I WAS at the Kell Brook fight against Michael Zerafa at the weekend.
I thought Kell was a little flat, but when a fighter gets in his 30s and only has maybe a few fights left, then people start to say, ‘Is he done?’
Heโs had flat performances before though โ if you look at his first fight with Carson Jones he got hurt, but then did a number on him in the rematch; which shows how flat he can be, and also how on top of his game he can be too.
There was pressure on him for the Zerafa fight, heโd changed trainers, he looked like he was trying to force things, and he maybe couldnโt get motivated for the opponent or didnโt have the fear factor. If heโs in with a name, and thereโs a bit more motivation, then heโll be fine. I donโt think you can read too much into it. Just look at Tyson Furyโs two fights before he fought Deontay Wilder, and then he puts in a performance like he did.
People have mentioned the trainer situation, but you can tell he likes [new trainer] John Fewkes. At this stage of his career, youโre not going to teach him a lot more; itโs the motivational side, and getting him up for fights. Obviously, theyโll be working on tactics to a degree but youโre not going to change him technically. I thought some of the criticism was unjustified, he won every round in an eliminator for a world title. People are quick to criticise, but he totally outboxed the kid and is now in line for a shot at the world title, or the Khan fight. Heโs now placed nicely, and I think heโll go from strength to strength.
People are knocking John Fewkes, but if Kell had taken Zerafa out early theyโd have said it was a substandard opponent, but because it went long theyโre saying heโs changed something that isnโt broken and has gone with the wrong trainer. Kell had been beaten previously and he wanted to freshen up, you canโt blame him for that. John Fewkes has the experience, he was a quality fighter himself who probably didnโt fulfil his potential. Him and Kell have hit it off, and I donโt see how you can criticise John Fewkes, to be honest.
Iโm also looking forward to the Josh Warrington and Carl Frampton show on December 22, I think itโs a great fight. Frampton has obviously fought the higher calibre of opponent, but Josh is a real athlete and has worked hard to get where heโs got – I have a lot of respect for him. If Frampton is comfortable at the weight, thereโs no niggles and is on the top of his game, then I think heโll be too much for Josh. But when it comes to endeavour, work rate and taking people out of their comfort zone, then thatโs where Josh has a chance. On ability, I think Carl is just in front but itโs a great, close fight; itโs 55/45 in Carlโs favour, for me. Josh is there on merit, I know he has that good win over Selby but I think, overall, Frampton is a stronger fighter than Selby.
Itโs a crazy situation that the Dillian Whyte and Dereck Chisora fight, another PPV, is on the same night. Why would anyone do that? Even the big American broadcasters usually avoid clashing with each otherโs shows. This will just affect the fighterโs purses because their money will depend on what numbers they do; Iโm positive of that. So, itโs crazy they couldnโt come to some sort of arrangement. You always look for a motive, but I donโt see any logic in it; obviously one [promoter] thinks their fight is bigger than the other one.
I think theyโre both great fights but, if I had to, Iโd probably go for Frampton against Warrington, with Whyte against Chisora a close second. Because the heavyweight division is on a high, they probably think itโll do better numbers, but Iโm not sure. I think Frampton against Warrington is more of a proper fight.