How is Brook, coming from a terrible loss, a great win?
it was an excusable loss versus Golovkin - he had no business fighting him there, same as Mikey vs Spence and Khan vs Canelo and Jermell vs Canelo and now Bud vs Canelo - eh? wait a second - I could swear I see a pattern there
The Thurman/Brook/Porter/Garcia welterweight era (and add in Ugas if you like) wasn't at that high of a level but higher than today's lot (bar Ennis imo). But it was competitive and fun to watch - a bit like today's 154 - Love Tim as a fighter but he does lack skills even if he is all heart.
Porter's best attribute was his motor. Garcia had no good wins at 147 but he had enough guile and pop to compete, so a win over him can be discounted. Brook's peak was beating Porter at his best but then he fell off but only slightly after the Golovkin defeat. Spence's victory over Brook is of much higher value than Bud's for example.
Thurman is one of those fighters who was eye pleasing and got by valid opponents in Garcia and Porter but he did avoid Spence and lets be honest about this - his weakness is body shots and if he ever had fought either Bud or Spence he would likely have been down for a body shot. I don't go along with the idea that he could have been a staple on the p4p list - that's just what-iffing - re-writing history.
Regards his personality - at least he had one even if a bit corny - unlike Haney or Fundora or Jermell angry lion.
Comment