Comments Thread For: Chavez: Canelo is Pound-For-Pound Best, But Crawford More Complete

[boxingitis]

Ellaborate with “more skills.” Estrada and Chocolatito are rather basic compared to Canelo.

That's your opinion.

[Thuglife Nelo]

That's your opinion.

That’s not opinion. Basic eye test and flexibility proves that, and also how you get hit. Canelo’s defense is more elite than them. You apply that to offensive gameplay as well.

[Jab jab boom]

If everyone was the same size, Gamboa would have smoked Crawford and we would never get to see Canelo-Crawford because Canelo would busy winning and Crawford would be busy getting dropped and KO’ed by the Gamboa’s and Kavaliouskas’ of the world.

Also, it’s easy to look great versus average opposition. Literally every good fighter would look great vs the opponents Crawford has faced. Canelo would look amazing, go undefeated vs Crawford’s resume. Can Crawford go undefeated vs Canelo’s resume?

so by that logic we can call into question many of Canelo's wins as well since he had a size advantage over almost all of his opponents until Chavez Jr and then he started implementing rehydration clauses to all of his opponents that were bigger than him, other than ggg. I mean if we want to get technical, we can also say that if Canelo wasn't the A side, he'd probably have 4 losses on his record right now and we wouldn't even be talking about him as an option for #1 p4p. I won't even get into the ped use.

[Silver Spear]

How about Gallo Estrada? He has more skills than Canelo, as does Chocolatito.

Getting smashed in the face takes no skill.

[Doctor_Tenma]

There is no evidence to suggest Crawford is more complete, none whatsoever. Canelo has displayed a wider arsenal in the ring but I wouldn't say Canelo is more complete either, even though there is more evidence to suggest he is, what I'd say is that Crawford has not faced the level of opposition to show us what he has, he has not had to adjust the way Canelo has had to. I've yet to see an inside game from Crawford

[Silver Spear]

I have crawford ranked pretty high in the P4P list because of what he has done. He unified in a division which is very rare. He looked mostly dominating in that division. Since he has moved up however he has yet to look at dominating and has not stepped up his competition really. Crawford tends to be a bit sloppy early on in fights but he does have the skills and abilities to adjust and adapt which is why I rank him in the top 5.

Canelo has shown a great comeback after his loss to Mayweather. He has fought a lot of top opposition as well as some mediocre but really what fighter does not have mediocre names on their list? Canelo has improved a lot defensively and offensively. He has mastered boxing and although I knock on him for his stamina and output in the later rounds he still has the better resume than any other top 10. Win lose or draw his resume trumps everyone else's and with the one exception loss to Mayweather he has looked good in every fight and improved in every fight.

My rankings would be

1. Canelo
2. Fury
3. Loma
4. Crawford
5. Inoue

[Silver Spear]

so by that logic we can call into question many of Canelo's wins as well since he had a size advantage over almost all of his opponents until Chavez Jr and then he started implementing rehydration clauses to all of his opponents that were bigger than him, other than ggg. I mean if we want to get technical, we can also say that if Canelo wasn't the A side, he'd probably have 4 losses on his record right now and we wouldn't even be talking about him as an option for #1 p4p. I won't even get into the ped use.

How many loses does Manny have on his record? Manny has also been accused of PED use although he has never been officially caught or tested positive. Having a loss on your record does not automatically disqualify you from the list. Unless you are HBO.

I agree to a point about the size advantage etc and it is a trend I see happening with a lot of younger boxers. A lot of fighters tend to drain in their earlier years because they can when they are young and use it to their advantage. Personally I dislike that but it is legal and if it helps you win then so be it.

[-Kev-]

There is no evidence to suggest Crawford is more complete, none whatsoever. Canelo has displayed a wider arsenal in the ring but I wouldn't say Canelo is more complete either, even though there is more evidence to suggest he is, what I'd say is that Crawford has not faced the level of opposition to show us what he has, he has not had to adjust the way Canelo has had to. I've yet to see an inside game from Crawford

Canelo has also faced different styles and he has fought opponents as elite as can get in boxing. He has fought highly skilled fighters, with difficult styles. We have seen his flaws because of this.

We have seen some of Crawford’s flaws even without him really facing anyone elite.

Crawford is obviously a very good fighter but his excellence looks a lot better than it is due to his opponent selection.

[Walexhris]

I try to keep their attributes as they are for their weight class and carry those to what they would be relative to their new weight class.


For example if i matched loma vs a heavyweight, i wouldnt keep loma's actual speed and the heavyweights actual power, but I would match their relative attributes, so loma would be a fast heavyweight with t rex arms and medium power.

Personally...I work with the knockout percentage, so I'd assume fighter x carries his knockout percentage to heavyweight

[Walexhris]

This is roughly how I do mine too. I mean measuring credentials is fine, but it becomes a bit too formulaic- and ignores that not all fighters have the same opportunity to achieve equal resumes.

This is why I like your way, or at least something similar. I try to evaluate relative ability (strength, speed, etc) towards one weight class and then if fighter retained those abilities, relative to their new weight class (same as you) with the skillset IQ- as you already mentioned. The one skill I think should also be considered is relative size (mostly height and reach). Consider how important size was to someone like Tommy Hearns at welterweight. Height and reach relative to weight is an important factor.

Hmmm.....I like this, I need to spend sometime on your last point