Vasyl Lomachenko is P4P #1

[Primo Carnera]

Have Geale, Rubio, Murray, Monroe and Wade ever been rated no.1 in their division and top 10 P4P by The Ring? That's a no. Only one of them has ever won a "world" title.

The only thing they have on Brook is being naturally bigger. And the "middleweight" Brook would beat the shit out of three and school the other two.

Middleweight Brook would do no such thing, everyone of those middleweights would have beaten Brook. That is the reason he fights at welterweight.

Everyone of them would beat Brook? Did they all do better than "middleweight" Brook against Golovkin too?

Geale, Rubio and Wade were knocked out inside 3 rounds. Monroe survived for 6 rounds, suffering three knockdowns and never won a round.

Brook was level 2-2 with Golovkin on two judges scorecards and 3-1 down on the other. He never hit the deck, quit or went close to being sparked, he lost through an injury.

not wanting to jump in on your debate , but just a question @Fenster. If Brook hadn't got injured, how do you think the fight would've panned out? I got the impression the power was wearing him down.
I have to say the 3rd round from Brook was one of the "Ballsyist" rounds of boxing I've seen for a long time.

[Master]

Have Geale, Rubio, Murray, Monroe and Wade ever been rated no.1 in their division and top 10 P4P by The Ring? That's a no. Only one of them has ever won a "world" title.

The only thing they have on Brook is being naturally bigger. And the "middleweight" Brook would beat the shit out of three and school the other two.

Middleweight Brook would do no such thing, everyone of those middleweights would have beaten Brook. That is the reason he fights at welterweight.

Everyone of them would beat Brook? Did they all do better than "middleweight" Brook against Golovkin too?

Geale, Rubio and Wade were knocked out inside 3 rounds. Monroe survived for 6 rounds, suffering three knockdowns and never won a round.

Brook was level 2-2 with Golovkin on two judges scorecards and 3-1 down on the other. He never hit the deck, quit or went close to being sparked, he lost through an injury.

not wanting to jump in on your debate , but just a question @Fenster. If Brook hadn't got injured, how do you think the fight would've panned out? I got the impression the power was wearing him down.
I have to say the 3rd round from Brook was one of the "Ballsyist" rounds of boxing I've seen for a long time.

Brook gave it his all but Triple G was always in control and Murray showed more bottle after being knocked down early and surviving into the later rounds.

[Fenster]

Have Geale, Rubio, Murray, Monroe and Wade ever been rated no.1 in their division and top 10 P4P by The Ring? That's a no. Only one of them has ever won a "world" title.

The only thing they have on Brook is being naturally bigger. And the "middleweight" Brook would beat the shit out of three and school the other two.

Middleweight Brook would do no such thing, everyone of those middleweights would have beaten Brook. That is the reason he fights at welterweight.

Everyone of them would beat Brook? Did they all do better than "middleweight" Brook against Golovkin too?

Geale, Rubio and Wade were knocked out inside 3 rounds. Monroe survived for 6 rounds, suffering three knockdowns and never won a round.

Brook was level 2-2 with Golovkin on two judges scorecards and 3-1 down on the other. He never hit the deck, quit or went close to being sparked, he lost through an injury.

not wanting to jump in on your debate , but just a question @Fenster. If Brook hadn't got injured, how do you think the fight would've panned out? I got the impression the power was wearing him down.
I have to say the 3rd round from Brook was one of the "Ballsyist" rounds of boxing I've seen for a long time.

I have no doubt Brook would have been stopped, i don't even think he won three rounds.

Master named a bunch of middleweights Golovkin walloped who are "better names" than Brook. Not only is that stupid, as Brook is more high profile than them, but also stupid because Brook did better against Golovkin than all.

Thickos on here act like everything that happens is a first for boxing. Welterweights have been challenging middleweights since boxing began, the brilliant smaller man challenging the brilliant bigger man are among the most famous in history. It's the very fact that Brook is a top drawer proven world-class welterweight, far superior to those decent world-level middleweights, that he could hold his own for a while. The same Brook that fought Golovkin would have smashed Daniel Geale to bits.

[Primo Carnera]

Have Geale, Rubio, Murray, Monroe and Wade ever been rated no.1 in their division and top 10 P4P by The Ring? That's a no. Only one of them has ever won a "world" title.

The only thing they have on Brook is being naturally bigger. And the "middleweight" Brook would beat the shit out of three and school the other two.

Middleweight Brook would do no such thing, everyone of those middleweights would have beaten Brook. That is the reason he fights at welterweight.

Everyone of them would beat Brook? Did they all do better than "middleweight" Brook against Golovkin too?

Geale, Rubio and Wade were knocked out inside 3 rounds. Monroe survived for 6 rounds, suffering three knockdowns and never won a round.

Brook was level 2-2 with Golovkin on two judges scorecards and 3-1 down on the other. He never hit the deck, quit or went close to being sparked, he lost through an injury.

not wanting to jump in on your debate , but just a question @Fenster. If Brook hadn't got injured, how do you think the fight would've panned out? I got the impression the power was wearing him down.
I have to say the 3rd round from Brook was one of the "Ballsyist" rounds of boxing I've seen for a long time.

I have no doubt Brook would have been stopped, i don't even think he won three rounds.

Master named a bunch of middleweights Golovkin walloped who are "better names" than Brook. Not only is that stupid, as Brook is more high profile than them, but also stupid because Brook did better against Golovkin than all.

Thickos on here act like everything that happens is a first for boxing. Welterweights have been challenging middleweights since boxing began, the brilliant smaller man challenging the brilliant bigger man are among the most famous in history. It's the very fact that Brook is a top drawer proven world-class welterweight, far superior to those decent world-level middleweights, that he could hold his own for a while. The same Brook that fought Golovkin would have smashed Daniel Geale to bits.

I agree what you're saying about Brook and I don't think he won 3 rounds, but he showed bags more heart and cojones than Murray et al. And just because somebody like Murray lasts more rounds where he adopts a high guard and doesn't really have a go, it doesn't mean he did better than Brook, because Brook had a proper go.
But on the other side of the coin , the weights are there for a reason, and as time goes on in a fight, the heavier man would have the advantage. Although Brook is an exceptionality big WW.