Sheldon312

Oscar.... The Pernell that Oscar fought is arguably better than Crawford at 147 and Oscar has the better resume

Isn't Crawford associated with Victor Conte?

Unpopular opinion, prime Lara is a better technician than Crawford. A boxing coach stated the same thing to me a while ago

Has Crawford even beat a fighter as good as cotto?

Why is it easier for Heavyweights to start later and have more success than lighter weights.

Anyone using the Karen fight as a measuring stick is an idiot

I simply don’t see it. Crawford has a mean streak and a sheer will to bully his way to take over a fight when he feels like he’s not dominating enough, but with the exception of the Spence fight which was his best performance and a virtuoso performance at that, I still don’t see him as a brilliant technician, he’s a good boxer puncher, but I still think if he were to fight an elite counter-puncher who’s defensively responsible, he’d be toast. I honestly think if he fought an elitenpressure/inside fighter like Ortiz he'd be tpast

p4p is head wrecking, u have to clear out your divisions top guys when they are at their best, no marinating, so maybe he is p4p yeah i agree If that's the case, Canelo, Crawford, Haney...etc should not be P4P then

Surely that isn't Mike Tyson at 9 or in the top 15 at all P4P Usyk beats none of the fighters listed

Im not joking when I say this but he’s in my top 15 ATG That's a stetch. 1. Leonard 2. Duran 3. Floyd 4. Pernell 5. Hagler 5. Armstrong 6. Ray Robinson 7. Salvador Sanchez 8. Wilfred. 9. Tyson 10. Pernell 11. Manny 12. Ali 13. Lewis 14. Hopkins 15. Jones

Ward. I would favor Ward against every Middleweight in history including Robinson and Jones.

Plus wilder hasn't koed anyone who had a reputation for great chin. Do you think vitali, holyfield, mercer couldn't take that shot ortiz succumbed to? Has ortiz ever been known to have a chin

It is a bad era of HW's but Wilders power is real. Horrible and looks bad in a fight but power that could end it all in a mere second. But it's like we're living in an era where no HWs have chins. Hell, in the 90's we had Tua, Tyson, Holyfield, Mercer..etc who could walk through anything.

This thread is probably the dumbest thread I’ve ever seen posted here. Did Tyson beat any fighter better than Wilder?

This is just weird. I have never seen a guy get outboxed every single ****ing round but end the fight in one round. This **** is weird.

Very astute points! Let me start with one disagreement I have with you. You are right about Fury on the whole, but that first Vlad fight was not close at all. Your point about the questionable decisions with Canelo is right on! And then you make the caveat that Canelo has fought the names and has some credability. What you did with this OP is use a kind of logic that allows one to make some logical inferences consistently, across the board. I hate when people single out a fight and make excuses for the results: "JOnes only beat Toney because Toney did not train, yada yada yada..." That single fight logic doesn't work with boxing because how do we really ever know what the training camps for the fight were like, the personal issues, etc. We have no way of comparing things we can only assume happened in particular fights. BUT when we look at a fighter's entire body of work, patterns DO emerge! We can see if there are certain factors that happened over and over again, whether they involve the age of the fighters, the relative ability of the fighters, etc. This logic is often used in other enterprises: Real Estate appraisers are taught that small errors on a report compound quickly... same idea, if I make one wrong estimation for an improvement on your home, its a difference of maybe 10k, but a few of those? we could be talking a substantial error in our opinion of value. Understandable but I hate when the boxing community starts saying like, "Fighter A is in the same class as Fighter B, due to beating Fighter C, when that version of Fighter C is nowhere close to the quality of competition that Fighter B fought when he fought them. You have people saying that Inoue is in the same class as Manny because he defeated Fulton and Donaire. You have people saying Crawford has surpassed Oscar, Titi, Vernon, and Mosley just because he beat Errol Spence who was without a doubt a shell of himself. Again, I am not making excuses for Errol or Fulton. I'm just saying that when you start comparing fighters across the board you have to take in consideration the quality of the opponents when they fought them. I am not saying that Crawford wouldn't had defeated Spence (it is very likely that he would've 5 years ago). But the Spence that showed up that fight would've lost to all the top WWs (Virgil, Ortiz, Stanionis...etc).

