Originally Posted by dftaylor
What exactly has Kell achieved that gives him a right to criticise or compare himself to Khan?
Originally Posted by Lazarus
I say the same friggin' thing, but if make a thread on that, it'll turn into a 20 page debate.
Its actually a more complex subject than this
Khan has some solid solid wins under his belt "at world level", but ................ and we all know what but means
Brook is an interesting one, flirted with world class but hasnt fought anyone who is genuinely world class, he's looked near punch perfect right up until Carson Jones bashed him up in the latter rounds, and then the questions began
You have to ask yourself, who would you rather be, and what record would you rather have, Lazarus no need to answer that, because if im undefeated and i trust my whiskers im in a better place than someone who has no whiskers
and currently hold 2 losses by KO no matter where he or I (Brook/Khan) have been doing business, thats just my opinion, id rather be Kell Brook, i believe Kell does have some more gears to go through, but not as many as he and Mr. Hearn are claiming he has