Errol Spence v Terence Crawford who wins ?

[Counter-puncher]

Crawford vs. Spence is like the rebirth of Leonard vs. Hearns, would be a spectacular and special event when it happens.

closest matchup to Leaonard-Hearns 1 in years, IMO

not just your opinion

[Badhusker]

Could be a Terry Norris vs Leonard fight. Spence reminds me a bit of Norris...Crawford reminds me a little bit of Leonard. Probably a poor analogy.

[jamamb]

u think its a 120-104 kind of fight? ya cus ray was really at his peak for that

[Badhusker]

u think its a 120-104 kind of fight? ya cus ray was really at his peak for that

No I don't, but Ray was only 34 at the time, and just came off fights against Duran and Hearns. SRL was a great fighter, but way over-rated in some ways. He was awesome in his short prime, maybe due to a lot of layoffs, but crashed hard much sooner than many too. Mayweather deserves more credit for the last half of his career, by far than SRL. At the same age 32+, Floyd would have schooled him if at the same weight.

[jamamb]

ok so now its a floyd praising thread?

i agree great atg boxer

[BAD INTENTIONS]

Crawford proved to me that he is a very good fighter against Postol.
He passes the eyeball test ... BUT, against who?

Prescott C
Sanabria D+
Klimov C-
Burns C
Gamboa B-
Beltran C
Dulorme B-
Jean C+
Lundy C
Postol B
Molina Jr C-
Diaz C+
Indongo C+

Take out Postol, and Broner wins these fights and looks just as good.

At 147, I will only respect Crawford when he fights the real fighters in the division,
Thurman, Garcia, Spence Jr, Porter ...

Instead, he'll beat up on the other good fighters at 147 and get ranked above the four fighters above somehow.

[BAD INTENTIONS]

PS - I think Thurman, Porter and Spence Jr have a good chance of beating Crawford.

Garcia looked too lazy and able to be out-hustled against Thurman.
But I'm not 75% sure Crawford beats him.

[Tanzio]

Crawford proved to me that he is a very good fighter against Postol.
He passes the eyeball test ... BUT, against who?

Prescott C
Sanabria D+
Klimov C-
Burns C
Gamboa B-
Beltran C
Dulorme B-
Jean C+
Lundy C
Postol B
Molina Jr C-
Diaz C+
Indongo C+

Take out Postol, and Broner wins these fights and looks just as good.

At 147, I will only respect Crawford when he fights the real fighters in the division,
Thurman, Garcia, Spence Jr, Porter ...

Instead, he'll beat up on the other good fighters at 147 and get ranked above the four fighters above somehow.

Your post was gliding along real well, then you just crashed and burned it.

[jamamb]

Crawford proved to me that he is a very good fighter against Postol.
He passes the eyeball test ... BUT, against who?

Prescott C
Sanabria D+
Klimov C-
Burns C
Gamboa B-
Beltran C
Dulorme B-
Jean C+
Lundy C
Postol B
Molina Jr C-
Diaz C+
Indongo C+

Take out Postol, and Broner wins these fights and looks just as good.

At 147, I will only respect Crawford when he fights the real fighters in the division,
Thurman, Garcia, Spence Jr, Porter ...

Instead, he'll beat up on the other good fighters at 147 and get ranked above the four fighters above somehow.

'somehow', do you mean because of racism against those guys advisor

[gilgamesh]

Racism against those guys advisor?

I doubt most people's problem with Haymon is race based. It's the fact that he HAD one of the best stables of any promoter in Boxing, TV dates on several networks, and wound up doing f*ck all with it, and wound up doing a huge disservice to those fighters, and the sport of Boxing in the process.

[IKSRTFO]

Crawford proved to me that he is a very good fighter against Postol.
He passes the eyeball test ... BUT, against who?