You're talking a lot about ATG's here, but it's not like there are a lot of ATG's around at all in this era. Bud and Inoue have the best arguments for that. Maybe Canelo. I don't really think there's anyone else active, not even Usyk, who has come anywhere close to earning such an accolade. In Inoue's side of things, maybe Chocolatito, who ducked Inoue, and Estrada, who came along after Inoue moved up. I reiterate, how many other fighters, even your "ATG's", have faced as high a percentage of top ranked fighters and champions? How many faced and destroyed the #1 ranked guy in each of their divisional debuts after moving up from their first class? Can you even name one who can match those accomplishments? You don't seem to know what ATG's even are. You say you don't care about Ring rankings, but then talk about quality opposition in the same breath. That's literally the definition of best quality opposition available. Go ahead. Who's the ATG active in Inoue's division who has a better resume? Let's see the resume comparisons? Usyk has the best resume in all of boxing if you think about it

Spence an ATG? He's not even first ballot I'm not even sure he gets in the hall of fame :boxing: Spence's resume looks too identical with Thurman With only one fight being the difference And I'm pretty sure everyone would agree with me that Thurman is not hall of fame. Unless he beats Crawford which will be considered a miracle if it ever happens I never said Spence was an ATG. I said he had the potential to be but accident and staying at 147 too long ruined that. When it comes to Thurman, I always felt that if he would've stayed more active, he could've accomplished more.

Especially if we start to look at Usk's body of work and AJ. He barely beat Chisora. I give him a pass on that because he fought in a manner that needed major adjustments, which he made... But he has not been a dominant heavy weight to this point. AJ looked horrible against a version of helenus that should probably have not been sanctioned for the fight... So using your logic, I would imagine AJ will probably get smashed if he steps up again, and this will have to be considered regarding Usyk. Also, what happens when Usyk steps up again? But it should tell us how good Usyk really is eventually. Right now, I favour Wilder to beat Aj and I think Fury will beat Usyk based on recent performances.

Yes, its obvious he wasn't 100%, he has false teeth for crying out loud. It's clear both his brain and body still has lingering effects from the accident. Also, the fact that Crawford looked bigger than Spence tells you Spence has been at 147 too long. I predicted Crawford winning even before the accident, but started rooting for Spence since he went out of his way to make the fight, but still had Crawford winning due to the accident. Spence didn't look the same since the accident, he was extra cautious against Danny Garcia, but his athleticism and high-output jab was enough to beat flat-footed Danny. Ugas punching power is probably comparable to Shawn Porter's, yet Spence got dazed by Ugas and not noticeably by Porter. ​ I noticed the same thing when I went back to watch the fights

You just have to watch the fights and not assume a decision means a win... This is why I said Canelo has too many controversial decisions.

lol at GGG His top 2 best wins are fights he arguably lost lmao He was robbed against Canelo IMO but he didn't deserve the hype that he received during his prime.

Pac beat barrera, an ATG in his prime, and in his 3rd division, yet floyd was no1 pfp still?. There's no rules for pfp for most people, just go by what you feel or who your favourite is, or kid yourself your favourite fighter would beat the guy who is a 6 or 7 division champ if same size? Well.... barera was elite in his prime. But I think year after year Floyd deserved P4P status

Even if spence was a 100%, he wouldn't beat crawford even at 154 ibs. Crawford read through him like a book, countered everything he threw. How do we know when Spence was not healthy

You put a lot of thought into that good effort. Context never matters to fans, they get hooked into a fighter if he ticks their personal boxes, and then they just attach the accolades and champion that guy, a personal image means more to the majority of fans than what the guy really does in the sport context doesn't matter to them because they rewrite their own version. Agreed but I think it's worse in boxing to a certain extent. I respect Usyk but beating AJ does not mean you will be competitive against other top 10 HWs of all time.

