The **BOXING** thread
Discussion
f
king great performance by brook. if I am being totally honest I don't think he did enough to win. first half of the fight was porter second half brook. dave parris was spot on with a draw I reckon. made up for the lad though, he really dug his heels in there. if he'd put his foot down a couple of rounds earlier it woulsd have been an emphatic win
king great performance by brook. if I am being totally honest I don't think he did enough to win. first half of the fight was porter second half brook. dave parris was spot on with a draw I reckon. made up for the lad though, he really dug his heels in there. if he'd put his foot down a couple of rounds earlier it woulsd have been an emphatic winThe one thing I found interesting was the reaction of Porter and his camp on the final bell. There just didn't seem to be any confidence there that they would get the decision. Fair enough if they don't want to get involved in the histrionics of a post-bell, pre-announcement celebration but I just remember getting the impression from them of, "St, that really didn't go to plan..."
As I said at the time, I thought it was the sort of fight that would go the way of the Champ/hometown fighter but I'm beginning to wonder whether being at ringside gave a slightly different perspective on the fight; particularly if you're viewing it through eyes that aren't accustomed to seeing a silky-smooth Kell Brook dominating opponents with ease (hence Brook labouring to establish a similar groove for a good chunk of the contest didn't suffer for the comparison) and without the bombardment of 'Eeyore' Watt's commentary telling you how bad things are going for Brook.
Interestingly, I think the World Boxing News unofficial scorecard was 116-113, so it wasn't just the two American judges who saw it pretty clearly as Brook's fight...
t, that really didn't go to plan..."As I said at the time, I thought it was the sort of fight that would go the way of the Champ/hometown fighter but I'm beginning to wonder whether being at ringside gave a slightly different perspective on the fight; particularly if you're viewing it through eyes that aren't accustomed to seeing a silky-smooth Kell Brook dominating opponents with ease (hence Brook labouring to establish a similar groove for a good chunk of the contest didn't suffer for the comparison) and without the bombardment of 'Eeyore' Watt's commentary telling you how bad things are going for Brook.
Interestingly, I think the World Boxing News unofficial scorecard was 116-113, so it wasn't just the two American judges who saw it pretty clearly as Brook's fight...
I had the benefit of watching the Brook vs Porter fight knowing the result and that there was some points controversy, so I watched I with the sound down (Jim Watt couldn't call a fight to save his life ) and I gave it to Brook by some margin because I was watching for scoring punches not just busyness and work rate in rounds 1 to 7 ( I think it was clear Brook comfortably won the second half of the fight). Brook looked fresh, wasn't hurt at all and was picking his punches and dealt very well with Porter who must be an absolute nightmare to fight but on the night he just wasn't landing anything and Kell was.
Bring on Brook vs Khan, can't wait
Bring on Brook vs Khan, can't wait
Yiliterate said:
The one thing I found interesting was the reaction of Porter and his camp on the final bell. There just didn't seem to be any confidence there that they would get the decision. Fair enough if they don't want to get involved in the histrionics of a post-bell, pre-announcement celebration but I just remember getting the impression from them of, "St, that really didn't go to plan..."
As I said at the time, I thought it was the sort of fight that would go the way of the Champ/hometown fighter but I'm beginning to wonder whether being at ringside gave a slightly different perspective on the fight; particularly if you're viewing it through eyes that aren't accustomed to seeing a silky-smooth Kell Brook dominating opponents with ease (hence Brook labouring to establish a similar groove for a good chunk of the contest didn't suffer for the comparison) and without the bombardment of 'Eeyore' Watt's commentary telling you how bad things are going for Brook.
Interestingly, I think the World Boxing News unofficial scorecard was 116-113, so it wasn't just the two American judges who saw it pretty clearly as Brook's fight...
