Comments Thread For: Crawford Would Favor Keith Thurman to Beat Errol Spence

[Madison Boxing]

two elite fighters and a true 50/50 fight. i think thurman doesnt get enough credit for his garcia win though, lots of people were saying garcia would win that.

[Steven Mccowan]

We aint phased. Same things yawl saying Thurman will do to Spence are the same things yawl said Algieri would do, and then jumped on the Brook bandwagon, and now yawl on the Thurman bandwagon.

We already know yawl got the Crawford bandwagon lined up.

I dont know who 'yawl' you are talking about. Spence is one of my favorites. I never jumped on any brook bandwagon. And algieri was always a joke in my eyes. I have watched thurman way before 'one time' became the number of his fights per yr. So hahaha. Seems like everyone who group thinks believes everyone else does the same. Im an individual and huge boxing fan. Oh and crawford is my favorite fighter and has been for years lmao. So im not sure the 'bandwagon' is still even around hahaha. Get a clue and stop being a group think champion. It looks fookin ******ed. Trust that

[_original_]

I'm with Crawford, Thurman has more dimensions but he'd have to fight a perfect fight against the relentless and dangerous Spence.

[Space]

I'm not sure how much boxing you some of these guys have been watching. Spence is bigger and stronger than Thurman. No way I can see Thurman winning that fight. Spence has superior boxing skills. Garcia is a fighter who is below class when compared to the likes of porter, Thurman, spence. I was very unimpressed with the way Thurman fought that fight. Spence would DESTROY Thurman.

[rickJen]

I'm not sure how much boxing you some of these guys have been watching. Spence is bigger and stronger than Thurman. No way I can see Thurman winning that fight. Spence has superior boxing skills. Garcia is a fighter who is below class when compared to the likes of porter, Thurman, spence. I was very unimpressed with the way Thurman fought that fight. Spence would DESTROY Thurman.

I agree with you mate as seen in my previous post.
But how much boxing do you know compared to Crawford? Hehe...

Crawford would favor Keith Thurman to beat Errol Spence.

[eco1]

me too! Thurman wins.

[Sheldon312]

Sheeple? Why sheeple, because they disagree with your assessment? That's a really good fight. I pick Spence because I've seen how Thurman reacts to body shots. I'm also not sure Thurman wins that fight against Brook... definitely not by stoppage like Spence did. Thurman's game is based on movement. Spence stood in there, taking Brooks' best shots and stalked him down.

Of course you would pick the thug over the more intelligent brother

[Scopedog]

I definitely disagree. I'm not entirely sure what Thurman's meant to be better at, honestly.

[WhatDisButtonDo]

In what way does Spence have superior boxing skills to Thurman?
Only reason people are running with this "Thurman is ducking Spence" narrative is because Floyd Mayweather said so.


1.) Thurman is quicker, more accurate with his punches.
2.) People site body work as if Thurman has gone down before yet he was punched solidly in the body by two guys with decent power and didn't fold.
3.) Thurman is a better outboxer and is better at using range, and not only that is better defensively.
4.) Spence is too easy to hit. There's a reason he didn't medal in the olympics. Thurman has spoken and shown that he has one of the highest ring I.Q's in boxing. The fact that Spence goes straight back or leans back when he expects to be attacked will be exploited.
5.) Spence is a great body puncher, but I've been watching boxing for years. Usually when prolific body punchers go against speedy guys with very good power that can counter them...they tend to get gun shy.
6.) Thurman hits harder than Brook, and or Spence..not to mention Thurman isn't a small welterweight, he's a big one. Size isn't just determined by height you know.

[Nomadic]

Thurman hasn't KO'd a top notch WW yet. I don't think will he last with Spence.