Spence an ATG? He's not even first ballot I'm not even sure he gets in the hall of fame :boxing: Spence's resume looks too identical with Thurman With only one fight being the difference And I'm pretty sure everyone would agree with me that Thurman is not hall of fame. Unless he beats Crawford which will be considered a miracle if it ever happens One more thing I would also like to add that an argument could be made that Thurman had a better overall resume than expense in his prime

I don't disagree that P4P lists are bogus. But, in some of those cases, you clearly haven't been following the fighters from the beginning and don't remember the context yourself. Take Inoue for an example, since most posters on here weren't following his career because he's little and fights mostly in Japan. You say his best wins are Donaire and Fulton, but leave out Narváez, who's already been nominated for the HOF, although didn't make it in on first ballot like Donaire will? Donaire was #4 at the time of their first fight and #1 at the time of the second, and beat the #2 ranked guy after the first fight. Yeah, he's old, but he's a first ballot HOF who was still one of the best fighters in the division. Tim Bradley is a HOF and it doesn't mean a damn thing. Narvaez is not considered an ATG in the boxing community so this point is void. No disrespect. If you were really going to do your due diligence, you'd look at where his opponents were ranked when he fought them. He's fought 20 title fights with 18 stoppages, and nearly half of his fights have been against champions (12, with 56 defenses between them) and opponents ranked in the top 10, 8 in the top 5. 20 of his opponents have been ranked top 10 by at least one of the sanctioning organizations. He fought a Ring ranked opponent in his 4th bout who went on to become a world champ. He's fought the #1 ranked fighter in the division in his divisional debut 3 times now, and his other divisional title fight came against the #4 ranked fighter. Again, I don't care about rankings. All I care about is the quality of opposition you faced compare to other ATGs on your division(s). Take a look at the resumes of other fighters. How many of them have as high a percentage of fights against ranked opponents? How many of them have fought 80% of their career fights as title fights, and half of them against world champions? How many of them have fought the best guy in the world in their divisional debuts? Once again, it's about "quality" compared to ATGs/ He's had exactly one hard fight, in which he fought for 10 rounds with a broken orbital. The metric for a champion is always fighting the best available competition, how well you do against them, and maintaining dominance in the division you're in. Even when you look at ATG fighters, you're going to have a tough time finding better resumes. You talk about context, but you clearly don't know the context, at the very least when it comes to the little guys, which makes it look like hypocrisy. ​​​​​​Don't care to mention little details like the fact that Usyk has won every title in the road in enemy territory? How many other champions can say that? ​​​​​ There's a lot of context you aren't mentioning that's relevant to why people rate some of these fighters. At the end of the day, P4P is fantasy. But give me a break with your "they don't know context". People in glass houses and all that. I respect your opinion but I disagree.

We can do this for everyone M Tyson - beat bums in a trash lates 80s heavyweight. No different than Wilder had been doing. But no social media back then opinions are different. Never fought Bowe. Paid Lewis 6m to dodge him in 96. Lewis - got sparked by Mcall or Rahman. If Wilder Fury AJ got sparked clean twice by someone like thst in a social media age they would never heard the end of it. Never fought Bowe Bowe - never fought Tyson or Lewis. But of course people love using the " this era is trash in 90s the heavyweights fought each other Division was so trash 90s that an old out of shape Foreman won a belt Hoylfield - i know everyone wonders if he would have passed a vada test, probably not Bowe bear Holyfield. Holyfield beat Tyson, Bowe, and Foreman. Lennox doesn't need to be explained. And Tyson was Tyson

IMO, Spence definitely was not 100 percent. Not saying he would have beat Crawford if he was, but Spence was a shell of a fighter that night. I'm not sure he'll ever be world class again. I blame Al Haymon for selling him out.

I'd be very very surprised if PBC negotiates with Crawford for the Spence rematch. They never wanted the first fight in the first place, let alone after seeing a very lopsided outcome. It just sounds crazy to do it again, not to mention going through the arduous process and very time-consuming negotiations. Yeah, it's not expected to be smooth. Who else is he going to fight? Boots? Yeah.... That's high risk low reward right there