Should Brook have kept fighting?

he did after round 10 but at that moment he had flashbacks of GGG and imagine thinking you will be blind for good to much scary ****........

 

his trainer shouldve saved him. now hes a quitter

 

Probably not. I think he tried to power through it as best he could but having sustained the same injury against Golovkin he knows what recovery he needs to go through. Brook wasn't going to win that at that stage and made an instinctive decision.

He's not a quitter in my opinion but I do think he is done, certainly at this level. There may be a Khan fight for him but whether that happens remains to be seen.

 

He did the right thing it's serious injury we are talking about. He couldn't see and was taking a lot of punishment because of it. The eye sight wasn't going to get any better and Spence wasn't going to let up.

No excuse to why he lost as Spence caused the damage and if I'm honest by the end of the 6th Spence had Atleast found a rhythm he could settle down to. But the eye injury made him easier to hit flush and took his own accuracy away. He was not going to be able to turn that fight around at that time so he made his decision.

There are quitter like cheats out there like Andre Dirrell, Brook does not fit into that category.

 

Well, finally bed time and time to do my time. No more future ban bets. haha

I just don't think some of you understand the value of eyesight. I started having problems in 2009 and can't really see into the distance, people I know have to come up really close so I identify them properly. No excuses for the Brook defeat, he was beaten by the better man. I just don't **** around with my eyesight.

Warriors code LOL.

 

Some of the tweets from other fighters were really disappointing and a reminder that a lot of these boxers aren't very intelligent. If someone like Kell brook takes a knee you just know it was serious

 

His defence simply wasnt a match for Spence. He did the right thing in getting out.

 

Why would any fighter potentially sustain permanent long-term damage, in this case loss of sight, for one day's performance? That is nuts. He did the right thing. Only he knows what he was experiencing. He is not a quitter, but I agree his corner should have bailed him out, like they did with GGG.

 

Fight on and make the fans proud and suffer irreparable damage for the rest of your life. Yeah he should've fought on. At least the fan can say that Brook has heart. Foh. He had enough and knew it. Armchairs can't ever dispute or ask this kind of question unless you've been through it in a ring. Pain threshold is different in every fighter and the armchair can't ever judge that. Ever!!!

 

My initial response was that he'd had enough and just quit like Cotto did against Margarito.

Having learned that he's got a broken eye socket yet again I think he made the right choice.

Not only was he against a quality operator in Spence it was at a time in the fight where Spence was coming on very strong and Brook looked about done.

 

He didn't pull a Walters, he fought valiantly back in some of the rounds he got dominated in like the 10th round. I think he showed enough heart for fans to still support him, just Spence had too much for him.

 

He made the right decision. It's not like a situation where Spence had a trainer who used plaster to cause damage purposely like Margarito Cotto where scumbag Margs and his scumbag trainer blatantly cheated Cotto. Do you believe that to this day people still think that Cotto quit against plaster, I mean ***arito!!!??? Lmao

 

Lol wut? Cotton got bricked half to death, most boxers would of been dead or permanently damaged after that plaster fight.

 

team sports have pension plans. i believe they are also obligated to pay doctors bills for sport related injuries. boxers are on their own, in probably the most dangerous sport. his eye looked bad, he had little chance at that point, only he knows what his vision was like. i have no problem with his decision.