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

[djtmal]

Thurman was the best ww when Manny beat him

[IronDanHamza]

Man...you're so dumb I actually feel sorry for you. Firstly, I said that you were probably the ONLY person on Earth who doesn't believe that Thurman was a puncher. I then changed this to 'handful' because there's a handful of idiots in this thread who believe that Crawford has a better Welterweight CV than Pacquiao. You then asked why I said handful as opposed to just your dumbass to which I pulled out the 100 million EXAMPLE to demonstrate that even a ridiculously large number like that can have a small handful. That's it...nothing more nothing less.

As for Thurman, YES he is a big puncher. Anybody who's dropped/stopped 25/31 opponents he's beaten is a puncher especially when almost all of the others he failed to put a dent in went the distance with MANY other top Welterweights too and were stopped only in the final fight of their careers.

Nothing more nothing less...Than a 100 million What do you sound like mate? Proper melt aren't you.

It went from the only, to 99.9%, to 100,000 to who knows what next. All made up numbers. I don't know if you read it or not but you can't just magic numbers out of thin air to defend an argument you retard.

I've already explained to you why dropping and stopping 25/31 fighters doesn't necessarily equate to someone being a puncher, looks like you missed it, I can't keep explaining the same point I've debunked over and over again. There have been fighters with higher KO%'s than that who also aren't big punchers.

Lol it's only a nonsensical comparison to a retard like you who DOESN'T believe that Thurman was a puncher! At the end of the day, we both know that those rankings are meaningless because Crawford received an elevated ranking due to being the undisputed Light Welterweight champion plus Thurman's ranking was affected by his 18 month lay-off. In other words, just because he was ranked #3 DOESN'T mean he was the 3rd best Welterweight at the time due to the reasons stated above.

It quite literally means that He was the 3rd best, thus, not the best. Extremely fucking simple mate. He was lucky to even be in the Top 10 at that point let alone 3. The idea of him being the best in 2019 is comical like most of your moronic arguments.

Anyway, I've made my point so will just leave it there. As the old saying goes 'never argue with an IDIOT, they will just drag you down to their level and beat you with experience!'

Yes you've made a point, that's moot. Cong**** on that idiot.

[djtmal]

Reminder- you have accused multiple boxers of being on PEDs despite them not testing positive either.

.

Did Manny Pacquiao fail a ped test

[IronDanHamza]

Thurman was the best ww when Manny beat him

Did you not go and get that Maths book like I told you to or do you still need it explaining to you why the number 3 has two numbers before it in a ranking system?

[djtmal]

Did you not go and get that Maths book like I told you to or do you still need it explaining to you why the number 3 has two numbers before it in a ranking system?

Lol. Thurman was the best ww in the world when Manny beat him. I don't need boxrec or ring mag to tell me that like you do

In a lot of cases those rankings don't tell the whole story. Top 3 means that he can be seen in many circles as the guy

[HisExcellency]

I've already explained to you why dropping and stopping 25/31 fighters doesn't necessarily equate to someone being a puncher, looks like you missed it, I can't keep explaining the same point I've debunked over and over again. There have been fighters with higher KO%'s than that who also aren't big punchers.

You HAVEN'T debunked anything you delusional cunt...according to BoxRec, Thurman officially stopped 23 out of 31 opponents he defeated (74% KO ratio). Of the 8 remaining opponents he couldn't get out of there, one was an 8-rounder whereas he dropped Bundu, Guerrero & Lopez. That leaves just 4 opponents of which Garcia, Porter & Zaveck were all only stopped in the FINAL fight of their careers. Therefore, how the FCUK was he not a puncher dumbass?

It quite literally means that He was the 3rd best, thus, not the best. Extremely fucking simple mate. He was lucky to even be in the Top 10 at that point let alone 3. The idea of him being the best in 2019 is comical like most of your moronic arguments.



Yes you've made a point, that's moot. Cong**** on that idiot.

Like I said before, those rankings were based on activity and NOT ability. Therefore, Thurman's 18 month lay-off lowered his ranking whereas Crawford received a boost due to being undisputed Light Welterweight champion. However, trust your low IQ ass to take everything at face value without looking at things in context. Also, Thurman was a unified champion just prior to getting injured so of course he deserved to be in the top 3 dipshit!

PS: I wasn't going to respond but just couldn't resist!

[IronDanHamza]

Lol. Thurman was the best ww in the world when Manny beat him. I don't need boxrec or ring mag to tell me that like you do

In a lot of cases those rankings don't tell the whole story. Top 3 means that he can be seen in many circles as the guy

Except he objectively wasn't, or even close for that matter. He was lucky to have retained his #3 rankings let alone #1. No where even close to #1 at that point.

No Top 3 doesn't mean "the guy". The #1 fighter is "the guy" idiot. The number 3 fighter is not "the guy".

Go and and get a Maths book and learn how to count you inbred retard.

[IronDanHamza]

You HAVEN'T debunked anything you delusional cunt...according to BoxRec, Thurman officially stopped 23 out of 31 opponents he defeated (74% KO ratio). Of the 8 remaining opponents he couldn't get out of there, one was an 8-rounder whereas he dropped Bundu, Guerrero & Lopez. That leaves just 4 opponents of which Garcia, Porter & Zaveck were all only stopped in the FINAL fight of their careers. Therefore, how the **** was he not a puncher dumbass?

Literally have done exactly that multiple times.

You can repeat the same thing again for the umpteenth time if you'd like, that's up to you.

He's never stopped a ranked fighter He's barely even dropped a ranked fighter. I don't know what else needs to be said. He's not a big puncher. I can't keep explaining the same thing over and over.

Like I said before, those rankings were based on activity and NOT ability. Therefore, Thurman's 18 month lay-off lowered his ranking whereas Crawford received a boost due to being undisputed Light Welterweight champion. However, trust your low IQ ass to take everything at face value without looking at things in context.

PS: I wasn't going to respond but couldn't resist calling you out on your sheer ******ity!

Couldn't give a flying fuck what the reasons were why he wasn't the #1 WW fighter at the time was. He objectively was not considered the #1 WW in the world at the time. That's a fact and I can't make it any simpler for you.

[djtmal]

Except he objectively wasn't, d.

So who objectively was lying dan

[IronDanHamza]

So who objectively was lying dan

I don't know if you know what the word "objectively" means, you might want to look it up.

But to offer you some clarity, you saying he was the #1 WW in the world in 2019 would make you the person who is objectively lying. Which would be a pattern for you.