Like almost everyone else, I was very, very impressed with Terence Crawford’s performance in becoming the undisputed super-middleweight champion with victory over Saul “Canelo” Alvarez.
To say he was magnificent is putting it mildly; his defence was fantastic; he totally neutralised Canelo’s power. Later on in the fight he then held his ground, and from the moment he did so Canelo looked even more lost. In a brilliant display of blue-chip skill and old school boxing science, “Bud” proved how important solid fundamentals are, leaving Canelo knowing that he was in trouble early on.
Sadly, I was disgusted that their fight was scored as closely as it was. I struggled to give Canelo more three rounds in the process of scoring it 9-2-1 in Crawford’s favour.
There is no doubt that Crawford cemented his legacy in victory. However, unlike when Canelo lost to Dmitry Bivol, I believe Canelo’s legacy was damaged in defeat. I don’t think there can be any doubt as to Crawford’s standing in history. Yet here is a question for those of you who love the sport like I do – has there ever been a fighter as great as Crawford who’s been as low profile for as he long was? Simply put, he flew under the radar for far too long.
His skills and competitive streak make him capable of competing with any fighter in any era. The biggest criticism of him has previously surrounded who he’s beaten, but who a fighter beats doesn’t always equate to how good they are – particularly in the case of Crawford, whose previous profile made it easier for rivals to avoid him. Canelo will be inducted into the International Boxing Hall of Fame in the first year that he is eligible and Crawford just toyed with him. What more does he realistically need to prove? Sometimes all it takes is that one win, with the odds against you, to prove your greatness to the world.
Great technique, balance and defence, the ability to counter-punch, and power – Crawford has everything the complete fighter needs. The victory over Errol Spence that was dismissed by some on the grounds of the perception that Spence underperformed is instead increasingly proving to have been earned by Crawford’s abilities. I believe that he was at his best at welterweight, and at 147lbs I’m convinced he could have competed with the very best we’ve seen.
One fantasy match-up that particularly appeals to me would have been Crawford versus Carlos Palomino. Crawford has the ability to try to frustrate Palomino, but Palomino would have come to fight and would have thrown punches and forced an exciting fight.
If he’d fought “Sugar” Ray Leonard the highest class of boxing matches would have ensued. Leonard’s speed might just have made Leonard a narrow favourite, but Leonard’s one of the greatest of all time and would have had to be at his very best. It certainly wouldn’t have been one-sided either way.
The aggression Roberto Duran would have brought to the ring would have been far more effective than Canelo’s. The Duran of the first fight against Leonard forced Leonard to stand there and fight him, but Crawford’s boxing abilities might have given Duran the same struggles other skilled fighters like Esteban De Jesus, Edwin Viruet and Wilfred Benitez all did.
Tommy Hearns’ size would unquestionably have tested Crawford. Those who succeeded against Hearns were those capable of hurting him, and I question whether Crawford’s style meant that he could have hurt him in the way we’ve previously seen. At the “Hitman’s” best he was capable of stopping almost anybody, and yet what Leonard did to Hearns suggests that Crawford could also have had some success.
The very best Benitez was also capable of succeeding against any in history – I’d struggle to do justice to how graceful the chess match that would unfold between them would be. They’re similarly intelligent boxers – it’s another fantasy fight that could go either way.
Although the bookmakers and fans of Manny Pacquiao would disagree, I like Crawford over Pacquiao. His skills, timing, boxing ability and defence would have given Pacquiao fits, even at Pacquiao’s peak. Pacquiao could hurt anyone he could get to and start landing on, but if he was made to miss and left open to counters he’d be in trouble, and that’s what I believe would happen.
“Bud” versus Floyd Mayweather is another high-class chess match. Mayweather was at his very best against opponents determined to be the aggressor, but Crawford would force him to wait, and when they exchanged they’d do so on even terms.
There’s no greater compliment that can be paid to Crawford than to envisage him in fights like that and struggle to pick their outcomes. He’s so fresh for a 38 year old that his legacy – and I don’t think he needs to prove anything else at super middleweight; nor do I think that he should risk the atrophy involved in returning to junior middleweight – could continue to build.
*
The news of Ricky Hatton’s sad death led to me reflecting on the dying art of infighting that he had down to a tee. At his best, Hatton slipped inside and then used everything he could – his upper-body strength, shoulders, forearms, elbows and head – to work on the inside against his opponents.
He made little secret of his admiration for Duran, and resembled Duran in many ways. The upper-body strength; the use of the shoulder; pulling with one hand and hitting with the other. Few can model themselves on their idol and succeed, but he did.
My condolences to the entire Hatton family, and especially to his son Campbell. May his memory be eternal.
