really in play.

I think quitting in the scenario like Brook did is fair play. But I do feel like most fans and boxers view it in much harsher ways. I remember people codemning Ortiz when his jaw was all f#cked up vs Josesito and he called it.

For me I don't take away points for sh^t like that. I give points to the guys who fight through it. But most people just seem to have the opposite stance. They expect a guy with a blown out eye or a destroyed jaw to keep fighting and take away points if you quit. That's just the reality most of the time regardless if you want it to be different

[GhostofDempsey]

There was a time in boxing when quitting was career suicide. Ask Duran, who still has to live down the "No Mas" fight almost 40 years later. In fact, he claims he never even voiced those words, he just waved off the fight and quit. The people of Panama not only turned their backs on him afterward but he had to live with death threats and never-ending taunts of no mas from fans and the media.

Today, it's not as much as an outrage, but, we live in a society where everyone loves labels. Especially if it's the guy who you were rooting against. Many a great fighter has quit--Chavez Sr. Morales, Duran, Liston, Cerdan, and it hasn't really impacted their legacy with true fans of the sport. Brook fought a brave fight and has nothing to be ashamed of, and who wants to see him end up like Benitez or McClellan?

[Zaryu]

That's a bigger dynamic you are talking about then just this fight doe. Sure dummies behind a keyboard are more likely to call anyone a idiot, a quitter or a this or that. But quitting is still quitting to a large segment of the population hiding behind a keyboard.

This ain't that complicated regardless if you & I disagree with Brook being a "coward" or whatever term dummies use casually & even some non-dummies & pro boxers.

It may be a bigger dynamic, but it's part of the problem. We're not arguing here about the definition of the weird quitting. The title is asking since when is wanting to fight another day considered quitting or cowardly.

The title itself let's you know we're not just talking about the act of quitting/giving up, etc. But the attitude that somehow saying you've had enough is not acceptable. That somehow fighters should be willing to give their lives or sacrifice their health in one night instead of calling a night short to fight anther day and continue entertaining us.

Again that's a whole other conservation on the effect of the internet on EVERYTHING good or bad. EVERYTHING is enhanced good or bad because of the internet. Doesn't mean people didn't believe the same thing pre-internet which is the main point. Quitting has had negative words said about it forever regardless if it was 1,000 people saying it publically or 200,000 saying it on twitter, FB & social media + in public.

The bad is particularly enhanced in the internet, and it has a lot to do with the anonymity of it. I'm sure some people, before the internet of things, were just as ******ed as a big segment of boxing "fans" posting in forums now a day, but without the platform and anonymity the internet provided they couldn't spread their message as effectively as they can today.

Maybe. But I think its simplistic to think its JUST THAT & nothing else for everyone. To me Bellew seems like a pretty straight shooter with his commentating & when he's not just hyping a fight. And I thought he came off like he almost didn't wanna say what he was saying then he took some weird W over Brook or joy in saying what he said.

I'm not saying it's just that, I'm just saying that I think it's a factor. It even be subconscious. Regardless, fighters saying it is completely different than non fighters saying it. I just think they should be careful with the verbiage the use, and hope they don't end up in a similar situation.

[Zaryu]

I disagree with this. Saying brook quit is just being honest. He took a knee on 2 separate occasions. It was clear he was about to get ktfo or stopped so he quit instead because that was the lesser of 2 evils.

I don't see the problem with just calling it as we saw it.

Sure, but people aren't just stating what they see, they're acting as if Brook is less of a fighter because of this. That's why the title is asking since when is wanting to fight another day looked at as a cowardly act.

No one is denying Brook surrendered. The problem is people are equating this with a lack of bravery, which is not true.

How hard is it to say "Brook did an honorable surrender, because if he would've kept going, he might've lost his vision, and then we never would've been able to see him fight again." It's not hard, but it's not what people want to say. People want to kick the man while he's down, and that's why the thread starter has brought up an excellent point.