Prescott C
Sanabria D+
Klimov C-
Burns C
Gamboa B-
Beltran C
Dulorme B-
Jean C+
Lundy C
Postol B
Molina Jr C-
Diaz C+
Indongo C+

Take out Postol, and Broner wins these fights and looks just as good.

At 147, I will only respect Crawford when he fights the real fighters in the division,
Thurman, Garcia, Spence Jr, Porter ...

Instead, he'll beat up on the other good fighters at 147 and get ranked above the four fighters above somehow.

Take out Brook and Broner probably wins against Spence opponents also.

[BAD INTENTIONS]

Take out Brook and Broner probably wins against Spence opponents also.

Cool. That's not a point I'm trying to make.
They both have equal impressiveness on the "eyeball" test.
They both have weak resumes.
So why is one the "p4p #1" and the other barely top 10?

Just call it even.
And then look at them.

I think Spence KO.
I can't see how that's so ridiculous. But whatever.

Instead we get Spence/Peterson in JANUARY 2018.

[IKSRTFO]

Take out Brook and Broner probably wins against Spence opponents also.

Cool. That's not a point I'm trying to make.
They both have equal impressiveness on the "eyeball" test.
They both have weak resumes.
So why is one the "p4p #1" and the other barely top 10?

Just call it even.
And then look at them.

I think Spence KO.
I can't see how that's so ridiculous. But whatever.

Instead we get Spence/Peterson in JANUARY 2018.

Because one actually rules his division with all the titles. The other doesn't. Championships do matter.

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Could be a Terry Norris vs Leonard fight. Spence reminds me a bit of Norris...Crawford reminds me a little bit of Leonard. Probably a poor analogy.

Definitely a poor analogy. Even in the context of it you have the fighters wrong.

[BAD INTENTIONS]

Take out Brook and Broner probably wins against Spence opponents also.

Cool. That's not a point I'm trying to make.
They both have equal impressiveness on the "eyeball" test.
They both have weak resumes.
So why is one the "p4p #1" and the other barely top 10?

Just call it even.
And then look at them.

I think Spence KO.
I can't see how that's so ridiculous. But whatever.

Instead we get Spence/Peterson in JANUARY 2018.

Because one actually rules his division with all the titles. The other doesn't. Championships do matter.

OK. You are an idiot.

No one else read this dickhead giving legitimacy to the WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF?
Get off the forum. You clearly don't know shit about boxing.

[gilgamesh]

OK. You are an idiot.

No one else read this dickhead giving legitimacy to the WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF?
Get off the forum. You clearly don't know poo about boxing.

Such anger...such abrasiveness...somebody must have had themselves a few drinks tonight

It often makes me a little meaner as well.

[BAD INTENTIONS]

OK. You are an idiot.

No one else read this dickhead giving legitimacy to the WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF?
Get off the forum. You clearly don't know poo about boxing.

Such anger...such abrasiveness...somebody must have had themselves a few drinks tonight

It often makes me a little meaner as well.

No. How can anyone give legitimacy to the WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF?
It is an egregious point to make. To the point of lunacy.

That sounded sober enough.

[gilgamesh]

OK. You are an idiot.

No one else read this dickhead giving legitimacy to the WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF?
Get off the forum. You clearly don't know poo about boxing.

Such anger...such abrasiveness...somebody must have had themselves a few drinks tonight

It often makes me a little meaner as well.

No. How can anyone give legitimacy to the WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF?
It is an egregious point to make. To the point of lunacy.

That sounded sober enough.

I'm with ya on the Alphabet org hate, I can just sense the alcohol fueled anger in the post.

[Ossyrules]

u think its a 120-104 kind of fight? ya cus ray was really at his peak for that

No I don't, but Ray was only 34 at the time, and just came off fights against Duran and Hearns. SRL was a great fighter, but way over-rated in some ways. He was awesome in his short prime, maybe due to a lot of layoffs, but crashed hard much sooner than many too. Mayweather deserves more credit for the last half of his career, by far than SRL. At the same age 32+, Floyd would have schooled him if at the same weight.

