Brook vs another bum

Fighting Kevin Bizier next, Bizier has lost twice to Jo Jo Dan, another stiff on Brook's record.

Embarrassment of a 'world champion' is Brook...

Not much he can do about the IBF making crappy mandatories, if he didn't fight Dan or Bizier they'd strip him straight away, blame the governing bodies rather than the boxer. Calling them stiffs is a huge insult either way.

Won't be buying this either...

Is getting incredibly difficult to make excuses for Brook now. Unless the Khan fight is a done deal for the summer and this is a low risk marking time bout this is unacceptable.

If the Khan fight is not happening, this is a farce. Hearn and Brook need to move on if Khan is not happening, they should be looking at the likes of Thurman or Garcia.

Bit harsh labelling Bizier a bum. He's a tough, game guy. Not what Brook needs at this stage I grant you.

Expect a lot of rhetoric from Matchroom on how Khan is avoiding Brook to shift the focus.

You would think there is too much money in Khan v Brook for it not to happen. But as with Quigg, it takes an age to come to fruition and a series of pointless fights in the interim to get there.

Hope this is on PPV with Joshua fighting as well

Eddie should simply call it:

'Prospects Night'

Would have liked to see Brook fight Jessie Vargas if not one of the big boys.

Some of you guys don't seem to happy with Brook because of this fight. He's not Floyd who could pick and choose who he wanted to fight. What do you expect from Brook, to not fight his mandatory and be stripped?

Atila wrote:Some of you guys don't seem to happy with Brook because of this fight. He's not Floyd who could pick and choose who he wanted to fight. What do you expect from Brook, to not fight his mandatory and be stripped?

how about fight a worthy voluntary between the mandatory?

Blame the IBF

irishbrads wrote:

Atila wrote:Some of you guys don't seem to happy with Brook because of this fight. He's not Floyd who could pick and choose who he wanted to fight. What do you expect from Brook, to not fight his mandatory and be stripped?

how about fight a worthy voluntary between the mandatory?

If he was allowed one then he probably would, remember he got injured last year, whether that was a real injury or not is up for debate

If the IBF says you are fighting a mandatory, then you HAVE to fight them

When he isn't fighting a crap mandatory he should be doing better than Frankie Gavin then..

Agreed that the Frankie Gavin fight was a joke. But there is nothing he can do about this one because it's his mandatory. As long as he still fights Khan in June and steps up after that as well to the likes of Bradley, Garcia, thurman etc then this is one we may have to live with. They won't put this on PPV though.

Hammer is right the IBF mandatories are absolutely shocking in a competitive division. However in 35 fights he has still managed to only fighter one guy in the top 15.

Cheers, Rodders

I'm sure Hearn's greatest fans Halling and Smith can polish this turd...

He must have gone the distance with some half decent journeyman...

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:When he isn't fighting a crap mandatory he should be doing better than Frankie Gavin then..

exactly this!!!

also there was talk of Brandon Rios, Garcia and Rios were very vocal that Matchroom weren't prepared to pay the money, in my opinion Hearn is milking this and i despair if this defence is PPV

Funny thing is the same people moaning about Khan fighting Algieri and Alexander will be sticking up for Brook..

This is ridiculous. Gutted as I really like Brooks style, with his timing and accuracy.
Brook will be 30 by time he faces his second career challenge. Why doesn't he face the big challenges whilst he still has some youthful athleticism and energy?

Hearn could have negotiated the IBF mandatory. A lot of promoters use the mandatory excuse to sell an easy fight these days

Could Hearn have paid the IBF a fee to allow Brook to fight a voluntary in it's place? Can that be done?

It's done all the time I believe. Plenty of fighters have no issues with mandatory fights. Some guys who have an arena booked and a fight schedule to keep to end up selling poor fighters as 'can't blame him for fighting his mandatory' type situation. The blue print on defending these titles in low risk fights is there for all to see. Just a matter of validating it to the ticket buyers

It can be done, sometimes the mandatory challenger will accept step aside money but not always.

Why do we hardly ever get decent mandatories anymore???

Derbymanc wrote:Why do we hardly ever get decent mandatories anymore???

Because the people in charge of the governing bodies are clowns, who judging by the mandatories must have a poor knowledge of boxing, must pull some of these so called mandatories out of a hat.

You can lose multiple title challenges and still get another title shot.

Derbymanc wrote:Why do we hardly ever get decent mandatories anymore???

Because high rankings are no longer earned they are bought and sold. All these intercontinental, transcontinental, pan American and Silver belts the governing bodies have all give a fighter top ten or fifteen rankings with the respective governing bodies. They all carry sanctioning fees, as such pay enough sanctioning fees and win/defend enough of these titles and you will move up the rankings. They have basically reduced world title rankings and shots to Tesco Clubcards.

The governing bodies are essentially self serving money making enterprises (they really hit the jackpot).

They rank the guys who play ball with them and pay their fees. They have invented any number of titles to use to charge fees and by progressing through their own made up criteria and paying them a fighter can essentially buy their way up the ladder. Nobody in these sanctioning bodies actually think their own rankings are genuine. They are just raking in the fees.

Good God. I thought Jo Jo was bad.....but this guy actually LOST to him and that's saying something.

Brook in 6.

In all seriousness when are we likely to see Brook fight a decent ranked fighter?

Apart from Porter his record is abysmal it really really is.

Surely one of the worst champs around?

He must fight Khan after this to gain any credibility

mobilemaster8 wrote:Good God.  I thought Jo Jo was bad.....but this guy actually LOST to him and that's saying something.

Brook in 6.

In all seriousness when are we likely to see Brook fight a decent ranked fighter?

Apart from Porter his record is abysmal it really really is.

Surely one of the worst champs around?

He must fight Khan after this to gain any credibility

I rate Brook, but your spot on, Brook should be telling Hearn to start getting him top ranked opponents, some of the  opponents he's fighting would be lucky to win a British title, never mind a world title.

Can't blame Brook for having to fight the IBF's mandatory, but after that Brook and his camp should be looking for the big names in the division.

Hearn is turning out to be a hindrance rather than an asset to Brook.

Completely agree mate.

Brook has talent in bundles and I'm confident he could mix it with the big names of the division and look good doing so.

But is there a reason he is being kept away from said fights? I'm not sure.

Just seems hearn is happy milking the title and fighting nobodies keeping his bank balance rolling as opposed to Brooks legacy.

He could go out to the states tomorrow and batter Thurman for example and the US Will stand up take note and say "holy crap this guy IS a real deal"

At the moment we are seeing a fighter who we know has all the ingredients be looked at like he is a laughing stock.