crawfords career is boring

[DrDuke]

Lomachenko is fighting similar opposition. Fair play as long as you're down on him too.

Loma has the biggest scalps out of them both.

[Onetimeonly]

Lomachenko is fighting similar opposition. Fair play as long as you're down on him too.

Loma has the biggest scalps out of them both.

Not really.

[DrDuke]

Lomachenko is fighting similar opposition. Fair play as long as you're down on him too.

Loma has the biggest scalps out of them both.

Not really.

Rigo and Linares are better, than anyone Crawford faced.

[Onetimeonly]

Linares might be the best win they have, he also gave loma way more trouble than anyone's given Crawford. You can nitpick his resume as easy as Crawford's. They seem to ruin fighters. Rigo was nothing on that fight.

[DrDuke]

Linares might be the best win they have, he also gave loma way more trouble than anyone's given Crawford. You can nitpick his resume as easy as Crawford's. They seem to ruin fighters. Rigo was nothing on that fight.

Rigo was nothing on that fight, but he had been in p4p top-10 prior.

[Onetimeonly]

He hadn't been in a significant fight for years. Gambia had been on p4p lists too.

[DrDuke]

Gambia had been on p4p lists too.

Had he been in top-10?

[Ikopable]

I think people are looking at Crawford's career with the benefit of hindsight and because he simply destroyed the people who were considered his step-ups he gets no credit for them. Gamboa and Postol were both undefeated champions before their fights with Crawford, both represented a new challenge for Crawford and both were dispatched with relative ease.

Top Rank have recently put the full highlights of the Crawford V Postol fight on youtube and I recommend that everyone rewatch that fight to remind themselves of what Postol came in to the fight as; the man who had just knocked out Matthysse and trained by Freddie Roach with an Ukrainian amareur pedigree. Crawford gave up 3" of height, although their reaches are similar, and dominated him, totally & utterly, not one round can be scored for Postol in that fight.

Then remember that Gamboa was the next big thing when Bud knocked him out, yes his career has deteriorated from there but whether that comes down to a lack of mental attributes is a different discussion. At the time of the fight Gamboa was looking better than he ever had or ever did again.

Don't get me wrong, his resume won't be complete without a Thurman or a Spence on there but to make out like he's not had any big fights seems a little unfair. Had Matthysse or Pacquiao won their fights against Postol & Horn, then we might have seen him beat a marquee name but unfortunately the big names kept losing.

[NoScoutingReports]

I think people are looking at Crawford's career with the benefit of hindsight and because he simply destroyed the people who were considered his step-ups he gets no credit for them. Gamboa and Postol were both undefeated champions before their fights with Crawford, both represented a new challenge for Crawford and both were dispatched with relative ease.

Top Rank have recently put the full highlights of the Crawford V Postol fight on youtube and I recommend that everyone rewatch that fight to remind themselves of what Postol came in to the fight as; the man who had just knocked out Matthysse and trained by Freddie Roach with an Ukrainian amareur pedigree. Crawford gave up 3" of height, although their reaches are similar, and dominated him, totally & utterly, not one round can be scored for Postol in that fight.

Then remember that Gamboa was the next big thing when Bud knocked him out, yes his career has deteriorated from there but whether that comes down to a lack of mental attributes is a different discussion. At the time of the fight Gamboa was looking better than he ever had or ever did again.

Don't get me wrong, his resume won't be complete without a Thurman or a Spence on there but to make out like he's not had any big fights seems a little unfair. Had Matthysse or Pacquiao won their fights against Postol & Horn, then we might have seen him beat a marquee name but unfortunately the big names kept losing.

Totally agree

Fingers crossed Bud & Spence face off in the not too distant future.

[Onetimeonly]

I think people are looking at Crawford's career with the benefit of hindsight and because he simply destroyed the people who were considered his step-ups he gets no credit for them. Gamboa and Postol were both undefeated champions before their fights with Crawford, both represented a new challenge for Crawford and both were dispatched with relative ease.

Top Rank have recently put the full highlights of the Crawford V Postol fight on youtube and I recommend that everyone rewatch that fight to remind themselves of what Postol came in to the fight as; the man who had just knocked out Matthysse and trained by Freddie Roach with an Ukrainian amareur pedigree. Crawford gave up 3" of height, although their reaches are similar, and dominated him, totally & utterly, not one round can be scored for Postol in that fight.

Then remember that Gamboa was the next big thing when Bud knocked him out, yes his career has deteriorated from there but whether that comes down to a lack of mental attributes is a different discussion. At the time of the fight Gamboa was looking better than he ever had or ever did again.

Don't get me wrong, his resume won't be complete without a Thurman or a Spence on there but to make out like he's not had any big fights seems a little unfair. Had Matthysse or Pacquiao won their fights against Postol & Horn, then we might have seen him beat a marquee name but unfortunately the big names kept losing.

