Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Comments Thread For: Keith Thurman Edges Shawn Porter To Win a War at Barclays

Collapse
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by MisanthropicNY View Post
    It's called being a pressure fighter and fighting on the inside... Brook is the best Welterweight because he looks most like a "boxer" to you...yes because you believe boxing is about only being on the outside and clinching is acceptable to you. Saying someone won because he "looked more like the classic boxer" is just dumb and Porter also hurt Thurman btw..something you left out...

    I thought Thurman won also, and landed the cleaner shots, but to act like Brook is something special because he clinches and gets away with it and Porter fights on the inside - is just ****** and the reason boxing gets so many boring fights and bad decisions - people like you judging and commentating on the fights.
    Lol @ some of you knowing what a pressure fighter is. Porter is not tactical at all in his "pressure" fighting. He just gets the guy against the ropes, wastes a bunch of shots and hopes something of significance lands. His punches are wide, he puts himself off balance when throwing when he misses. Thurman is by far the better fighter out of the 2 of them. People want to complain about brook, but brook clinched and negated any real work Porter could do. Brooks clinches were very much successful in not allowing Porter to do much of anything. Brook was relaxed, used solid 1 2 combos to win the fight, even if you don't like or agree with his fighting style.

    Look at Duran, look at Frazier, hell, look at Castillo, or Hatton as inside fighters, MUCH more tactical in their approach in looking for openings. Pressure fighters need to be smart in their application...Porter is not. His record suggests that now. 2 times he's stepped up, 2 times he's lost. Scoring is based off of CLEAN, EFFECTIVE aggression...porters work was ugly and much of it was ineffective. Thurman landed the attention grabbing shots and put Porter on the back foot. He was using the left hook and landing it at will. I don't care to see a rematch because I believe Porter gets knocked out the next time. I like both guys, both seem very decent, though Porter has been a bit of a sore loser in defeat both times. Either way, Thurman beats Garcia (assuming Floyd doesn't crash that party and get to Garcia fight and beat him) and then Thurman and brook need to fight since both have their best win over the same guy.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by justblaze813 View Post
      I had Porter up one round, besides the few and I mean few punches that landed for Thurman. Other than those Porter gave him the blues most of the night. Also Thurman must have some head damage because at the presser he said he defense was perfect. Im not a professional by any means but if you have stitches on your head from punches you took, your defense is far from perfect lol.


      What fight did you watch if you only saw a "few" punches landed by Thurman? He connected all night with clean effective punches. He landed just as much as Porter but with a much higher connect %. His cut came from a headbutt, so ya..idk wtf you're talking about. You must be a casual fan

      Comment


      • Originally posted by darius45 View Post
        Also, I don't know if anyone mentioned this, but after Thurman's performance against Porter, I don't think there was anyway he could of beat Floyd had they ever fought.
        That's the key though, they never fought. We'll never know if that would've been a good matchup.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by KayDub View Post
          That's the key though, they never fought. We'll never know if that would've been a good matchup.
          Seriously? Guys, Floyd is retired, he's 40 years old. Much of when any of us looks back at the greats or just our favorite fighters currently, we do it with nostalgia. There's no way to know who Floyd might have won or lost to in the 80s, or 60s or whenever.The point is that at some point, like him or not, you have to admit Floyd did about as much as he could to prove himself. He didn't get in the ring with Thurman, no. However, had he done so and won, then people would've said that he was an unproven fighter, or this guy was to slow, to out of shape, to old, to fat....something. All time greats are like great artists of any other genre of art, they are rarely appreciated until they are very old, or dead. Right now Floyd is done...no point in arguing about him

          Comment


          • Any1 impressed w/Hurd?? I was not, had a guy made 2 order + I saw 2 many holes in him that, if he stay's@'54 he'll have trouble vs
            better opposition, not a guy that walks directly 2 him...