I did notice jim watt's uber negativity!! I suppose you may be right about my expectations you know.....I envisioned that the way kell was to win was by being ultra elusive with sharp counters and angles. as he let porter bully him at the start of the fight I was probably unfairly disappointed in how it was unfolding.t, that really didn't go to plan..."As I said at the time, I thought it was the sort of fight that would go the way of the Champ/hometown fighter but I'm beginning to wonder whether being at ringside gave a slightly different perspective on the fight; particularly if you're viewing it through eyes that aren't accustomed to seeing a silky-smooth Kell Brook dominating opponents with ease (hence Brook labouring to establish a similar groove for a good chunk of the contest didn't suffer for the comparison) and without the bombardment of 'Eeyore' Watt's commentary telling you how bad things are going for Brook.
Interestingly, I think the World Boxing News unofficial scorecard was 116-113, so it wasn't just the two American judges who saw it pretty clearly as Brook's fight...
one thing however, porter looked s
t and crude. I think that was down to kell's style and timing.and while it may not have been pretty it was obviously enough to continually frustrate porter.if the porter of the mallignaggi fight turns up again in his next fight that will emphasize how well kell did at nullifying porter's strengths
STW2010 said:
Did anyone watch the post-fight talk in the studio, particularly regarding Brook vs Khan? Khan did not like it when Rhodes said that Brook would win!!
I find that a tough fight to call, but I think Khan would probably win that one.
Yeah, thought Rhodes could have deflected that a bit but, there again, it shouldn't have come as any surprise to Khan that Rhodes would back his friend and stable-mate.I find that a tough fight to call, but I think Khan would probably win that one.
Edited by Yiliterate on Monday 18th August 12:40
tuscaneer said:
I did notice jim watt's uber negativity!! I suppose you may be right about my expectations you know.....I envisioned that the way kell was to win was by being ultra elusive with sharp counters and angles. as he let porter bully him at the start of the fight I was probably unfairly disappointed in how it was unfolding.
one thing however, porter looked st and crude. I think that was down to kell's style and timing.and while it may not have been pretty it was obviously enough to continually frustrate porter.
if the porter of the mallignaggi fight turns up again in his next fight that will emphasize how well kell did at nullifying porter's strengths
It's interesting how you can view the same event from differing perspectives and come out with entirely different perceptions of that event. I think my preconceptions jaundiced my view of the first part of the fight as it was happening to an extent, which I can actually see a bit more clearly when I flip things around and consider the fight from a Porter standpoint...one thing however, porter looked s
t and crude. I think that was down to kell's style and timing.and while it may not have been pretty it was obviously enough to continually frustrate porter.if the porter of the mallignaggi fight turns up again in his next fight that will emphasize how well kell did at nullifying porter's strengths
Okay, he knew he was going up against a talented, skilful fighter in Brook, but so too were Alexander and Malignaggi and that didn't stop him from roughing up Alexander a treat and battering Malignaggi from pillar to post in a way nobody else had managed. And they were proven, seasoned fighters too...both two-time world champions and both fighting on home soil, not some first time world title contender fighting for only the second time outside of the UK.
So, while the workrate was good and he was pushing Brook around the ring and backing him up for the first half of the fight, it must have been concerning that he wasn't really catching him or damaging him the way he had against the other two...and it’s not like there wasn’t anything coming back from Brook either. Then, in the second half of the fight – when it was expected that Porter’s strength would really start to tell – it was actually Brook who was getting on top and reducing Porter to wild, crude, swinging attacks which were having very little success.
Look at it that way and, on reflection, I think Porter’s team had plenty to be concerned about on the final bell. It would certainly explain their body-language, which baffled me a bit at the time.
Edited by Yiliterate on Monday 18th August 12:47
As an exercise in highlighting just how strong the Welterweight division is, this makes interesting reading:
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2165915-ranking...
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2165915-ranking...
Extended (45mins!) interview with Eddie Hearn following Brook - Porter:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hfZYRSzC0R8
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=hfZYRSzC0R8
Gassing Station | Sports | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff