Burns or brook? Who was the better FIGHTER?

Brook was the better fighter, Burns the better FIGHTER.

 

Brook and it isn't even close

 

Brook had more ability. Burns achieved more and had a better career.

 

Brook all day
Burns is tough as hell but very limited skill wise

 

Both were pony once their faces were smashed - before the injuries to both it has to be Ricky Burns for me.

 

Brook was more talented but Burns made the most of what he had. Burns had a better career thats for sure.

 

Brook

 

Burns kind of had the career that Brook should've had. Burns seemed to be far more dedicated, was teak tough and barring a few fights late on in his career, always gave it his best shot. He was gifted the odd decision like against Beltran but made the best of his opportunities.

If Brook had the same dedication and application as Burns, he'd have gone on to be a British ATG. So obviously chased the dollar in the end as opposed to making smart career choices. Brook had the talent, Burns the dedication so it's a question of what you think is more important. For me, sheer hard graft and determination are more worthy and honourable traits than just getting by on talent alone so for me it's Burns. Brook is a case of what could've been

 

More talented fighter without doubt was Brook.

Burns was the fighter out of the two of them though.

 

Brook better boxer, Burns better fighter and career.

Although does Burns have a better single win than Porter?

 

I'm a big fan of Burns. Lovely guy i met a couple of times and real hard worker. I think Brook had more natural talent but was completely mismanaged (fighting GGG was about the most stupid thing i've ever seen in boxing). Burns was matched pretty well and used his opportunities very well ans so achieved more overall.

 

Maybe not. Martinez is probably his best win, and I think Porter is a better fighter.

However, if Porter has been in there with the welterweight equivalent of Loma, he might be looked at a bit differently.