Comments Thread For: Arum Admits: ESPN Would Not Be Pleased if Crawford Lost

[WesternChamp]

Why? I'm pretty sure I saw you recently saying Pacquaio could still beat Crawford, Spence, Thurman and he struggled with Horn. It was a close, competitive fight. I didn't agree with the decision but it wasn't a travesty either. If Crawford won say 9-3 then that's a loss and proof he can't fight but a 7-5 type fight for Pacquaio was proof he is still #1 at 147? Also factor in this is Crawford's first fight above 140 and Horn has been a champion for a year.

Is it possible you have a bias?

yes, but look at how old pac is!!!!!

crawford is suppose to be the best fighter right now according to his fans. so if he struggle with horn, it's an automatic L.

[chrisJS]

yes, but look at how old pac is!!!!!

crawford is suppose to be the best fighter right now according to his fans. so if he struggle with horn, it's an automatic L.

I'm probably one of the biggest Crawford fans here and certainly one of the fans that goes back years and years. I consider him #2 p4p which is reasonable.

I also think it's reasonable to struggle with a bigger guy who's clearly a solid fighter in your first fight at a new weight coming off of a 10 month lay-off. It's totally unreasonable to suggest he should win every second of every round and end it on a KO and anything else is a "L".

Pacquaio is old but if he's the best and would beat everyone else then surely that suggest Horn is a good fighter since he fought on almost even terms with him in his first big fight? I just don't understand the following logic

7-5 type fight with Jeff Horn = still the best and would beat Crawford and Spence

9-3/10-2 type fight with Jeff Horn = exposed, trash, really a loss

That's just backwards and completely lacking a decent rationale.

[Boxing Logic]

And Jeff Horn needed the help of the ref vs. Randall Bailey, Jeep Horn was allowed to break any rules to get the win -- but things are going to be different in Vegas come Saturday.

Exactly. In Vegas, you're only allowed to do that if you're American or Mexican! The **** you're complaining Horn got away with, Crawford is going to be allowed to get away with in every single fight for the remainder of his career. So for objective fans like me, I will call it out either way. It's wrong when Horn was allowed to do it, and it's wrong when Crawford is. But for some biased fans, it won't be like that. I wonder if you will still criticize it when Crawford is protected by corruption, or if you will celebrate it and act like he did something real, the same way so many Andre Ward fans celebrated corruption not once but TWICE recently, and the same way Floyd fans did basically every time he fought (I mean jab and grabbed).

Just be consistent. If you care about boxing, fans need to start being consistent, otherwise the corruption will continue forever so long as they know that a good portion of fans will always defend the corruption and try to help them cover it up because they know those fans care more about seeing the boxer the corruption helped get the "win" than they care about the integrity of the sport.

[WesternChamp]

I'm probably one of the biggest Crawford fans here and certainly one of the fans that goes back years and years. I consider him #2 p4p which is reasonable.

I also think it's reasonable to struggle with a bigger guy who's clearly a solid fighter in your first fight at a new weight coming off of a 10 month lay-off. It's totally unreasonable to suggest he should win every second of every round and end it on a KO and anything else is a "L".

Pacquaio is old but if he's the best and would beat everyone else then surely that suggest Horn is a good fighter since he fought on almost even terms with him in his first big fight? I just don't understand the following logic

7-5 type fight with Jeff Horn = still the best and would beat Crawford and Spence

9-3/10-2 type fight with Jeff Horn = exposed, trash, really a loss

That's just backwards and completely lacking a decent rationale.

i just explained to you!! if you're gonna just repeat yourself over again then dont quote me! i hate talking to people like this. crawford is being crown as the best fighter right now (even tho imo he hasnt prove that he is) so if he struggles with horn, that's an automatic L. i am going by what his fans is crowning him as.

you can say all this about how pac lost to horn (if you really believe that) or how pac struggle, but pac is 40! on his way out! and i never said pac is still the best! i said he still have enough to beat guys crawford (who imo hasnt prove anything yet).

so now its "ok" if crawford struggle with horn but isnt that the exact reason why manny got trashed, etc. because according to the floyd fans, he lost/struggle to a school teacher? now yall wanna flip this and make it seem like horn is a legit contender so if crawford struggle, its understandable?

[chrisJS]

i just explained to you!! if you're gonna just repeat yourself over again then dont quote me! i hate talking to people like this. crawford is being crown as the best fighter right now (even tho imo he hasnt prove that he is) so if he struggles with horn, that's an automatic L. i am going by what his fans is crowning him as.

you can say all this about how pac lost to horn (if you really believe that) or how pac struggle, but pac is 40! on his way out! and i never said pac is still the best! i said he still have enough to beat guys crawford (who imo hasnt prove anything yet).

so now its "ok" if crawford struggle with horn but isnt that the exact reason why manny got trashed, etc. because according to the floyd fans, he lost/struggle to a school teacher? now yall wanna flip this and make it seem like horn is a legit contender so if crawford struggle, its understandable?