Age for age holds little value. Fighters peak and dip at ages specific to them and there career. Floyd was able to fight at a high level for a long time granted. He was also the sharpest match maker about

[SaadOffTheDeck]

Such anger...such abrasiveness...somebody must have had themselves a few drinks tonight

It often makes me a little meaner as well.

No. How can anyone give legitimacy to the WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF?
It is an egregious point to make. To the point of lunacy.

That sounded sober enough.

I'm with ya on the Alphabet org hate, I can just sense the alcohol fueled anger in the post.

Nah, he's just a cock.

[BAD INTENTIONS]

No. How can anyone give legitimacy to the WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF?
It is an egregious point to make. To the point of lunacy.

That sounded sober enough.

I'm with ya on the Alphabet org hate, I can just sense the alcohol fueled anger in the post.

Nah, he's just a cock.

No, Gilgamesh is right.
Saad is wrong yet again. U should be able to recognize drunk posting? Right Saad.

But there is an alarming amount of people here giving legitimacy to the ABCs.
People who tried that used to get ROASTED.
Where are these “real boxing fans” coming from who think ABC titles matter?

[IKSRTFO]

Cool. That's not a point I'm trying to make.
They both have equal impressiveness on the "eyeball" test.
They both have weak resumes.
So why is one the "p4p #1" and the other barely top 10?

Just call it even.
And then look at them.

I think Spence KO.
I can't see how that's so ridiculous. But whatever.

Instead we get Spence/Peterson in JANUARY 2018.

Because one actually rules his division with all the titles. The other doesn't. Championships do matter.

OK. You are an idiot.

No one else read this dickhead giving legitimacy to the WBA, WBC, WBO and IBF?
Get off the forum. You clearly don't know poo about boxing.

It means he beat most of the the top guys in his division, something Spence hasn't done yet. It goes into the record books and he's one of the few undisputed champions. He is the lineal champion at 140. Has Spence won a lineal title?

And you don't tell me what to do on this forum unless you're going to enforce it.

[BAD INTENTIONS]

It means he beat most of the the top guys in his division

Not it does not.
Now that I'm not drunk,
let's calmly look at another unified champion, 3 titles in fact ...

TYSON FURY!!!

Titles, the number of titles, who is champion, means nothing.
HBO doesn't do this thing anymore of the top fighter in the division.
It used to be their best graphic imo.
Many times they would list, for example the consensus top 7 fighters in the division.

Sometimes all the title holders would be on the bottom row,
and clearly not as good as non-title holders.
HBO wouldn't even hide it. They used to just pack the bum title holders away in the corner.

[IKSRTFO]

It means he beat most of the the top guys in his division

Not it does not.
Now that I'm not drunk,
let's calmly look at another unified champion, 3 titles in fact ...

TYSON FURY!!!

Titles, the number of titles, who is champion, means nothing.
HBO doesn't do this thing anymore of the top fighter in the division.
It used to be their best graphic imo.
Many times they would list, for example the consensus top 7 fighters in the division.

Sometimes all the title holders would be on the bottom row,
and clearly not as good as non-title holders.
HBO wouldn't even hide it. They used to just pack the bum title holders away in the corner.

Tyson Fury never had all of the belts nor did he almost all of the top guys. Crawford did.

[Evander]

Spence is going to fight Lamont Peterson 35-3-1 Age 33 ... He'll be 34 later that month.
Lamont has been around the block.
He fought Tim Bradley in 2009 and lost by decision.
Beat Amir Khan in 2011 by decision.
Got stopped by Lucas Matthysse in 2013.
Lost an MD to Danny Garcia 2015.
Errol Spence on January 13th 2018 ...

It's been awhile since his last big fight but here he is again.
It looks like Spence could kick his ass with boxing six ways through Sunday, question is can Peterson force the action and have enough in him to ride out and perhaps share some of the rounds to do a late round push and inch it across the line.