if postol is so good how come hes such a massive underdog....

[Bob Haymon]

im saying he hasnt proven anything worth a damn to be elevated to the level hes touted to be at. someone was telling me he's fighter of the decade. his best win is a massive underdog against josh taylor ffs lol.

Winning six belts in three weight classes is pretty damn impressive. In the era of ducking and marinating fights there isn't too many fighters who can claim they've accomplished more than Crawford.

[Prince Madison]

Exactly...He was the one hyping Brook thru the roof before the fight

i dont know what yours and big dunns point is. its not me with the double standard, its you two. i said brook was a solid win and if we go by your standards then postol should be a very good win for taylor also and should rate him near spence.

[Prince Madison]

Winning six belts in three weight classes is pretty damn impressive. In the era of ducking and marinating fights there isn't too many fighters who can claim they've accomplished more than Crawford.

they are crap divisions though, broner looked like the man when he fought in weak weight classes. it doesnt mean anything. in my view beating 2 world class fighters at 147 would mean more than being multi weight world champ and clearing out ****e divisions.

[Prince Madison]

just makes me laugh, im the one made out to be the court jester yet its everyone else with the double standard. Why the hell is the brook win regarded in such a high regard but the postol one wouldnt be, if you rated postol as such a good fighter. can talk about momentum etc, where the hell was brooks momentum after ggg smashed up his eye. point is, if you dont think taylor beating postol is much of a win, then you cant have rated him much in the first place.

[richardt]

Postol lost 12-0 to Crawford, including some knockdowns and has fought once in two years since. That's probably factored in also. Sometimes fighters aren't the same after a loss. Crawford ruined Gamboa as a 2-1 underdog and perhaps that's a reference that after a guy is taken apart by Crawford he's not the same. Tito Trinidad used to do that with highly touted guys too, unbeaten ones also.

And maybe Postol in his next fight where he was dropped and didnt look so good may have played into the odds.

[O Prophet]

Crawford took Postols soul, Postol will never be the same.

[The Big Dunn]

Is this another dramashow thread where he is upset that posters give props to fighters for easy wins the same way he gave GGG props for years for doing the same thing?

I can't treat this thread like it is legitimate. Context matters so there is no way a rational adult boxing fan thinks Postol today is the same as Postol was when he fought Crawford.

If you want to get real-this is most likely a fake question asked solely so you can accuse anyone that answers "No, it doesn't mean Taylor goes on the p4p list" of being pro black or biased against white or non american fighters.

You do this stuff day in and day out. Why?????????

i dont know what yours and big dunns point is. its not me with the double standard, its you two. i said brook was a solid win and if we go by your standards then postol should be a very good win for taylor also and should rate him near spence.

I detailed my issues with this thread clearly in the 2 posts above.

You are pretending Crawford got ranked because he beat Postol. He got ranked p4p because beating Postol meant he was lineal champ in 2 divisions. That will not be the case for Taylor.

Then you bring up Spence beating Brook. You lie about people saying Brook was the same-it was you predicting he'd beat Spence and he got embarrassed.

Taylor beating Postol will not put him near Spence because Spence is a legit world champ and seen as the best in his division. Taylor has not been a world champ yet and very few times will a non world champ be put on any p4p lists.

Of course we know why you made the thread-see my 2nd post above.

edit: Spence also has a couple of defenses, albeit against weak opposition. Taylor has defended his commonwealth belt against guys worse than Petersen and Occampo.

How about you just admit why you really made the thread and stop pretending this is a legitimate point you are trying to make.

[bojangles1987]

What did Crawford do to this guy that he's so whiny about tearing him down? Damn.

The Postol win was incredibly impressive and no amount of whining is going to change that.

[R_Walken]

Postol was never that good

He has 1 decent win and gained his Internet hype because all these Internet warriors made it seem like Garcia ducked Postol. If Taylor gets past Postol it’s just further proof Crawford’s resume is sh.it

Crawford the real deal but nothings wrong with saying him beating on the Indongos, Postols, Horn isn’t sh.it just a bunch of B class champions

[deanrw]

This is a very tricky subject so I should shed some light on the matter to clarify everything.

When I was young, Boxing events were huge around here. Buffalo Jonny Johnson used to get into sanctioned fights down at the wharf. It cost a nickel for the trolley and another nickel to get in. Anyway, Jonny was completely blind in one eye and he could not see out of the other. So one day when his wh0re of a wife lead him to the ring, she did not even wish him luck and instead blew a kiss to his opponent Herbert Albertson.

You could tell she was having an affair with him because she was belittling Jonny during the fight. So to me it all makes sense now. She hated Jonny for not being able to find her clit.