Tweet
To me garcia has never been a fighter ive been that impressed by. Even though he'd looked like trash in multiple fights all i ever heard about garcia in the build up to the thurman fight was 'he finds a way to win'. even though hes had multiple close fights (?gifts) against mediocre fighters which suggests hes not much better than them he 'finds a way to win'.
well guess what, when he came up against a top welterweight he didnt find a way to win. He lost. And thats because hes not good enough. And still people are overrating him, telling me how good his resume is, how hes a level above porter. Is he really? Based on what exactly? Whats actually so good about him? Cause he beat another overrated fighter in mattysse (just like alexander, the ghost of judah, postol, 50 year old senator pacquiao)? Can say them first two were close but u shouldnt be struggling against judah at that stage if you are any good.
He certainly doesnt look great to me on the infamous 'eye test' either.
And I dont get how opinion on porter has changed so much in recent years. Yeah his 0 has gone but he gave thurman and brook hell. There were many who scored both fights to porter. Surely that shows this is a world class welterweight who can compete at the highest level. Hes a top fighter who can be a major player in this division with a few tweaks. ****ing fine margins in this sport, if he won a round more against thurman he'd be the one people would be touting for crawford/spence fights. Dont understand how their fight can be so close and debated yet its as if they are on different levels cause thurman has an 0 and porter doesnt.
And to me hes one of the most entertaining guys in the sport, dont understand the hate for his style, that last fight with thurman was a barnstormer and he comes to fight every time.
Now ive said all that garcia will probably ko him in 2 rounds lol, but thats how i see things.
well guess what, when he came up against a top welterweight he didnt find a way to win. He lost. And thats because hes not good enough. And still people are overrating him, telling me how good his resume is, how hes a level above porter. Is he really? Based on what exactly? Whats actually so good about him? Cause he beat another overrated fighter in mattysse (just like alexander, the ghost of judah, postol, 50 year old senator pacquiao)? Can say them first two were close but u shouldnt be struggling against judah at that stage if you are any good.
He certainly doesnt look great to me on the infamous 'eye test' either.
And I dont get how opinion on porter has changed so much in recent years. Yeah his 0 has gone but he gave thurman and brook hell. There were many who scored both fights to porter. Surely that shows this is a world class welterweight who can compete at the highest level. Hes a top fighter who can be a major player in this division with a few tweaks. ****ing fine margins in this sport, if he won a round more against thurman he'd be the one people would be touting for crawford/spence fights. Dont understand how their fight can be so close and debated yet its as if they are on different levels cause thurman has an 0 and porter doesnt.
And to me hes one of the most entertaining guys in the sport, dont understand the hate for his style, that last fight with thurman was a barnstormer and he comes to fight every time.
Now ive said all that garcia will probably ko him in 2 rounds lol, but thats how i see things.
Comment