[jamamb]

dont agree, guy like postol was never a really that much of a lasting standout win (i always thought this and wasnt really hyped by the fight) and gamboa looked tiny in there . also its totally legit to look at what opponents do after, esp when there like postol and really did not have many good wins before (best other win 116-113 at home over lundy?) or are 5'4 and had been mostly at 126 lol

really craws a great fighter but indongo and postol as arguably biggest wins like 11 years and 34 fights in isnt really noteworthy. hes clearly lacking in defining notable wins relative to ability and horn, jess, and collazos a continuation of it

[EJA]

He needs to beat a guy like Spence. That is all

[Onetimeonly]

dont agree, guy like postol was never a really that much of a lasting standout win (i always thought this and wasnt really hyped by the fight) and gamboa looked tiny in there . also its totally legit to look at what opponents do after, esp when there like postol and really did not have many good wins before (best other win 116-113 at home over lundy?) or are 5'4 and had been mostly at 126 lol

really craws a great fighter but indongo and postol as arguably biggest wins like 11 years and 34 fights in isnt really noteworthy. hes clearly lacking in defining notable wins relative to ability and horn, jess, and collazos a continuation of it

It's required to use hindsight to evaluate a resume. It's bullshit to do it in regards to matchmaking.

[jamamb]

He needs to beat a guy like Spence. That is all

i would even rate thurman, garcia, porter as career best wins. that would be a start if not spence right away.

[jamamb]

im not really knocking craws matchmaking below 147, basically there i think he really did all he could in those divisions , which werent strong at the time, and a unification vs postol made sense. but nevertheless i think whatever the reason hes never really managed a type of standout win that matches his talent and i feel he needs much more to define him and really leave a mark.

now at 147 there are some real good fighters and there is more to work with. his matchmaking at 147 has left a lot still to be desired though

[Onetimeonly]

Loma needs one too.

[jamamb]

maybe mate? though thats not really any baring on crawfords situation , plus lomas been a pro just 4 years and like 12 fights and imo has already beaten opponents better then anyone ters faced

plus i think craw is better then loma and is being more short changed legacy wise by not getting big fights

[Onetimeonly]

maybe mate? though thats not really any baring on crawfords situation , plus lomas been a pro just 4 years and like 12 fights and imo has already beaten opponents better then anyone ters faced

plus i think craw is better then loma and is being more short changed legacy wise by not getting big fights

Maybe? Cmon, be consistent.

[jamamb]

lol im being perfectly consistent, and as i said lomas been a pro 4 years/12-13 fights and already fought at a higher level despite being the lesser fighter, strange guy to pick for some 'hypicrite!' stuff, lomas pushed the pace like very very few ever have

his career has no baring on crawfords either, im not sure why you want to deflect the issue

[Onetimeonly]

Deflect what issue? That you find him boring? That's an opinion. Loma and bud are at the same trajectory and point of their careers. They're both top 5 p4p and they both lack a big win that you desire. One of them you go on about with the exact same post every time their name is mentioned, the other you have never mentioned it. Seems personal.

[jamamb]

wtf man, 'personal'

nah, not at all, and already stated what i see as the difference anyway, though maybe you cant read that. i dont even post about craw that much tbh

[Onetimeonly]

I read it, it's bullshit. They're both in the same spot. With Bob arum and in the same divisions. They both would fight anyone. Sometimes it works that way. Bud and Bob wanted Manny at 47, PAC wanted nothing to do with it even if he didn't get screwed. McCallum and Chavez had similar careers, Taylor bs aside. I said personal because I've read the same point from you in at least a dozen threads and now you've started one with the same thing. You're not even wrong but if it isn't personal it's well beyond the dead horse lane.

[jamamb]

i dont post about craw nearly as much or as widely as you think i do, seriously man dozens of threads ? and getting personal? lololol

since you 4 some reason want to make this about loma.....to me its fery different when one guys been pro less then half the time and a third of the fights yet has already fought at a higher level. if lomas career went on another 6 years and had yet to go any higher, of course id be losing interest too, but for now at 4 years hes been on an unreal pace from the start, just not the same career profile at all, plus like i said i think craw has more to offer then him

[Onetimeonly]

His level hasn't been any higher. Salido and Linares are the two best, after that it's the same stuff. They both fight the best guys they can get in the ring. You post about Crawford in any thread of his. With the same post. Guarantee you've made it a dozen times.

[jamamb]

checking my crawford posts, its basically just a few threads since benavidez ive posted anything like this in, and like half the craw threads ive posted in are to say that i think hes best american boxer, has better skills then loma, best in the world etc

your getting a bit strange mate