            Comment


            • Originally posted by nycsmooth View Post
              Any1 impressed w/Hurd?? I was not, had a guy made 2 order + I saw 2 many holes in him that, if he stay's@'54 he'll have trouble vs
              better opposition, not a guy that walks directly 2 him...
              I thought Hurd did his thing

              That uppercut in the 1st was nasty, looks comfortable on the inside, good overall performance.

              Not saying he's destined for the top spot in the division but it'll be interesting to see how far he goes and I'll be watching.

              154 is stacked

              Comment


              • Originally posted by nycsmooth View Post
                Any1 impressed w/Hurd?? I was not, had a guy made 2 order + I saw 2 many holes in him that, if he stay's@'54 he'll have trouble vs
                better opposition, not a guy that walks directly 2 him..
                .
                So, like golovkin then

                Comment


                • Originally posted by revelated View Post
                  Exactly my opinion. The fight was not that great compared to true burners. Matthysse/Postol was better, Saldio/Vargas was better, any of the three Pacquiao/Bradley fights were better. I could go on and on. Even Provodnikov/Molina was better than that.

                  People just want to see rock-em-sock-em and that's all this was. I'm not bashing Thurman with that statement, he did what he had to do against an awkward opponent, but it was just two guys throwing. Wow.

                  It actually reminded me a lot of Mayweather/Maidana 1, frankly. Same level of dirty fighting, same brawl-style action, not really a "good" fight.



                  Porter/Maidana is a toss-up fight.




                  Porter didn't see Broner's punch. It was LIGHTNING fast. Porter was squared up for Thurman's flush shots every time because he wasn't going to same mistake he did against Broner with a more powerful puncher.



                  Being the ineffective aggressor never should win you a fight, no.
                  So much wrong with this post.

                  Porter/Thurman was not a mindless slugfest. Both fighters boxed in spots and boxed effectively. Just because two guys are throwing leather and throwing caution to the wind does not make the fight any less technical.

                  Maidana/Floyd was a great fight. And Maidana boxed superbly in that fight, lol @ you insinuating all he did was brawl like Ruslan or Rios would do.

                  Porter gets stopped by Maidana, and so does Thurman quite frankly. Porter would rush Maidana and would lose at his own game.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by LoadedWraps View Post

                    Porter/Thurman was not a mindless slugfest. Both fighters boxed in spots and boxed effectively. Just because two guys are throwing leather and throwing caution to the wind does not make the fight any less technical.


                    I didn't say "mindless". But that was not Thurman's best performance by any stretch. He allowed Porter to dictate pace and that is a guaranteed recipe for an overall uninteresting fight. That's why people are up here claiming it was a draw, Porter got robbed, etc.

                    This fight should have realistically gone one way: wide UD, minimum 116-112, in favor of Keith Thurman. But Thurman played Porter's game. All I saw was Thurman running in 4 rounds, throwing in the rest. He wasn't fighting the way we know he can. All to entertain people who frankly don't care either way.

                    Thurman should have said screw the haters, stayed on the outside and "Mayweathered" the storm. They'd boo him anyway, might as well make Porter look like the overrated bum he actually is.

                    Originally posted by LoadedWraps View Post
                    Maidana/Floyd was a great fight. And Maidana boxed superbly in that fight, lol @ you insinuating all he did was brawl like Ruslan or Rios would do.
                    See. that's the problem. You're equating "brawl" with Ruslan's style when realistically, Ruslan is a better boxer than Maidana as sad as that is. All Maidana does is bull rush, throw wild looping punches, throw low blows, bite, headbutt and hope to land a key shot. That's all I saw from him across every fight except Ortiz - and Ortiz just happened to be more wild than Maidana was, forcing Chino to actually BOX for a change.

                    Mayweather/Maidana 2 - now THAT was a boxing clinic. Minus the biting.

                    Originally posted by LoadedWraps View Post
                    Porter gets stopped by Maidana, and so does Thurman quite frankly. Porter would rush Maidana and would lose at his own game.
                    Thurman would box circles around Chino, I'm sorry.

                    Porter? I think it ends in an early stoppage due to head butt.

                    Comment


                    • Damn good fight!

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X
                      TOP