Brook is better than Thurman IMO and Spence is a stylistic matchup problem for Thurman. Thurman has problems with people who throw a lot of punches and not let him get his punches off.
Thurman only throws one punch at a time. He doesn't throw combinations. Spence will easily win rounds by just staying active. Thurman has shown he can be hurt to the head and body. I think Spence stops him.
Thurman is like a less athletic Roy Jones. Not a ton of skillful fighting but athleticism brings him to the top. Thurman is super athletic but isn't the complete athletic freak that Jones was.
I definitely think that Thurman is a good fighter and I like him. I just don't see him as an elite fighter whatsoever. Top 10 p4p? Perhaps. But a top 5? No way. Spence may not be there yet but he will get there soon I think
You whattake Porter away from Kell's record and what's he done?
Not to mention he quit in back to back fights in his own backyard!
Thurman has beaten better and so far he's not lost (let alone quit)
Brook probably wouldn't even beat Khan let alone Thurman
In 13 years and after 38 fights, Brook has one good win on his record
Thurman has had 10 less fights and has already beaten better and done more.
Kell Brook is shit! I know there's a lot of Brits posting on here
But come on guys let's be honest. Kell has fallen far short at elite level.
That is harsh on Kell, who is a very decent fighter and can hold his own against the top US fighters.
Anyone at welterweight who steps in the ring with GGG would be damaged.
Do not let success go to your head and do not let failure get to your heart.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks