Just watched it again. Man that was entertaining as heck. Very high paced. Both guys throwing big shots. Max Kellerman said that if GGG was in with a bigger (MW) version of Brook that maybe GGG would have lost the fight. I thought that it was a very close fight. At least up until the 5th
I mean if you thought that it was a great fight then that's you but GG beat his ass from start to finish and Brook only won 1 round.
I think an argument can be made that Brook won the 1st and the 2nd. Round 3 was the round where GGG got frustrated and hit after the bell. Going into the 5th I thought Golovkin was in for a long night and then the beat down started. But even at the end of the fight Brook was slipping lots of GGGs big shots.
I gave Brook 2 rounds and yes I thought it was a very good fight. Great is a little much but it was a fun high paced action fight, Where the seemingly invincible fighter was actually given pause for a moment or two.
I thought Brook's work got overrated because he was smaller so he got the benefit of the doubt in close exchanges, I only gave him 1 round. Kassim Ouma is still the guy who had the most success against 3G.
We all see fights different. I thought that GG was just getting warmed up. Brook just didn't carry enough power. Big heart and he was parrying and taking hard body shots and even laughing in there, but the eye. He had to be careful early to fight later and he got hurt (eye) early.
Hagler vs Hearns was competitive for only one round, Hagler proceeded to beat that ass later. That's considered one of the best fights of all time. The thing is, Hearns had all time great power and although he was a former welter, he was 6'1 and carried his power up. Still, I find that fight overrated, it was just a crazy round. Brook vs GGG was entertaining. Brook had great moments. It was similar to Pascal vs Kovalev. Pascal landed better punches on Kovalev than Ward did, that's a fact.