Khan vs Porter for the WBC title?

Porter is not a pressure fighter. He's a brawler and his style is bordering on mediocrity. He doesn't belong in the elite group. He should rematch Broner. Or Haymon should just let him feast on guys like Karass, Berto, Guerrero, Diaz, Molinas, etc. Khan would just employ what Brook did, clinch, clinch, clinch. Khan's combo would kill Porter. That's why fans should be demanding Thurman vs Khan, not this silly matchup. Brook is strong enough to do that(plus having a favorable ref helps) and be effective, he also carries a lot more pop than Khan that was able to get Porter's respect somewhat early and hurt Porter a bit later on in the fight. But it was still a close fight and Khan doesn't have the kind of strength to clinch Porter and keep him locked up on the inside. And sure, Porter brawls, he's not skilled about his work, but he knows how to close the distance fast and put the pressure on with his mauling style, and he doesn't stop doing it. Again, look how easily Algieri was able to catch Khan with a pressure fighting style he effectively learned in one camp. Porter brings far more relentless pressure with better athletic ability backing it. I would 100% bet on Porter to dog out Khan on the inside. Thurman vs Khan would be fine too. Khan would get stopped there likely by a Thurman counter from a weird angle. Khan's best route at this point is Kell Brook, where he'd also lose by stoppage, but at least he'd get a great payday out of it. Waiting for Floyd has failed.

It's probably just me, but I don't think Khan looked all that fast in his last fight. By that, I mean I think he looked noticeably slower.

He might be 'bigger' in terms of height and reach but Porter's definitely heavier. I've seen Rashad Holloway say Porter used to walk around at 180 or something, I don't know what he walks around at now but he has a hard time making 147, no idea how he made 144 for Broner. Porter is very big and physically strong, Brook is probably the only guy in the top 10 who's bigger than Porter. I know Peterson's big at 140 as well though. I know Porter is a big kid for 5'7 and maybe he does weigh a bit more than Peterson, but it is'nt going to be more than a few pounds. I just look at Peterson, who fights at 140, but blows up to almost the same size as a GGG. I'll have to thumb through boxrec and see some of Porters fight night weights.

Peterson is actually quite a bit bigger than Porter. He is two inches taller, has a 4" inch reach advantage , and he blew up to like 168lbs. against Garcia. Peterson is basicly a jmw/mw pretending to be a jww. There is nothing that Porter brings to the table, physically, that trumps what Peterson brought against Khan. He might be 'bigger' in terms of height and reach but Porter's definitely heavier. I've seen Rashad Holloway say Porter used to walk around at 180 or something, I don't know what he walks around at now but he has a hard time making 147, no idea how he made 144 for Broner. Porter is very big and physically strong, Brook is probably the only guy in the top 10 who's bigger than Porter. I know Peterson's big at 140 as well though.

This is a pretty risky fight for Khan

Porter's a swarmer, right?

Porter will smash Duck-Boy to pieces.

Peterson is actually quite a bit bigger than Porter. He is two inches taller, has a 4" inch reach advantage , and he blew up to like 168lbs. against Garcia. Peterson is basicly a jmw/mw pretending to be a jww. There is nothing that Porter brings to the table, physically, that trumps what Peterson brought against Khan. Plus he was on PED's and that's exactly why the rematch was cancelled, everyone seems to ignore that bit.

You mean Brook will wait for the winner? Meanwhile he'll fight another No no Dan? :pat: Why not let him fight Thurman? and when did I say that???:thinking:

Watch Khan vs Peterson. Khan should've won the fight but I can see Porter doing what Peterson did more consistently. Porter's bigger and stronger than Peterson. He had a hard time dealing with Diaz's pressure as well. And Porter isn't a brawler. Peterson is actually quite a bit bigger than Porter. He is two inches taller, has a 4" inch reach advantage , and he blew up to like 168lbs. against Garcia. Peterson is basicly a jmw/mw pretending to be a jww. There is nothing that Porter brings to the table, physically, that trumps what Peterson brought against Khan.

good fight... winner fights brook for unification. :boxing: You mean Brook will wait for the winner? Meanwhile he'll fight another No no Dan? :pat: Why not let him fight Thurman?

good fight... winner fights brook for unification. :boxing:

Porter didn't struggle much with Alexander himself and has a totally different style anyway, making comparative results on that common opponent pointless. Alexander doesn't put pressure on you, he's a low power slick boxer-type. Khan usually feasts on that style of fighter with his length and speed. He's never faired well against the kind of pressure Porter brings to the table. Even Algieri was able to change his style completely to pressure fighter and massively trouble Khan. Porter is not a pressure fighter. He's a brawler and his style is bordering on mediocrity. He doesn't belong in the elite group. He should rematch Broner. Or Haymon should just let him feast on guys like Karass, Berto, Guerrero, Diaz, Molinas, etc. Khan would just employ what Brook did, clinch, clinch, clinch. Khan's combo would kill Porter. That's why fans should be demanding Thurman vs Khan, not this silly matchup.

I think this is the type of fight that nobody can really be certain of an outcome. Both fighters could beat the other using different styles. It would likely come down to who would want it more on the night. For Khan it would be his first legitimate test at 147 against a puncher. For Porter it would be a real test of how well he can cut the ring, and be patient and considered with his attacks. Porter could swarm Khan early, or Khan could run all night. Really interesting match-up styles wise IMO.

Why not Khan vs Thurman? Who is Thurman fighting next? Another Collazo type opponent?

Is it a 50/50 split when a fight is ordered between the #1 and #2? Good fight. i'd favour Porter due to his style but won't be shocked to see a Khan decision.

Porter struggled with Alexander while Khan vs Alexander was a mismatch - Khan was about 2 or 3 levels superior to Alexander. I think Porter only has a punchers chance against Khan, if he doesn't get lucky, he gets brutalized and dominated the same way Alexander did. Porter didn't struggle much with Alexander himself and has a totally different style anyway, making comparative results on that common opponent pointless. Alexander doesn't put pressure on you, he's a low power slick boxer-type. Khan usually feasts on that style of fighter with his length and speed. He's never faired well against the kind of pressure Porter brings to the table. Even Algieri was able to change his style completely to pressure fighter and massively trouble Khan.

Good fight. Porter on his best day kills Khan. Khan on an average day probably wins a UD.

Good fight but I think it's relatively easy work for Khan. It's true Khan lacks inside fighting but even if Porter gets on the inside he just smothers his own work anyway. Porter only impressed me in the Paulie fight, that created a false illusion on his power imo.

Porter struggled with Alexander while Khan vs Alexander was a mismatch - Khan was about 2 or 3 levels superior to Alexander. I think Porter only has a punchers chance against Khan, if he doesn't get lucky, he gets brutalized and dominated the same way Alexander did.