is amir khan an hippocrate over brooks opponent's

Yeah World Champion Kotelnik, contender Malignaggi, Maidana, Judah, McCloskey and Peterson only equates to two "half decent" opponents. So presumably of that 6, 4 of them are less than half decent, so in other words poor?:roll:

 

excellent post.good

 

Maidana and Peterson were the only "world level fights" on that list, and I'm only including Maidana due to the stylistic trouble he gave Khan, he's made it pertinently obvious he isn't World Class both before and since the Khan fight.. Judah was, but not anymore, very much past it. I hate people bringing up Kotelnik, seriously, who has he beat? Ever? Mcloskey was also evidently out of his depth, and a far worse fight than Brook, which he's currently rubbishing. Oh, and bloody hell "contender" Malignaggi, who looked genuinely SHOCKED that he'd hurt a recent opponent, really?

Also was a it a coincidence you skipped the biggest joke world title fight until Burns fought that midget? What a world class operator Salita was eh.

 

I very much agree.. I aint saying Khan aint good but he aint light the world alight. He hasnt done what Froch has done and fought world class opponents one after another has he?

 

froch has lost the biggest fights of his career, so what if he fought one after the other, he was in a comp, he had no choice.

 

yeah but maybe Froch was in a comp but he came out and straight at Bute and if he wins another big fight guranteed and if he loses a big fight guranted

 

What does any of that have to do with my post? I criticised the previous poster for saying he had only fought two "half decent" opponents. Kotelnik is clearly better than half decent, regardless of whether you think he warrants being deemed world class.

Who has he beaten? He beat Maidana, M'Baye and despite losing on the cards was many peoples winner in the fight with Devon Alexander. He merits being called a world class fighter IMO, but that depends on your understanding of the term "world class". I find it interesting that you include Peterson as world level, but in reality that has only been truly proven by him beating Khan. Before that fight Kotlenik had a superior record to Peterson with more impressive wins.

Nor was I in anyway saying that Khan should not fight Brook, I made no mention of Brook as a potential opponent, so that aspect of your post is irrelevant. Why would I mention Salita?

Salita was a poor opponent, and I was citing examples of opponents who constiute a better rating than "half decent". So no it was not a coincidence it was an obvious omission because the bout would not be an example of a decent opponent.

You seem to be insinuating that I am raving about Khan's record or arguing he has fought a host of top tier opponents. I'm not. Go back and look at exactly what posts I was replying to.

Malignaggi patently qualifies as a contender despite your attempt to dismiss it. He has only ever lost to world champions in the form of Cotto, Hatton, Diaz and Khan. He also beat Diaz who has wins over Freitas and Katsidis.

Malignaggi is the exact definition of a "contender" and his lack of power is irrelevant, so I'm not sure what the point of you comment about that was.

Brook looks increasingly impressive and I'd enjoy a fight between him and Khan. That said, in terms of records there is no comparison and Brook has had a ludicrously long career for the progress he has made. To not have fought above British title level in an 8 year career for an unbeaten and talented fighter is just unbelievable.

 

No and nor has pretty much anyone else before, because the nature of the Super Six was totally original and ensured a level of competition that is fairly unique within the sport.

 

u think if he won the comp he would have fought bute? doubt it, too much risk for little reward, he would have went for a bhop shot imo.

 

nohing wrong with a bhop fight btw, just saying he would have went for the money fights,