I'm not a Floyd fan. Not even close. Nice try. I've also not claimed Crawford to be the best fighter in the world. That's clearly Lomachenko currently (let me guess Pacquaio thrashes him too?). I also clearly stated earlier I felt Pacquaio beat Horn (7-5) in a competitive fight so my point is if you think Pacquaio winning 7-5 against Horn in a tough fight is indication he'd beat Crawford then it's unfair to put a "L" on Crawford for beating Horn 10-2 considering Horn has now been a champion for a year and 9-3/10-2 win is more impressive than a 7-5 controversial loss. I can see it now if he loses a feel out round or two posters like you will be sharpening your knives and if he destroys Horn he'll get no credit and would still lose to a year older Pacquaio who had a very close fight with Horn.

Horn is a solid guy. Nobody is saying he's great but he's a solid fighter for sure. He'd not have been able to do better than Vargas and Bradley if not. He's not a bum. A guy like Crawford should and will handle him even in his first fight at the weight off the back of a 10 month layoff. If he doesn't dominate it's not a loss. He'll likely be much better in his 2nd, 3rd, 4th fight at the weight class. That's how Boxing works.

I know the reason you dislike Crawford. It's because you dislike Mayweather and some of the same fans that like Mayweather like Crawford. Crawford is doing his thing. He's cleaned out two divisions, was the only undisputed champion in the entire sport in over a decade and has been dominating all the best guys in his weight classes and in 4 days he's likely to dominate the guy that recently gave Pacquaio a solid fight. The same Pacquaio you'd presumably pick to defeat the consenus two best fighters in the sport in Loma and Crawford.

[WesternChamp]

I'm not a Floyd fan. Not even close. Nice try. I've also not claimed Crawford to be the best fighter in the world. That's clearly Lomachenko currently (let me guess Pacquaio thrashes him too?). I also clearly stated earlier I felt Pacquaio beat Horn (7-5) in a competitive fight so my point is if you think Pacquaio winning 7-5 against Horn in a tough fight is indication he'd beat Crawford then it's unfair to put a "L" on Crawford for beating Horn 10-2 considering Horn has now been a champion for a year and 9-3/10-2 win is more impressive than a 7-5 controversial loss. I can see it now if he loses a feel out round or two posters like you will be sharpening your knives and if he destroys Horn he'll get no credit and would still lose to a year older Pacquaio who had a very close fight with Horn.

Horn is a solid guy. Nobody is saying he's great but he's a solid fighter for sure. He'd not have been able to do better than Vargas and Bradley if not. He's not a bum. A guy like Crawford should and will handle him even in his first fight at the weight off the back of a 10 month layoff. If he doesn't dominate it's not a loss. He'll likely be much better in his 2nd, 3rd, 4th fight at the weight class. That's how Boxing works.

I know the reason you dislike Crawford. It's because you dislike Mayweather and some of the same fans that like Mayweather like Crawford. Crawford is doing his thing. He's cleaned out two divisions, was the only undisputed champion in the entire sport in over a decade and has been dominating all the best guys in his weight classes and in 4 days he's likely to dominate the guy that recently gave Pacquaio a solid fight. The same Pacquaio you'd presumably pick to defeat the consenus two best fighters in the sport in Loma and Crawford.

first of all, i was addressing the floyd fans who claim crawford is the best right now. you quoted me with your 2 cents. if you dont wanna get lumped in, dont quote me if i didnt mention you. the rest, i didnt read.

[WesternChamp]

I'm not a Floyd fan. Not even close. Nice try. I've also not claimed Crawford to be the best fighter in the world. That's clearly Lomachenko currently (let me guess Pacquaio thrashes him too?). I also clearly stated earlier I felt Pacquaio beat Horn (7-5) in a competitive fight so my point is if you think Pacquaio winning 7-5 against Horn in a tough fight is indication he'd beat Crawford then it's unfair to put a "L" on Crawford for beating Horn 10-2 considering Horn has now been a champion for a year and 9-3/10-2 win is more impressive than a 7-5 controversial loss. I can see it now if he loses a feel out round or two posters like you will be sharpening your knives and if he destroys Horn he'll get no credit and would still lose to a year older Pacquaio who had a very close fight with Horn.

Horn is a solid guy. Nobody is saying he's great but he's a solid fighter for sure. He'd not have been able to do better than Vargas and Bradley if not. He's not a bum. A guy like Crawford should and will handle him even in his first fight at the weight off the back of a 10 month layoff. If he doesn't dominate it's not a loss. He'll likely be much better in his 2nd, 3rd, 4th fight at the weight class. That's how Boxing works.

I know the reason you dislike Crawford. It's because you dislike Mayweather and some of the same fans that like Mayweather like Crawford. Crawford is doing his thing. He's cleaned out two divisions, was the only undisputed champion in the entire sport in over a decade and has been dominating all the best guys in his weight classes and in 4 days he's likely to dominate the guy that recently gave Pacquaio a solid fight. The same Pacquaio you'd presumably pick to defeat the consenus two best fighters in the sport in Loma and Crawford.

basically said the exact same thing i said --

Yes Horn is a BUM. that's why Crawford should easily smoke him.

therefore if he doesn't he just lost to a BUM. making him a hype job.

Pacquiao was a fossil years past his prime. Bud is at his peak.

[jas]

smh they gonna rob horn

[TonyGe]

Can't see Horn getting past Crawford. He lost to Pacquiao. He got away with all kinds of illegal tactics. Pac had a 10-8 round against him and it wasn't acknowledged by the judges. Crawford is bigger and younger than Pac and a top fighter. Horn is going to take a beating.