Why do I get the feeling Brook vs Spence is going to..........?

If his jab was slow and inaccurate, why would his trainer want him to throw it at all?

 

For the judges. It's a strategy light hitting boxers use. Judges see a jab thrown and count it. They don't ask whether it was a clean effective blow. Hence Brook's success with judges.

 

.. Sure.. Tell that to Porter

 

Porter is part of the style problem that results in clinching though. Bumrusher.

 

Im expecting fireworks i think they both want to let their hands go. After a long feeling out period that will last 3 rounds the fight will take shape Spence the agressor and Brook reverts to plan B working off the back foot and it will be great viewing.

 

You keep claiming that Brook's jab is inaccurate, yet all the fighters who have fought him and sparred with him have praised his accuracy as one of his main assets. This is why I can't take your posts seriously on Brook.

 

Your statement "all the fighters" can be verified? No. How about just the last two fighters he's faced? GGG does not count, since he knocked Brook down in round 1 and then decided to cover up and let Brook hit him so as not to end the fight too soon and give the fans a show. That leaves Porter. What did he say? Brook's jab missed Porter all night as Porter came in on Brook and went to the body continually. Which is why Brook was wrapping him up and clinching all night. Brook's jab was not effective at all against Porter. And why ask them anyway and not use your own eyes?

Brook's jab is slow and inaccurate. The only two elite fighters he's faced had no problems with it, or with much else, quite honestly.

Kell Brook is not special.

 

Wrong on so many accounts.

Golovkin did not knock Kell Brook down in round 1, that is a false and incorrect statement. Kell Brook's jab was working great vs Golovkin especially the counter-jab. I used my own eyes to deduce that.

Keith Thurman - Kell very accurate jab

http://www.skysports.com/boxing/new...han-opted-against-more-challenging-kell-brook

Carson Jones - Kell very accurate jab

http://www.skysports.com/brook/news/34037/10885697/31


Frankie Gavin, Jamie Cox and Craig Cunningham have all said THIS WEEK that Brook is very accurate.

One of Brook's best attributes is that is he doesn't waste punches because he is so accurate. In fact the Showtime commentary team said this during the fight with Porter in which you claim that Brook wasn't accurate.

So many wrong statements and I ain't even got to the worst bit. You think Round 2 GGG covered up and let Brook hit him? Brook dominated round 2 and made Golovkin looks very slow, ponderous and confused. I've never seen GGG frustrated like that before, he was throwing wild winging punches and was getting hit with the counter-jab and combinations from the smaller but quicker Brook.

Brook is a very accurate fighter. Your entire statement is false and incorrect.

 

I noticed that, but fighters and trainers aren't dumb. They're not gonna reveal their entire fight plan to film crews. It's just one thing that they're gonna integrate into the master plan.

 

You missed the parts where I repeatedly emphasize my comments only apply to Brook against elite fighters, of which there have been two. What do I care about Brook against all the bums he's fought? Of course Brook's jab was accurate against Carson Jones. Everyone's jab is accurate against Carson Jones, Gavin and the rest of Brook's pitiful resume. No one is talking about those guys.

Thurman? Thurman has never fought Brook. He's a spectator like us. What fights was he talking about. It could not have been the Porter or GGG fights. Your arguments are not based on Brook's fights against elite fighters. But if the best you can do is appeal to the authority of Al Bernstein, then I guess that's the best you can do.

You don't think GGG was carrying Brook? Excuse me, when is the last time you saw a fighter cover up against another fighter BEFORE that fighter ever hit him? Do you remember the surprise on Brook's face like, "What, he's going to let me hit him? Well, ok".

And then in round four GGG unaccountably took off his earmuffs and went back to giving Brook a beating. I wonder why?

Brook was hurt by a body shot in round 1, started to fall and then hugged GGG to stay on his feet. He actually almost fell twice from it and grabbed onto GGG both times. So, yes, I forgot he saved himself from falling. The effect was same.

I think that replies to everything in your post. Now, in the rbr for this fight, I expect you to say something like, "Kell throws out another slow inaccurate jab. We're still waiting for it to arrive..."

 

True enough. Brook has gone toe to toe with pretty much everybody.

 

Exactly lol. I think if it stays in the middle brook wins, that's where brook wants to keep this fight.

 

Your talking like your 'In the know' spence has a variety of ways he can win? Where has this been shown? Every one of his fights he starts cautious gets behind his jab and slowly breaks his opponent down and eventually starts stepping inside and pushing them to the ropes.. its been the same in le greco algieri bundu van heerden so where is there any proof of any of these other various ways he can win. Spence in the amateurs struggled with guys who move it will be the same in the pro's. He needs to set his feet and he needs you to stand still. His limitations like porter will be shown.

 

All you did was alter every incorrect statement you made slightly. Even so, it doesn't make much difference you are still wrong and incorrect on multiple accounts. Who on earth says oh yeah he was knocked down, then retracts and says that actually he was holding on instead. Let me guess you think Mayweather got knocked down by Mosley too right under your logic?

Brook: 441 Thrown, 158 Landed, 36% Connect Rate
Porter: 626 Thrown, 154 Landed, 25% Connect Rate

So on the one hand we have some random nobody who has a clear bias and agenda against Brook saying he has a slow and inaccurate jab. And on the other we have Keith Thurman, a professional boxer who's opinion you have just dismissed. Heh.

"Do you remember the surprise on Brook's face like, "What, he's going to let me hit him? Well, ok"." - No I don't because that's completely made up to suit your agenda.

"And then in round four GGG unaccountably took off his earmuffs and went back to giving Brook a beating. I wonder why?" - You fail to mention that GGG took over once the injury happened, once again showing your agenda.

I called you out on your Brook bias in another thread and I have completely exposed you here. Your opinion means jack all when you literally MAKE STUFF up and completely go against the facts, stats and opinions of other professional fighters.

Any more statements about Brook you would like to now change?