Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Thurman and Porter are both solid fighters but both are lacking

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Thurman and Porter are both solid fighters but both are lacking

    Thurman is a solid counter puncher but can not fight on the inside and gets pushed back easily and and does not really have a great jab. He has solid power but does not have the great timing to make it as effective as it can be.

    Porter can not fight going backwards at all and has no jab worth mentioning, He leaps in wide open and off balance. Porter is aggressive ,but once he gets in he either smothers his work of just wastes energy wrestling his opponent.

    Both are solid fighters and if they fix certain things may have the chance to prove they are elite top fighters. Neither are as good as they think they are and both are very, very limited. But fighters like these have to fight each other to learn and improve

  • #2
    Originally posted by larryxxx... View Post
    Thurman is a solid counter puncher but can not fight on the inside and gets pushed back easily and and does not really have a great jab. He has solid power but does not have the great timing to make it as effective as it can be.

    Porter can not fight going backwards at all and has no jab worth mentioning, He leaps in wide open and off balance. Porter is aggressive ,but once he gets in he either smothers his work of just wastes energy wrestling his opponent.

    Both are solid fighters and if they fix certain things may have the chance to prove they are elite top fighters. Neither are as good as they think they are and both are very, very limited. But fighters like these have to fight each other to learn and improve
    Thurman has amazing timing, specially those left hooks and straight rights that he landed when Porter got lazy on his defense. If it were anybody but Porter he would have gotten knocked out by the amazingly timed punches Keith was landiing. I do agree that he needs to work on getting pushed against the ropes.

    Porter actually did pretty good for himself when Keith started to pressure. The jab is another thing. When Porter used the jab just to get in he would get countered but when he put more than one together and mixed his offense he did well. What I don't like about porter is that he smothers his work.

    Comment


    • #3
      If you're landing 47% of your power shots a fight, your timing is fantastic.

      Comment


      • #4
        Thurman's biggest weaknesses are his lack of jab and lack of inside game, he loads of on everything, people think he has stamina problems but when you load up on that many punches, your gas tank isn't gonna last 12 rounds. He needs to pick his shots, use his energy more wisely.

        But his lack of jab is my biggest concern with him

        Comment


        • #5
          Thurman's biggest weakness is he fights like a guy with KO power.

          Porter's weakness is that he is just too basic and simple.

          Both put on a good fight but neither is special.

          The last messiah for American welterweights is Spence but I don't see him staying at 147 for long and he gets beat up at 154. Mark my words.

          Americans should really be getting behind their only ace, Timothy Bradley.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by larryxxx... View Post
            Thurman is a solid counter puncher but can not fight on the inside and gets pushed back easily and and does not really have a great jab. He has solid power but does not have the great timing to make it as effective as it can be.

            Porter can not fight going backwards at all and has no jab worth mentioning, He leaps in wide open and off balance. Porter is aggressive ,but once he gets in he either smothers his work of just wastes energy wrestling his opponent.

            Both are solid fighters and if they fix certain things may have the chance to prove they are elite top fighters. Neither are as good as they think they are and both are very, very limited. But fighters like these have to fight each other to learn and improve
            Don't know but that fight last night was a modern day classic for this era and both fighters showed massive heart and determination and true will to win. And contrary to what you say, great skill was on display.

            I'll take those type of fighters all day long everyday.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by boxinghead530 View Post
              Don't know but that fight last night was a modern day classic for this era and both fighters showed massive heart and determination and true will to win. And contrary to what you say, great skill was on display.

              I'll take those type of fighters all day long everyday.
              I agree it was a modern day classic

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by soul_survivor View Post
                Thurman's biggest weakness is he fights like a guy with KO power.

                Porter's weakness is that he is just too basic and simple.

                Both put on a good fight but neither is special.

                The last messiah for American welterweights is Spence but I don't see him staying at 147 for long and he gets beat up at 154. Mark my words.

                Americans should really be getting behind their only ace, Timothy Bradley.
                Errol Spence Jr...

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by larryxxx... View Post
                  I agree it was a modern day classic
                  Both fighters showed good skill too. Thurman and Porter fight the way they fight and have perfected there style of fighting. They may not do everything perfect but they do what they do for there style great plus add on great heart and determination.

                  I mean which fighter does everything prefect boxing wise anyways. I'll take a Thurman or Porter over any fighter who looks perfect because I know Thurman and Porter can trump them with what they got because of there heart and determination.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by soul_survivor View Post
                    Thurman's biggest weakness is he fights like a guy with KO power.

                    Porter's weakness is that he is just too basic and simple.

                    Both put on a good fight but neither is special.

                    The last messiah for American welterweights is Spence but I don't see him staying at 147 for long and he gets beat up at 154. Mark my words.

                    Americans should really be getting behind their only ace, Timothy Bradley.
                    What's this **** people keep preaching about Spence not staying long as a welterweight?

                    Dude if Margarito and Baldomir (walked around at 180lbs and came in in the mid 160s on fight nights) could stay at welterweight as long as they did, then I don't see no problem at all.

                    Worst of all, your bias is even more transparent by mentioning Bradley, coz Bradley fought at middleweight in the amateurs and yet fought as a junior welter and a welter his entire pro career, and he still a welter to this date.

                    Guys like Ortiz and weigh more than Spence on fight night yet nobody hollarin bout them not making weight.

                    You guys are pieces of **** and your agenda is transparent. Spence is the truth and yawl can't stand it so you gotta make up all this nonsense to make yourselves feel better.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X
                    TOP