After watching all of Crawford's and Spence's fights, this is my conclusion.

One thing I've noticed about the boxing community is that the more "flashy" fighter is always favored. Based on the eye test, Crawford's boxing is just "prettier". Crawford mesmerizes you with his beautiful counter-punching and timing while Spence makes you cringe with his relentless pressure and bone-crushing power. But, when you look at both fighters and study who they fought (when they fought them), it is clear that neither guy is really more "skilled" than the other. Crawford is more twitchy, has slightly faster hands and feet, has exceptional timing, and is great at judging distance. Spence has better defense, chin, jab, better in the pocket, better at cutting off the ring, and he seems to have much better stamina (he threw 110 punches in round 9 against Ugas). If you were to put a gun to my head, I would favor Spence by SD or late-round stoppage. Here's the issue I have with Crawford, if you compare the resumes of both (including the Kell Brook and Porter fight), it is clear that Spence has fought the better competition. Now, I am not saying that Crawford wouldn't have beaten the same versions of Kell Brook, Porter, Danny Garcia, Mikey Garcia, and Ugas that Crawford the Spence did, I'm just saying we have not seen him fight anyone as good as the version of fighters that Spence has fought. Let's look at Crawford's best wins excluding Porter and Brook (I'm excluding these two to prove a point). 1. Gamboa: Gamboa (the fighter that Crawford said hurt him the most) came up two weight classes and buzzed Crawford. This is not a good sign if you're fighting someone like Spence who is arguably a top 10 puncher in the sport (Top 3 at WW). 2. Postol: Postol had a terrific win but nothing really special (would've lost to Danny and Ugas at 140). I actually think Josh Taylor did better even though it could be argued that Postol was a better version compared to the Postol that fought Craw 3. Benvidez: It took Crawford 12 to Stop a one-legged Benavidez (Spence would've taken care of him in 6". Crawford struggled with the length of Benavidez who was literally fighting on one leg. The guy could barely pivot. 4. Diaz: Diaz was a one-hit wonder who was extremely hyped up. 5. Horn: Everyone knows that he lost that fight to Manny 9-3. Horn was never anything special and would've gotten battered in the rematch. 6. Khan: Way past his prime and not the same Khan that was at 140. Now, let's look at two common opponents (Porter and Brook). Brook: Just being objective, neither guy fought the best version of Brook. Brook went up two weight divisions to fight the Number 1 P4P fighter in GGG and came back down to 147 to fight Spence. Crawford, on the other hand, fought a version of Kell Brook who was past his prime, had three fights at 154, and took the fight at 147 on a 6-week notice (Even Ingles refused to coach him). Since Kell Brook was much fresher at 147 when he fought Spence, you have to say that Spence fought a much better version of Kell Brook. Porter: Porter was one foot away from retirement and Kenny Porter admitted that Porter did not train as hard as he did when he fought Spence( If you watch both fights, you can tell). Plus, I had it tied when Crawford fought Porter before the knockdown. With Spence, even before the knockdown, I had it 9-3 for Spence (Porter was missing a lot of shots and Spence put on a defensive masterclass utilizing his jab and shell defense. To sum it up, in almost every fight Crawford has had, he had some type of advantage whether it be a huge disparity of skills, power, size...etc, or fighters just simply being past their best. Crawford has never faced anyone who possesses the perfect combination of power, fundamentals, jab, defense, and pressure that Spence brings. Had Crawford defeated Manny, Prime Porter, Prime Kell Brook, and Prim Thurman, I would probably give him the edge. But based on how many times he has been hurt and the level of competition, I have to side with Spence in this fight. Plus you are only as good as your recent opponent David Ava was defeated by Mean Machine (who Crawford knocked out) and Spence defeated a top 5 WW in Ugas, who is better than anyone Crawford has faced in his career. This fight will probably be similar to Hurd vs Lara, with much more skill and more action-packed. My gut tells me that this fight will be a controversial draw, but my head tells me that Spence is going to win by decision or late stoppage. ​ Yeah well, all that to see Spence gets dominated, humiliated and stopped.

Crawford P4P 1

if Terence neutralizes Errol's jab, this fight will be more like manny-Cotto. Errol wants this fight to go like Floyd-Cotto but with the pressure guy winning this time. Similar to Cotto-Floyd the jab makes Errol competitive at longer ranges where his opponent is better Right on the money, bro! :boxing:

What happened??? NSB guys wrong yet again!!!

lmao whoops gloatfest time Lol, you earned it mudafocka. Spence got his sleepy face ass embarrassed

You don't know sh.it about boxing lmao whoops gloatfest time

"Kell Brook, Porter, Danny Garcia, Mikey Garcia, and Ugas" brook - both fought brook post GGG. Spence fought a brook who had his face broken by GGG. Porter - Crawford performed better than Spence did and it wasnt that far apart. That was also a pre crash spence who had a tough fight with porter. danny and mikey garcia..... those are among Spence's best names and there is nobody on the planet who doesnt agree that crawford can decision them just as easily as spence. ugas - ugas is way past his prime and rocked spence spence's resume isnt really much better than crawfords. his size isnt much bigger. all of his advantages are pretty small. Crawford has the bigger gap in skill over spence than spence does for his advantages. Crawford by KO Bump for gloatfest

