Who had the better career at Welterweight: Pacquiao or Crawford?

[djtmal]

Idiocy generally annoys me.

Well then stfu and look in the mirror more

[IronDanHamza]

That's not a feeling son

It is LITERALLY exactly that BY DEFINITION you idiot

[IronDanHamza]

Well then stfu and look in the mirror more

No it's more like when brain dead inbred's like yourself say the #3 ranked fighter is the best WW in the world when they objectively aren't, that kind of thing.

It would be like me saying now "Mario Barrios is the best WW in the world" that would be moronic and objectively wrong, wouldn't it? That's what you're doing now.

[IronDanHamza]

About your ego? I don't think so, what other motivation do people have for arguing repetitively online like this? That desire to have the last word and not be seen to lose face in front of a (mostly imagined) audience is a significant proportion of internet interaction. Particularly between men.

I find it fascinating to observe.

No, not about my supposed ego, Doc. About Thurman being the best WW in the world in 2019. He wasn't, and that was universally considered to be the case, and to reiterate, "not even close" either.

I'm glad you find it fascinating, you can write that one down on your therapy sheet if it makes you feel better. This is a discussion board, the key word being discussion. Kind of the point of the whole thing.

[IronDanHamza]

Lol there's no 'irreconcilable differences' at all...this guy religiously sticks to his Ring magazine rankings like a religious fundamentalist and their holy book. Absolutely NOTHING you say can change his opinion. For example, he refuses to acknowledge that Thurman was a puncher during his prime despite Keith's 75% career KO ratio and having dropped/stopped 25/32 opponents he ever shared the ring with. However, fortunately 99.9% of other fighter's, pundits & fans think the opposite

Re this particular debate, Thurman had already beaten 6 Welterweight champions and been a unified champion by the time he fought Pacquiao. In comparison, Crawford & Spence had only won one title each and Bud's resume at that particular point in time was completely laughable. Spence's was only slightly better but still nothing compared to Thurman's and he only gained some credibility in the division AFTER beating Keith's leftover's (Garcia & Porter) lmao!

That would be because he wasn't a puncher.

I would love to see the data you've compiled for that 99.9% stat there, how did you devise that? Or did you just pull it out of thin air as per usual, you retard

You've just said it yourself than Thurman wasn't the best WW in the world at that point in time which he objectively was not so I'm not sure where you're lost on this you fool.

[Coverdale]

No, not about my supposed ego, Doc. About Thurman being the best WW in the world in 2019. He wasn't, and that was universally considered to be the case, and to reiterate, "not even close.

I'm glad you find it fascinating, you can write that one down on your therapy sheet if it makes you feel better. This is a discussion board, the key word being discussion. Kind of the point of the whole thing.

You're not having a discussion, just repeating your respective talking points. Were you all sitting in the same room you would either have escalated to a shouting match or brawl by now or, most likely, have agreed to disagree and moved on to something else.

But please, continue 'discussing' this triviality for another 55 pages. I will check in occasionally to leave one of my teasing comments.

[IronDanHamza]

It's self-evident that Pacquiao's welterweight career is superior to Crawford's, the main holdouts seem to be Mayweather obsessives continuing their stale crusade 16 years on. It's a waste of energy trying to reach the unreachable.

That would make sense Doc if I didn't say it was "Pacquaio, easily" ON THE FIRST PAGE

So what the fuck you babbling on about?

[IronDanHamza]

You're not having a discussion, just repeating your respective talking points. Were you all sitting in the same room you would either have escalated to a shouting match or brawl by now or, most likely, have agreed to disagree and moved on to something else.

But please, continue 'discussing' this triviality for another 55 pages. I will check in occasionally to leave one of my teasing comments.

Right, because the other person isn't seeming to grasp that #3 isn't the best. I can lead a moron to clarity but I can't make them think.

That won't stop it from amusing me, however.

[IronDanHamza]

Lol you can't just ignore the FACT that Crawford received an elevated ranking due to being undisputed Light Welterweight champion (similar to the boost he received amongst the 4 alphabet bodies PRIOR to making his debut at Welterweight) plus the FACT that Thurman's low ranking was largely due to inactivity.

However, any logical minded person would realise that at that particular point in time (July 20 2019), Crawford had only had 3 fights at Welterweight against 3 bums. Firstly, he beat Horn who should've NEVER been champion in the first place having been outlanded 182 vs. 92 punches overall (and 11 rounds to 1) by Pacquiao according to CompuBox. Secondly, he beat Jose Benavidez Jr who did absolutely NOTHING at the weight and glass-chinned Khan who'd already been splattered by Prescott, Garcia & Canelo and started his career at Lightweight.

In comparison, Thurman was a CAREER Welterweight and a UNIFIED champion at the weight class having beaten no less than 6 champions e.g. Garcia, Porter, Collazo, Guerrero, Zaveck & Quintana.

Honestly, if you truly believe that Bud stepping up to Welterweight and beating 3 absolute BUMS makes him a 'better Welterweight' than Thurman who'd already beaten 6 CHAMPIONS at the weight than the jokes on you. As for Spence, he'd only beaten 2 legit Welterweight champions at the time Thurman fought Pacquiao (Brook & PEDerson) so shouldn't have been ranked above Thurman either if not for greater activity (ditto for Bud).

But yeah, keep holding onto your beloved Ring magazine rankings without any context lmao!

So a long winded way of saying Thurman wasn't the best WW in the world in 2019.

Fantastic.

[HisExcellency]

That would be because he wasn't a puncher.

I would love to see the data you've compiled for that 99.9% stat there, how did you devise that? Or did you just pull it out of thin air as per usual, you retard

You've just said it yourself than Thurman wasn't the best WW in the world at that point in time which he objectively was not so I'm not sure where you're lost on this you fool.

Lol...you're literally ONE of a handful of retards on this planet who doesn't consider Thurman to be a puncher. Any normal person would acknowledge that a fighter with a 75% KO ratio who has either dropped/stopped 25/32 opponents he's ever shared the ring with to be a puncher. Anyway, we've been down this road a million times before and like the old saying goes 'there's no point arguing with an IDIOT' which is EXACTLY what you are

Anyhow, when did I say that Thurman WASN'T the best Welterweight in the world when Pacquiao fought him? I've literally said the complete OPPOSITE you thick cunt given that he'd already beaten 6 Welterweight champions unlike Spence & Crawford. Just because Ring decided to elevate Crawford in the rankings due to being undisputed Light Welterweight champion and having beaten the 3 blind mice DOESN'T make him a 'better Welterweight' at the time imbecile.