Canelo fights #1 ranked Smith: "cherrypick". Bud fights unranked Brook: "#1 P4P!". Le

[Cobra Curry]

No, it's not because Spence will have THREE PPVs after Danny. The first two drew more than Crawford, Danny's damn sure will, because Danny draws Mexican fans.

Porter drew casual fans.

Mikey drew Mexican fans.

Do you not understand WHY those fights are important? Spence is fighting top draw opponents. That's the difference, bro. Crawford is NOT! And he needs to. Fight a top draw, do to them what you did to the ghost of Kell Brook, NOW you can sell a Spence fight.

Meanwhile you got Crawford who is on record saying Kell Brook was a shadow of himself yet demanding 60%. Why? Why does he deserve that BASED ON HIS 147 RESUME?



You're trying to rewrite history. And I'll not allow it.

1980, Tommy Hearns stepped up to fight a very dangerous fighter in Pipino Cuevas.

Cuevas was believed to be the king at welterweight at the time despite not having more than one belt, largely because of his championship win over Ángel Espada in 1976, a very good fighter but not at the very top.

The problem is, Espada's best achievement, winning the WBA strap (that Cuevas later took) was tainted by the fact that Nápoles (then undisputed at welterweight) never lost it in the ring; he was stripped because WBA wouldn't allow him to stay champion and challenge Monzon at middleweight, allowing Espada to win vacant over Clyde Gray (a decent fighter, but not top).

This right here was one of the earliest situations where these letter orgs started to get out of control.

Nápoles, the former WBA Welterweight Champion, would go on to get stopped by Monzon at Middleweight. (Shades of Golovkin/Brook).

My point is, Cuevas was being overrated at the time because he beat a guy that got gifted a title. Sound familiar (Crawford after beating Horn)?

BUT..."At The End Of The Day", Cuevas was highly rated, highly ranked and still a dangerous fighter (Same as Crawford). Nobody questioned that Cuevas was a threat, but people did question how he would perform at the TOP levels.

Tommy Hearns destroys him in two rounds, leaving him face down on the mat at one point, and winning his first welterweight title.

Prior to this, Cuevas had only ever been knocked out one time - in his debut fight, and Castro was never seen again after that win (sketchy) nor does any footage exist of it or even a description of events; we don't even know if the guy's still alive. So chances are that Cuevas took dives for money early in his career (just like Rungvisai was told to for his debut fights).




As far as Leonard, you should be ashamed of yourself.

1979. Leonard had stopped Wilfred Benitez who was arguably just as great as the others - then WBC and The Ring champion (meaning, he was The Guy). The sad irony of this win?

Benitez was lineal champion after a close win against Carlos Palomino in January of 1979.

Palamino became lineal champion after a questionable late fight stoppage against John Stracey in June of 1976.

John Stracey became WBC and The Ring champion after he stopped and retired Jose Nápoles in 1975.

Yes, the same Nápoles that got stopped on the stool at Middleweight never lost his lineal or WBC Welterweight titles.

In summary: Leonard, due to Nápoles bad decision to fight at middleweight, benefitted from getting to fight THE MAN at Welterweight, and beat him soundly, to become The Man.

AND he knocked out Andy Price, a solid B+/A- level fighter and former champion, in the first. Same year.

1980 - Leonard avenges his loss and makes Roberto Duran QUIT, become the first to stop Duran.

So no, Leonard was heavily tested.

Leonard fights Hearns in 1981 - by which time he was already proven, and had already obtained the WBC and The Ring titles. Meaning he was considered the guy. (Shades of Errol Spence now).

Leonard becomes the first guy to beat AND stop Tommy Hearns, taking the WBA title from him.


So no...these two guys didn't just fight "tune-ups". They fought A-levels before they ever met, especially in Leonard's case. AT WELTERWEIGHT.


Tommy Hearns fought a top guy in Pipino Cuevas and destroyed him.

Sugar Ray Leonard fought a top guy in Benitez AND a top guy in Duran and stopped them both.


THAT is how it really went down. Both Leonard AND Hearns were tested before they ever met, and it helped sell the fight tremendously, because nobody really knew who would win it. Both guys were PROVEN legit, not just 'eye test' legit.

I'm not attempting to rewrite anything, although I did forget that Leonard fought Kalule prior to Hearns who was very good. Hearns after beating Cuevas fought Baez, Primera and Sheilds. Make of that what you will.
Leonard was a star, point blank period but his rematch with Duran was not well received at the time.
My point is Cuevas and Benitez, the title fights were the tests.
I wouldn't dream of saying Horn was as good as Cuevas but he had the belt and he took it from a great fighter, one who is a champion today. That's your test right there.

As for the PPV argument, again, Spence is leaning too heavily on his dance partner to be considered a draw. By your own admission, Porter drew the casuals and Garcia drew the Mexicans. He and Crawford are interchangeable as far those numbers go.

I wasn't aware that Crawford was calling for 60%, 50-50 sounds fair enough to me but the most important thing as far as I'm concerned is that the fight happens in timely fashion.

[_original_]

1. Canelo
2. Fury
3. Inoue
4. Spence
5. Teo


Bud isn't even top 5 IMHO.

[Combat Talk Radio]

I'm not attempting to rewrite anything, although I did forget that Leonard fought Kalule prior to Hearns who was very good. Hearns after beating Cuevas fought Baez, Primera and Sheilds. Make of that what you will.
Leonard was a star, point blank period but his rematch with Duran was not well received at the time.
My point is Cuevas and Benitez, the title fights were the tests.
I wouldn't dream of saying Horn was as good as Cuevas but he had the belt and he took it from a great fighter, one who is a champion today. That's your test right there.

As for the PPV argument, again, Spence is leaning too heavily on his dance partner to be considered a draw. By your own admission, Porter drew the casuals and Garcia drew the Mexicans. He and Crawford are interchangeable as far those numbers go.

I wasn't aware that Crawford was calling for 60%, 50-50 sounds fair enough to me but the most important thing as far as I'm concerned is that the fight happens in timely fashion.

The point is, Crawford - when comparing fighter level - has NOT faced anyone even close to the level of prime and/or skill and/or draw as a Pipino Cuevas. Period. He hasn't been tested.

Spence has been tested. We know what he is. We know he draws money. We know he's a double champion. We saw him take the WBC from the former champion who took it from a vacancy - a vacancy from a strip from the top guy in the division at the time. Same guy who successfully defended that belt twice against other A-levels.

We saw Spence go over the pond - not force domestic - OVER THE POND - and take back the IBF that one of the guys lost domestically.

I get it. Everyone wants to see the fight. SO DO I!...when one of the two has PROVEN they deserve to be there.

Because what I don't want to see after the fight - after Spence does what he does and pulls it out - "Who's Crawford beat?" "Well his resume"...I'm tired of that crap. Let's fix his resume so there are NO EXCUSES.

FFS at least even Lopez had the Commey win so it wasn't like he went into the Loma fight with NO credible opponents on the resume.

[Combat Talk Radio]

Hopefully this thread will better resonate with NSB now that these two have done a face off.

Canelo is about to face a tough challenge. A VERY tough challenge.