Is Keith Thurman the best welterweight in the world?

[M Bison]

No, Kell Brook is now because he is fighting GGG, Thurman needs to step up and fight the winner of the fight or he is a coward ***** ass diva like that limp wrist shirt lifter Andre Ward.

[mathed]

With Brook moving to Middleweight, if only for the moment, is Keith Thurman the best welterweight in the world? He arguably has the best resume of welterweight vs welterweight competition. He kos 80% of his opponents and has knocked down all but Porter (who wobbled) in his fights. But has he shown too much vulnerability to be considered the legitimate heir to the 147 thrown? If so, when did vulnerability start defining a division? Was Leonard not vulnerable to a Hearns and vise versa? Was Tito not vulnerable to the boxing ability of DeLa Hoya? Isn't that what makes boxing the sort of sport that defies generations? All in all, Keith might not be the most talented 147 in the world. But I dare anyone to show me a better candidate for best welterweight in the word....

The only legit threats he's fougth in his career are an over-the-hill Guerrero, Porter (who he barely beat, could have been a draw), and Chaves who was outboxing him prior to the stoppage.

Bradley, Crawford and probably Vargas can all beat him.

[KayDub]

Thurman has the best record of the current crop of welterweights. Brook is probably on the elite level but who really knows?

Errol Spence isn't there yet as far as record is concerned but he has the possibility of beating Thurman. At the moment I favor Thurman though since he's more proven. Crawford isn't even 147lbs so I don't know why he was mentioned here.

Bradley hasn't been looking too good and Vargas gets stopped by Thurman.

[deathofaclown]

Well if we're considering Mayweather retired, then Pacquiao still has to be in for a shout as best WW?

He did just beat Bradley again. If anyone else beat Bradley, they would be raving about it.

I wouldn't be that confident picking any other WW right now over even this version of Pacquiao.

[hoe_train]

Thurman is for the time being but wait till Spence moves into the title picture, he is takin everyones belts. That brother is too strong, too big and too slick

[bojangles1987]

No one at welterweight deserves to be called the best welterweight in the world. None of them have proven to be the best over the other contenders.

[Boxfan83]

IDK how anyone can say Thurman, Spence, Garcia etc are the best when Tim Bradley is still an active WW. Tim Bradley by far has proven more than all 3 have ever. The only thing about Tim is you never know which 1 you are going to get but Tim in his A game beats all 3, not easy but beats them all. Hell if you even think about it, face first Tim Bradley makes for a fun competitive fight so that should tell you something about his skill and the others. Another thing, Tim Bradleys loss(es) to Pacquiao are better than anything the 3 guys I mentioned have done in their careers.

[j0zef]

While it's highly arguable who's the clear #1, you're not gonna find many people who actually think Thurman's #1. Brook beat Porter in a more convincing fashion, and both Bradley and Garcia are probably better than him - and Pacquaio, if he unretires, has the best claim to #1.

He's #4-5 in my book.

[-PBP-]

I wouldn't call him the "best welterweight in the world" but based on his resume, he's earned the right to babysit that #1 spot until somebody gains a hold of the division.

[FrankieBruno]

yes.......based on resume, he has fought decent comp, unlike brook who fought jo jo dan, frankie gavin and kevin bumzier