Thurman and Porter are both solid fighters but both are lacking

[rudy]

Thurman is a solid counter puncher but can not fight on the inside and gets pushed back easily and and does not really have a great jab. He has solid power but does not have the great timing to make it as effective as it can be.

Porter can not fight going backwards at all and has no jab worth mentioning, He leaps in wide open and off balance. Porter is aggressive ,but once he gets in he either smothers his work of just wastes energy wrestling his opponent.

Both are solid fighters and if they fix certain things may have the chance to prove they are elite top fighters. Neither are as good as they think they are and both are very, very limited. But fighters like these have to fight each other to learn and improve

You talking **** both put on a fight of the year so nobody cares what you think

[joseph5620]

You're right, I wouldn't bet my house on Spence jr.

Outgunning Algieri was irrelevant, Algieri was a quite worn out fighter.

Thurman would counter the sht out of Spence IMO.

Spence is not really a boxer, he looks more like a fighter relaying on his souhtpaws stance just like Pacquiao was at lower weight a decade ago,
but I doubt Spence has a once of the hearth, strenght, speed and chin Manny had.


We'll see, maybe Spence will have a decent career, but HOF I don't know, let alone being the "new Mayweather".

He has Nothing to make us think he's the new Mayweather except his nationality and colour lol, if someone might be the next Mayweather (overskilled unmatchable fighter) I would think more about Lomachenko.

And yes, Loma lost a fight, but it was his second fight, out of 20 fights, Spence never fought a guy as dangerous and experienced as Salido.

I have a not seen a single person say that. You just made that up.

[soul_survivor]

What's this **** people keep preaching about Spence not staying long as a welterweight?

Dude if Margarito and Baldomir (walked around at 180lbs and came in in the mid 160s on fight nights) could stay at welterweight as long as they did, then I don't see no problem at all.

Worst of all, your bias is even more transparent by mentioning Bradley, coz Bradley fought at middleweight in the amateurs and yet fought as a junior welter and a welter his entire pro career, and he still a welter to this date.

Guys like Ortiz and weigh more than Spence on fight night yet nobody hollarin bout them not making weight.

You guys are pieces of **** and your agenda is transparent. Spence is the truth and yawl can't stand it so you gotta make up all this nonsense to make yourselves feel better.

what has Bradleys weight got to do with this? What bias are you talking about?

Bradley is 5'6'', Spence if 5'9'' ish, he is a big welter by modern standards and has a very big frame. As his body naturally grows, it would just be better for him to go to 154. What's wrong with that?

If Spence is indeed the truth then lets have him fight Thurman, Porter, Brook, Garcia, Khan and we will all know for sure rather than going off of fantasy match ups.

[soul_survivor]

You're right, I wouldn't bet my house on Spence jr.

Outgunning Algieri was irrelevant, Algieri was a quite worn out fighter.

Thurman would counter the sht out of Spence IMO.

Spence is not really a boxer, he looks more like a fighter relaying on his souhtpaws stance just like Pacquiao was at lower weight a decade ago,
but I doubt Spence has a once of the hearth, strenght, speed and chin Manny had.


We'll see, maybe Spence will have a decent career, but HOF I don't know, let alone being the "new Mayweather".

He has Nothing to make us think he's the new Mayweather except his nationality and colour lol, if someone might be the next Mayweather (overskilled unmatchable fighter) I would think more about Lomachenko.

And yes, Loma lost a fight, but it was his second fight, out of 20 fights, Spence never fought a guy as dangerous and experienced as Salido.

Lets not compare Spence or Loma to Manny or Floyd.

In terms of just how good Spence may be, I have no idea. He has been matched very carefully, the guy has had 20 pro fights and been a pro for 4 years and yet the best he has to offer is Algieri.

[therealpugilist]

Thurman is a solid counter puncher but can not fight on the inside and gets pushed back easily and and does not really have a great jab. He has solid power but does not have the great timing to make it as effective as it can be.

Porter can not fight going backwards at all and has no jab worth mentioning, He leaps in wide open and off balance. Porter is aggressive ,but once he gets in he either smothers his work of just wastes energy wrestling his opponent.

Both are solid fighters and if they fix certain things may have the chance to prove they are elite top fighters. Neither are as good as they think they are and both are very, very limited. But fighters like these have to fight each other to learn and improve

I was thinking this the whole time during the fight. If Thurman estabished his jab instead of trying to time counters, he could have gave him self a better chance to set up the shots he wanted to land.

I think this fight will be a great benefit to both. Most of the action was upclose, they didnt get hit with a lot of full leverage shots. They both will go back to the drawing board after this one. I think both will become better fighters from this fight


Porter has potential....he needs to work on his head movement and shortening his shots....that wasted motion bouncing up and down is a bad habit, he picked up from his dad to establish rhythm. A smart fighter can time that bounce like kell brook did and land a stright right down the pipe.

Porter also would benefit from creating punching opportunities by pivoting to the side. Ricky Hatton was great at this and this skill would benefit Porter.

[gmc_rfc_06]

For those saying Bradley, can I ask what he has done to be the top guy at 147?

Genuinely, what is it?

A win over a small, 38 year old Marquez? 3 losses to Pacquiao? Getting dropped multiple times and getting gifted a win vs Provodnikov?

His record at welterweight says 5-2-1, but his real record should be 3-3-2.

[BillyBoxing]

I have a not seen a single person say that. You just made that up.

I did, maybe I should stop reading youtube's comment...

[WesternChamp]

For those saying Bradley, can I ask what he has done to be the top guy at 147?

Genuinely, what is it?

A win over a small, 38 year old Marquez? 3 losses to Pacquiao? Getting dropped multiple times and getting gifted a win vs Provodnikov?

His record at welterweight says 5-2-1, but his real record should be 3-3-2.

that alone right there is better than anyone thurman or porter ever fought. just sayin....

[BillyBoxing]

For those saying Bradley, can I ask what he has done to be the top guy at 147?

Genuinely, what is it?

A win over a small, 38 year old Marquez? 3 losses to Pacquiao? Getting dropped multiple times and getting gifted a win vs Provodnikov?

His record at welterweight says 5-2-1, but his real record should be 3-3-2.

How many guys at 147 would have a better record facing Manny 3 times?

Spence, Thurman, Porter are uncomplete fighters, the main asset about them is they are fighters walking around 165 and rehydrating to 160 wich make them huge guys next to Floyd, Manny or Bradley.

I think Bradley might be the best skill wise at 147 but he seems to be too small to hang with those big WW, maybe Bradley should go back to 140.

His fights vs Manny and Marquez proved he's a great little man.

I dunno, Bradley vs Porter would be a cool fight tough.

Don't know if Bradley is still motivated to face such threats.

After getting 3 losses, almost in a row, fighters tend to lose motivation.

[12TRIBEsRiSe]

Yeah they both have weaknesses, but that was a great fight props to both men, no idea who will take over at 147, very interesting