Kell Brook...Who next?

It was a very good performance, yes, against a small guy who threw next to nothing.

I can see what you're saying, but I just haven't seen Brook in with a guy who is on the level Maligngaggi is (I do rate Malignaggi. I think he's still a decent contender). The guy throws punches, he's got speed, he's got no power but I still think he gives Brook problems. I don't think he beats him as easy as you think, but that's my opinion anyway. We'll know more on Brook when he fights next. Hopefully the guy he fights in Dec will be a solid solid contender so we know more about him because this fight today wasn't even worthy of a sparring session. It was like beating up an old man.

 

I was a fan of John Murray, you tit atsch I stopped when he started to continuously face terrible opposition time and time again.

Yes, I do believe it. I'm just not going to jump on Brook's dick like and claim he's the next best thing based on the fight he just had.

Best thing you should do is bookmark the thread. If I'm wrong, then so be it. I'll be happy if he does prove me wrong.

 

Laz, just try to watch Kell without an agenda.

 

No agenda, just my opinion.

 

Confuse him with what? His hands down - face first defence?

Paulie's pretty much finished, and he was never that good anyway.

 

i suppose you were a fan of brook as well at some point in time:think, you'v proven what an idiot u clearly are, how gullible do you think ppl here are you dont think its a bit of a coincidence the 2 ppl who you deslike the most are/were had some kind of rivalry with khan, log off now and comeback as lexar you daft twat

 

His speed, his jab, his work rate, his footwork. (Albeit not attributes which are top tier, but he still has them)

We'll see how Brook does with someone who has these.

 

Never a fan of Brook, but he's a good fighter.

I'm an idiot because I have an opinion? No, you're just an ignorant moron who can't accept people having different opinion's to others. It's a Forum. We don't all have to be sheep and agree that this fighter can do this and all be happy. This is why this Forum is here. For debate - you know the meaning of the word?

When have I ever disliked Murray because of his rivarly with Khan? Show me some proof.

Don't embarrass yourself.

 

Kell Brook v Matthew Hatton next, for all the marbles.

 

His speed? Brook's quicker.

His jab? Brook's is better.

And his work rate is on the slide.

 

:huh He didn't look very quick to me, to be honest. I think Malignaggi is faster.

His jab is better.

His work rate was actually pretty good in the Lozada and Jose Cotto fights.

We'll see anyway, when he steps his opposition up. I think it would be a good fight.

 

check your own dumb**** posts u'v already done all the embarassing :good
your an idiot because your a genuine nuthugger and whatever u do or say is gravitated to khan one way or the other, and before you start calling ppl morons perhaps you should try finding out who jose miguel cotto actually is before you start making dumb**** statements that paulie wiould beat brook based off of that win,

 

It's funny how all the people that all the posters that have a problem can't spell or put sentences together for ****. Just a pattern I noticed.

 

Quicker at throwing arm punches maybe. Not anything of substance.

He looked **** against Lozada, and not great against Cotto.

Paulie's jab is sloppy and has nothing behind it. How is it better than Brook's?

 

Kell is not as fast as some people are making him out to be, he is fast but that's it, I think Berto is faster than Kell.

Like all these Naz fan boxers from Ingles gym try to imitate but never duplicate the Prince

Just kidding, thing which made Naz so hard to hit was his reflexes and one punch speed, Kell looks to upright and stiff to me at times, also wide open to counters.

Again he looked good tonight but let's not forget who he beat.