Is Keith Thurman the best welterweight in the world?

With Brook moving to Middleweight, if only for the moment, is Keith Thurman the best welterweight in the world? He arguably has the best resume of welterweight vs welterweight competition. He kos 80% of his opponents and has knocked down all but Porter (who wobbled) in his fights. But has he shown too much vulnerability to be considered the legitimate heir to the 147 thrown? If so, when did vulnerability start defining a division? Was Leonard not vulnerable to a Hearns and vise versa? Was Tito not vulnerable to the boxing ability of DeLa Hoya? Isn't that what makes boxing the sort of sport that defies generations? All in all, Keith might not be the most talented 147 in the world. But I dare anyone to show me a better candidate for best welterweight in the word.... he has to beat Danny Garcia and Jesse Vargas.....gotta unify....too many undefeated fighters in the top ten even brook holds a belt here....unify at least 3/4 belts and he should be considered number one Timmy has only lost to Manny, an ATG, so he is in the mix too

Tim Bradley /thread

yes.......based on resume, he has fought decent comp, unlike brook who fought jo jo dan, frankie gavin and kevin bumzier

I wouldn't call him the "best welterweight in the world" but based on his resume, he's earned the right to babysit that #1 spot until somebody gains a hold of the division.

While it's highly arguable who's the clear #1, you're not gonna find many people who actually think Thurman's #1. Brook beat Porter in a more convincing fashion, and both Bradley and Garcia are probably better than him - and Pacquaio, if he unretires, has the best claim to #1. He's #4-5 in my book.

IDK how anyone can say Thurman, Spence, Garcia etc are the best when Tim Bradley is still an active WW. Tim Bradley by far has proven more than all 3 have ever. The only thing about Tim is you never know which 1 you are going to get but Tim in his A game beats all 3, not easy but beats them all. Hell if you even think about it, face first Tim Bradley makes for a fun competitive fight so that should tell you something about his skill and the others. Another thing, Tim Bradleys loss(es) to Pacquiao are better than anything the 3 guys I mentioned have done in their careers.

No one at welterweight deserves to be called the best welterweight in the world. None of them have proven to be the best over the other contenders.

Well if we're considering Mayweather retired, then Pacquiao still has to be in for a shout as best WW? He did just beat Bradley again. If anyone else beat Bradley, they would be raving about it. I wouldn't be that confident picking any other WW right now over even this version of Pacquiao.

Thurman has the best record of the current crop of welterweights. Brook is probably on the elite level but who really knows? Errol Spence isn't there yet as far as record is concerned but he has the possibility of beating Thurman. At the moment I favor Thurman though since he's more proven. Crawford isn't even 147lbs so I don't know why he was mentioned here. Bradley hasn't been looking too good and Vargas gets stopped by Thurman.

With Brook moving to Middleweight, if only for the moment, is Keith Thurman the best welterweight in the world? He arguably has the best resume of welterweight vs welterweight competition. He kos 80% of his opponents and has knocked down all but Porter (who wobbled) in his fights. But has he shown too much vulnerability to be considered the legitimate heir to the 147 thrown? If so, when did vulnerability start defining a division? Was Leonard not vulnerable to a Hearns and vise versa? Was Tito not vulnerable to the boxing ability of DeLa Hoya? Isn't that what makes boxing the sort of sport that defies generations? All in all, Keith might not be the most talented 147 in the world. But I dare anyone to show me a better candidate for best welterweight in the word.... The only legit threats he's fougth in his career are an over-the-hill Guerrero, Porter (who he barely beat, could have been a draw), and Chaves who was outboxing him prior to the stoppage. Bradley, Crawford and probably Vargas can all beat him.

No, Kell Brook is now because he is fighting GGG, Thurman needs to step up and fight the winner of the fight or he is a coward ***** ass diva like that limp wrist shirt lifter Andre Ward.

Individuals who say that please proceed to the nearest exit immediately to fuk off.

With Brook moving to Middleweight, if only for the moment, is Keith Thurman the best welterweight in the world? He arguably has the best resume of welterweight vs welterweight competition. He kos 80% of his opponents and has knocked down all but Porter (who wobbled) in his fights. But has he shown too much vulnerability to be considered the legitimate heir to the 147 thrown? If so, when did vulnerability start defining a division? Was Leonard not vulnerable to a Hearns and vise versa? Was Tito not vulnerable to the boxing ability of DeLa Hoya? Isn't that what makes boxing the sort of sport that defies generations? All in all, Keith might not be the most talented 147 in the world. But I dare anyone to show me a better candidate for best welterweight in the word.... First of all Brook moving up for one fight doesn't mean he isn't still a WW. Brook and Bradley both beat Thurman in my book, so Thurman is at best 3rd in the division, and that's assuming Maidana doesn't move down after killing Cotto at 154.

After his fight with Porter, I say yes. Thurman is the real deal imo.

Now that Brook moved up, I would say yes.

I think he is one of the top 3 best welterweights in the world. I rate him even with Pacquiao and Brook if Brook returns to 147 after GGG KOs him. I don't rate him above or below Brook and Pacquiao. I rate him dead even with them in a big 3 way tie of best welterweights. I do rate one welterweight as the very best welterweight in the world including Thurman, Pacquiao and Brook. That welterweight is Spence Jr. In my opinion he is the best welterweight in the world and he will continue to improve for a few years as he gains experience and perfects his skills.

At this moment in time i would say so. It's not a given that he beats everyone in the division but i would defenitely favor him over anyone else. Errol is on his way but for god's sake the kid is just 20 fights in, some of yall need to pump the brakes lol, what we've seen so far is amazing but we have yet to see how he stands his ground against the more experienced fighters. Son.

Him and Brook is a fight I wanted to see at 147. Spence is promising also, still need to see him up against some better guys but I think he's the goods.