Yes. Errol is like this era’s Cotto imo Cotto was more 2-dimensional and could move when necessary, but Errol makes up for his 1-d’ish with his athletic gifts I think a lot of people are enamored by the way he hammers away and gets opponents to essentially submit. I feel as if he’s much more hittable than Crawford, especially if he’s trying to slug it out as he usually does. Seeing Crawford fold is just something I can’t conceive, much like Hopkins and Cotto before they took their losses. This is a dangerous fight for Crawford but I just don’t think he gets stopped. Knowing Crawford, if I was Spence I’d snatch those 3-4 rounds that Crawford likes to give away, dig for the next 3 and just switch it up to strictly boxing on the outside for the last 5. He can win a decision, but a stoppage by Spence? I highly doubt it.

Boxing orthy would reduce the angles for Errol’s jab to land But Terence fights southpaw 80% of the time If he’s orthodox his left hand is wrestling with Spence’s right hand and for anyone that has boxed, they should know how tiring that can be, not to mention that it’s one of the main ways Spence applies his strength to wear opponents down and opposite stance’s are closer to each other. The advantage lies in the southpaw stance for Crawford. His footwork and headmovement advantage allows him to more easily take Spence’s jab away with counter’s and angles, plus it open’s Spence’s ribs, under his jab, for powerful left hooks/uppercuts, not to mention the distance gained. Mainly pros from what I see. A lot more of having to fight Spence if he stays orthodox.

Always wondered why Arum made Pacquiao fight Horn instead of trusting Crawford to take the belt himself. Then last minute Spence backs out and let’s Ugas do the job. And thank God Spence backed out because he would have seriously hurt Pac

Do you think Crawford should fight more Orthodox or softball I think a fighter like Crawford is as strong stylistically as his ability to make adjustments. By contrast? Spence has to pay attention on when to hit the gas, when to back off, not to chase a puncher... Crawford has to literally throw some shiat on the wall and see what sticks and let that dictate his adjustment at every turn.

Well thought out take! Grandpa Bernard also had a well thought out take. My take: In one corner we have a gifted technical fighter with lethal power... By analogy, Crawford presents as a more consistent James Toney, while Spence is the less technical fighter who has his approach down, has cardio to spare. kind of like McCallum routinely hitting to the body, to extend the analogy with Toney. One fighter will grind, the other will try to set up combos and look for a big shot in the process. Both guys will have their moments, Crawford has to be very careful early not to give away rounds, looking for the good combo set up and Spence has to win rounds where Crawford is inactive. My heart says Crawford my head says Spence. I just think Spence can bank rounds and make it so Crawford has to depend on finding Spence enough to either KO him, or win rounds. So I hate to do it but am picking Spence. I would rather be the guy avoiding being hit big than the gy who has to make it happen. Do you think Crawford should fight more Orthodox or softball

Mike McCallum is an ATG fighter so not sure what you're trying to say with that one. They both have similar styles as both liked to fight on the inside both had elite jabs and both were tremendous body punchers

MMMM Spence is more like Mike Mccalum IMO. This eras cotto may be Teo Lol I had a similar thought!

if Terence neutralizes Errol's jab, this fight will be more like manny-Cotto. Errol wants this fight to go like Floyd-Cotto but with the pressure guy winning this time. Similar to Cotto-Floyd the jab makes Errol competitive at longer ranges where his opponent is better I can see Spence's jab being neutralized more than I can see it being countered. I do think Crawford realistically might be able to neutralize the jab, but a good jab is so hard to counter especially considering Spence throws punches in bunches.

Spence beats Crawford by decision or late stoppage. Probably going to force the stoppage. He’s going to take Crawford’s legs from him by going to the body early. Well thought out take! Grandpa Bernard also had a well thought out take. My take: In one corner we have a gifted technical fighter with lethal power... By analogy, Crawford presents as a more consistent James Toney, while Spence is the less technical fighter who has his approach down, has cardio to spare. kind of like McCallum routinely hitting to the body, to extend the analogy with Toney. One fighter will grind, the other will try to set up combos and look for a big shot in the process. Both guys will have their moments, Crawford has to be very careful early not to give away rounds, looking for the good combo set up and Spence has to win rounds where Crawford is inactive. My heart says Crawford my head says Spence. I just think Spence can bank rounds and make it so Crawford has to depend on finding Spence enough to either KO him, or win rounds. So I hate to do it but am picking Spence. I would rather be the guy avoiding being hit big than the gy who has to make it happen.

MMMM Spence is more like Mike Mccalum IMO. This eras cotto may be Teo Mike McCallum is an ATG fighter so not sure what you're trying to say with that one.

prior to spence's car accident, was confidently picking spence......but i still might bet on spence because of the odds..

I just hope it's a good fight with no robberies controversies and that the right man wins. Have you seen the judges? I think the fight is going to be a draw now.

I just hope it's a good fight with no robberies controversies and that the right man wins.