So, who has the better resume - Crawford or GGG?

[Porter's Dad]

GGG by far better resume, it’s not even close. He is the wrong skin color for most of the haters though...

I don't think it's that clear. Bud is an amazing fighter and made solid guys like Indongo and Postol look totally useless.

But I just think it's interesting that after years of saying GGG was a hypejob because he faced no-one, it's actually interesting that he may have a better resume than the top dog.

So that means Bud is number 1 because of the eye test - which wasn't the way these guys would ever allow GGG to be judged.

I mean, even something like the Gamboa win - isn't that more or less the same as Kell Brook?

[Porter's Dad]

cant add Canelo to his resume when he didnt win

In the context of this particular post, please go read this post I made in Larry's thread that he made 10 minutes after I made this one:

https://www.boxingscene.com/forums/s...3&postcount=10

[Loque-san]

There is not much to separate them really. I think Crawford fans will vote for Crawford and vice-versa.

They have both beaten the second best fighter in their respective divisions. Bud beat Beltran at 135 and Postol at 140, GGG beat Jacobs. Both also easily dominated a bunch of average opponents (Murray, Geale, Burns, Beltran, etc.). And finally both have a comparable win against a highly regarded but severly undersized fighter. Golovkin has the best single win as I rate Jacobs above everyone else on Crawford's resume and that win probably tips the scales slightly in his favor for me.

I don't count Canelo, not just because the official result was a draw but also because I thought the fight was close. I don't go by official results only when a fight is given to the wrong guy after a one-sided fight.

[Porter's Dad]

There is not much to separate them really. I think Crawford fans will vote for Crawford and vice-versa.

They have both beaten the second best fighter in their respective divisions. Bud beat Beltran at 135 and Postol at 140, GGG beat Jacobs. Both also easily dominated a bunch of average opponents (Murray, Geale, Burns, Beltran, etc.). And finally both have a comparable win against a highly regarded but severly undersized fighter. Golovkin has the best single win as I rate Jacobs above everyone else on Crawford's resume and that win probably tips the scales slightly in his favor for me.

I don't count Canelo, not just because the official result was a draw but also because I thought the fight was close. I don't go by official results only when a fight is given to the wrong guy after a one-sided fight.

I agree with a lot of what you say here. In essence, do you agree that it is very stupid of Crawford fans to make fun of GGG's resume, particularly if you think Bud is the best fighter in the world?

[BoxingFan85]

Hard to pick because they have beat the second best guys in their division and in Craeford's case he has done it in a shut out fashion with Indongo and Postol..
GGG had close fights with Jacobs and Canelo and edged it in my book..
I'll go out on a limb and say Crawford because he has beat #2 guys with ease + got all the belts there is..

[Larry the boss]

Crawford is 5-0 against current or former champs...and GGG has a record of 5-0-1 against current or former champs...one is 35..the other is 29..why are we even comparing the 2?

[sugarsmosley]

his win over canelo trumps anything on crawford.


sorry

[Porter's Dad]

Crawford is 5-0 against current or former champs...and GGG has a record of 5-0-1 against current or former champs...one is 35..the other is 29..why are we even comparing the 2?

Why are we comparing the 2? Oh, I don't know. Because race-baiters like you go around making fun of GGG's resume, whilst exalting Crawford's, and ranking him as the best in the world. You don't see the contradiction in that?

What the hell does age even have to do with anything, when we know GGG turned pro late. Whilst Crawford has been nurtured by the best promotional company in the world, GGG was stuck in limbo in Germany, trying to get out of his. So going on about facking age is a useless argument.

Why don't you answer the question Larry? Who has the better resume and why?

[Hot Shyt]

GGG easily

[Vegemil]

Hard to pick because they have beat the second best guys in their division and in Craeford's case he has done it in a shut out fashion with Indongo and Postol..
GGG had close fights with Jacobs and Canelo and edged it in my book..
I'll go out on a limb and say Crawford because he has beat #2 guys with ease + got all the belts there is..

The second best in each division were worlds apart in skill. Don't just look at the rankings and numbers you gotta assess the actual people they fight.