Comments Thread For: Turki Alalshikh, Paulie Malignaggi Rank Terence Crawford Above Naoya Inoue

[BoxingUpdates]

Talk to enough boxing lifers and they'll say one of the most revealing elements of a champion's mettle is how they perform once they're knocked to the canvas.
[Click Here To Read More]

[Spartacus26]

Malignaggi and Chris are wrong. Crawford was knocked down by Mean machine, the referee just didn't make it official. Both Crawford and Inoue are effective, efficient and get the job done. However what separates them is one crucial area and that is overcoming adversity. Being in a dog fight where the other guy doesn't cooperate and us bringing the PAIN Right back at you. Inoue passed that crucial test against a still formidable Donaire. He fought through a fractured eye socket and broken nose! And WON. Crawford hasnt had that kind of opponent yet. A declining burnt out Errol Spence and a shot Porter ready to retire and a been shot Kellbrook don't count. Inoue gets to be no. 1 P4P Because overcoming adversity is the TRUTH TELLER as to whether a fighter is the real goods. And why do I sense an AMERICAN bias here especially since Inoue has done the same as Crawford but against fighters who are in their Primes and not damaged and is a better puncher??

[dannnnn]

The thing is, Inoue has had three fights in the same time span that Crawford has had one. You shouldn't be rewarded for sitting on the sidelines imo. The Spence win was great but you can't dine out on that forever.

Crawford could have already fought Ennis (or a top guy at 154lbs) since the Spence fight. Instead, he acts like he's too good for that fight, it's beneath him, we are barely worthy to see him box etc. Well, Inoue would have taken that fight and probably another one on top, and that's the difference between them - that's why Inoue is pound-for-pound number one.

[Bob]

Quite simply they are wrong, you have to be active to make any list, one a year doesn't cut it. Personally i have Inoue & Usyk at 1 & 2 in no particular order.

[SteveM]

Malignaggi and Chris are wrong. Crawford was knocked down by Mean machine, the referee just didn't make it official. Both Crawford and Inoue are effective, efficient and get the job done. However what separates them is one crucial area and that is overcoming adversity. Being in a dog fight where the other guy doesn't cooperate and us bringing the PAIN Right back at you. Inoue passed that crucial test against a still formidable Donaire. He fought through a fractured eye socket and broken nose! And WON. Crawford hasnt had that kind of opponent yet. A declining burnt out Errol Spence and a shot Porter ready to retire and a been shot Kellbrook don't count. Inoue gets to be no. 1 P4P Because overcoming adversity is the TRUTH TELLER as to whether a fighter is the real goods. And why do I sense an AMERICAN bias here especially since Inoue has done the same as Crawford but against fighters who are in their Primes and not damaged and is a better puncher??

It's not an American bias just Malignaggi trolling and speaking without thinking things through.

He's saying Usyk will be P4P #1 if he beats Fury. I can't see any reason for this unless recency is is prime criteria for p4p rankings (in which case Inoue's activity trumps Bud's lack of activity)

Usyk's list of foes at CW and HW are not that exceptional. Fury has been dropped countless times and although he has boxing skills esp for a HW, lets be honest it's his size which is his best attribute in a division without weight limits. Usyk's best wins are against Joshua imo but Joshua is heavily criticised on these boards - critics can't have it both ways. Either Joshua is mediocre so Usyk's wins aren't that estimable or Joshua is something else and so are Usyk's wins - which is it?

Crawford imo exceptional boxer as he is - and he is brilliant - has one great win over Spence - but was Spence still the same? You can say Spence looked great after the car crash against Ugas but then Barrios beat Ugas - how does that work?

Inoue - has a better win over cool boy Steph imo - it was a 60-40 fight going in - in Fulton's favor - he was going to be two big and too skilled. The first win over a diminished but not washed Donaire was a good one - Donaire wasn't washed - he went on to win another belt at 118 afterwards. And Tapales and Nery, although not well known are just as formidable challenges at 122 as a diminished Spence and Porter.

Also - this is a constantly evolving list - if Bud drowns Madrimov at 154 that would edge him above Inoue for me. If Usyk beats Fury in the rematch then that would be quite something - to beat both Fury and Joshua twice. And if Inoue goes up to 126 and takes out Lopez or Brandon fig then he would edge back in front

[TonyRespectful]

This Saudi dude got a thing for Crawford. Making me wonder.

[brettWall]

This Saudi dude got a thing for Crawford. Making me wonder.

Not sure about that. He wants TC to fight Benavidez also.

[CPNUTKnockoutFreshMart]

Pound for Pound is subjective. Any combination of Crawford and Inoue at one and two is reasonable. There's no right and wrong here.

[MONGOOSE66]

Crawford DESERVES all the accolades of being the best welterweight of this time. That said, this generation of welterweights SUCKS. So lets just remember that and also, let’s also notice that like Canelo & tank. Crawford avoids real threats.

[Hands of Stone]

Resumes are somewhat similar but on shear activity and willingness to compete, you 'll have to give the edge to the Monster. In a weak welterweight era, Crawford could have also fought a Boots, for example, but he wanted nothing to do with it whereas Inoue has shown the willingness to take on the next formidable guy. Those attributes should count for something.