Rate Kell's resume out of 10.

6 out of 10

 

7/10 would be lower but that Porter win was really impressive

 

7 out of ten. Undefeated, world champion, porter win and can only fight who his team puts in front of him.

 

6/10.

I've tried to categorise Kell Brooks fights (see bellow). Kell's resume at World title level isn't great with the exception of the Porter fight. For me from winning the British title in his 17 fight (against Barrie Jones) right up until fight 32 (against Robles) is overlooked. I know he changed promoters to Matchroom and had various injuries etc in this period, but IMO this is the main reason why Kell receives criticism of having such a padded record of 35-0.

World championship level or for fights simply involving a World title before anyone says anything (fights 33-35)
Porter, Dan, Gavin

Inter-Continental / Fringe World level (21-32)
Bienias, Jennings, Kotey, Ndou, Jackiewicz, Galarza, Hatton, C. Jones, Saldivia, C. Jones, Senchenko, Robles

British level (fights 17-20)
B. Jones, McIntyre, Elwell, Lomax

Apprenticeship / Lower level (fights 1-16)
Buckley, Cosnett, Williamson, Coleman, Taylor, Handley, Smith, Whiteman, Smith, Smith, Harvey, Cottier, Kirk, David, Stoda, Gethin

 

Porter makes it a solid 6, but it's a weak list.

That's why he needs that Khan scalp. Khan's almost at Porter kinda level wich makes it more solid overall.

 

6/10.

His poor grades in woodwork drags it down.

 

6/10

 

4.5

 

I would have to agree with you -- Kell's career is, at present, no higher than a solid six out of ten. Beating Porter is the obvious highlight and, apart from blowing away Senchenko, nothing else really stands out.

Since the impressive win against Porter, Brook has had two gimme title defences -- which will soon become three against Bizier.

 

5 at best

 

6 because he's on 35 fights and has been with major promoters for years. It's completely understandable if a fighter has 35 fights and hasn't gotten that far because that's politics. However Brook's been touted for many years under ****** and Hearn but his progression has been slowed. Each time he steps up, he talks like he is on the next level up but in reality stays at his newly acquired level for too long.

When Brooks finished Jennings, that was a defining moment for him to leave the British scene and make a proper run at the world scene. That fight was nearly 6 years ago.

He steps up vs Porter, shows the potential he has and then does nothing for his next 3 fights.

With Pac and Floyd out of the picture, the division is wide open.

If I remember correctly, Brook turning down Bradley and spending too long chasing the money in Khan show his true colours. Very talented, very able but his minds not on being the best or legacy, it's on managing his career very carefully and money.

EDIT: In those 6 years Khan relocated to America, went up a weight class, unified and fought Malinaggi, Maidana, Judah, Peterson, Garcia, Collazo and Alexander. Different gravy when it comes to their mindsets as fighters.

 

Beating Porter was a good win for Brook; but his opponents in his two defences thus far (Dan and Gavin) were utter dross, as far as world title defences go.

Wasn't there talk of Brook defending against Maidana and Juan Manuel Marquez not so long ago?

 

6 is about right...after khan..and possibly garcia...id say 7.5