Page 2 of 2
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 11:28
by gilgamesh
Jip wrote:Crawford is a running pus:&y. Tito would chase land and if tc decide to bang tito would tko him
Don't ever call yourself an expert again. You don't know sh*t about boxing.
It's almost as if you've never actually seen Crawford fight.
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 11:40
by Ossyrules
Any fantasy fight with Crawford and Trinidad surely should be discussed at 147
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 11:42
by gilgamesh
Ossyrules wrote:Any fantasy fight with Crawford and Trinidad surely should be discussed at 147
Shouldn't be discussed at all yet IMO. Crawford still hasnt' moved up to Welterweight, Tito was never relevant at 140 pounds. There still hasn't been a meeting ground for them to fight yet.
Crawford will ultimately wind up competing at Welterweight in the near future though I'm sure.
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 11:43
by Ossyrules
gilgamesh wrote:Ossyrules wrote:Any fantasy fight with Crawford and Trinidad surely should be discussed at 147
Shouldn't be discussed at all yet IMO. Crawford still hasnt' moved up to Welterweight, Tito was never relevant at 140 pounds. There still hasn't been a meeting ground for them to fight yet.
Crawford will ultimately wind up competing at Welterweight in the near future though I'm sure.
You're right, but it's only a fantasy fight, it's not unreasonable to conceive what Crawford would be like at 147
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 11:45
by gilgamesh
Ossyrules wrote:gilgamesh wrote:Ossyrules wrote:Any fantasy fight with Crawford and Trinidad surely should be discussed at 147
Shouldn't be discussed at all yet IMO. Crawford still hasnt' moved up to Welterweight, Tito was never relevant at 140 pounds. There still hasn't been a meeting ground for them to fight yet.
Crawford will ultimately wind up competing at Welterweight in the near future though I'm sure.
You're right, but it's only a fantasy fight, it's not unreasonable to conceive what Crawford would be like at 147
Yeah, but I'd still like to see how he actually does first. You never can tell sometimes it seems like a guy will surely be a success at the next weight class up and sometimes he goes up there and finds it's a bridge too far for him. I doubt that'll be the case with Crawford, but it wouldn't be the first time that things didn't go as planned for a fighter.
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 11:46
by Ossyrules
gilgamesh wrote:Ossyrules wrote:gilgamesh wrote:
Shouldn't be discussed at all yet IMO. Crawford still hasnt' moved up to Welterweight, Tito was never relevant at 140 pounds. There still hasn't been a meeting ground for them to fight yet.
Crawford will ultimately wind up competing at Welterweight in the near future though I'm sure.
You're right, but it's only a fantasy fight, it's not unreasonable to conceive what Crawford would be like at 147
I don't disagree
Yeah, but I'd still like to see how he actually does first. You never can tell sometimes it seems like a guy will surely be a success at the next weight class up and sometimes he goes up there and finds it's a bridge too far for him. I doubt that'll be the case with Crawford, but it wouldn't be the first time that things didn't go as planned for a fighter.
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 13:16
by Jip
True experts know future.
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 13:44
by Counter-puncher
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 14:05
by Lackeos
This started out as a what-if thread, and ended-up serving as proof that Jip is an idiot. There is a reason that virtually all boxers are managed as slowly as they are. It's because they would lose if they went the ultra fast route. Even Lomachenko, who had like 400 amateur fights, lost to Salido when he tried to step-up too soon; and Lomachenko is one of the only modern prospects to get pushed that fast. Felix Trinidad was only 51-6 as an amateur, and only 17 years old when he was 7-0. He was no Lomachenko as far as professional readiness goes. Lomachenko was 25 when he turned pro, btw.
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 14:13
by Jip
Floyd defeated good guys like manfredo when floyd didnt have many fights. Jones looked like a atg in his debut fight. Usyk defeated glowacki (the #1 cw), when usyk only had 9 fights. Rigo beat donaire (top 3 p4p at the time), when had like 13 fights. Loma had one complicated night against a guy who didnt make weight and came to the ring as a light welterweight. Also many say loma won. Fu:..÷k experience. Talent+training wins fights. Not the amount of fights on your record.
I am amongs the biggest experts on this forum, top 5. You, watch table tennis and eat some cereals!
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 14:37
by Ossyrules
Jip wrote:Floyd defeated good guys like manfredo when floyd didnt have many fights. Jones looked like a atg in his debut fight. Usyk defeated glowacki (the #1 cw), when usyk only had 9 fights. Rigo beat donaire (top 3 p4p at the time), when had like 13 fights. Loma had one complicated night against a guy who didnt make weight and came to the ring as a light welterweight. Also many say loma won. Fu:..÷k experience. Talent+training wins fights. Not the amount of fights on your record.
I am amongs the biggest experts on this forum, top 5. You, watch table tennis and eat some cereals!
What subject on you an expert on
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 15:52
by Lackeos
Jip wrote:Floyd defeated good guys like manfredo when floyd didnt have many fights. Jones looked like a atg in his debut fight. Usyk defeated glowacki (the #1 cw), when usyk only had 9 fights. Rigo beat donaire (top 3 p4p at the time), when had like 13 fights. Loma had one complicated night against a guy who didnt make weight and came to the ring as a light welterweight. Also many say loma won. Fu:..÷k experience. Talent+training wins fights. Not the amount of fights on your record.
I am amongs the biggest experts on this forum, top 5. You, watch table tennis and eat some cereals!
Not enough of an expert to know what age these guys turned pro and how many fights they had. You're basically like "17-year-old with a modicum of amateur experience would be elite in his 7th pro fight. As evidence, I present to you a bunch of guys who turned pro in their mid 20's and had hundreds of pro fights each."
Usyk: 350 amateur fights, Olympic gold medal, debuted age 26
Rigondeaux: 475 amateur fights, Olympic gold medals, debuted age 28
Lomachenko: 397 amateur fights, Olympic gold medals, debuted age 25
RJJ: 134 amateur fights, Olympic silver medal (most agree should've been gold), debuted age 20, didn't fight anyone with a boxrec rating greater than 74 (i.e. no one in the top 25)
Mayweather: didn't fight anyone with a boxrec rating greater than 12 in his first 7 fights (i.e. no one in the top 450). Pretty bad example.
Trinidad: 57 amateur fights, debuted age 17, no amateur accomplishments
Why could you not see that these were all bad examples? RJJ was probably your closest attempt, but still pretty far off. Can you name someone who debuted closer to the age 17 ballpark, has less than 100 amateur fights, no Olympic medals, and actually beat someone near Terrence Crawford's caliber (i.e. divisional #1, top 10 p4p) in their first 9 fights? If you could come up with even just one example in the entire history of boxing would be pretty impressive.
Oh, one more thing. A boxing expert wouldn't have listed Trinidad as a light welterweight. That's something a non-expert prone to errors would do.
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 17:00
by ValMar
Lackeos wrote:Jip wrote:Floyd defeated good guys like manfredo when floyd didnt have many fights. Jones looked like a atg in his debut fight. Usyk defeated glowacki (the #1 cw), when usyk only had 9 fights. Rigo beat donaire (top 3 p4p at the time), when had like 13 fights. Loma had one complicated night against a guy who didnt make weight and came to the ring as a light welterweight. Also many say loma won. Fu:..÷k experience. Talent+training wins fights. Not the amount of fights on your record.
I am amongs the biggest experts on this forum, top 5. You, watch table tennis and eat some cereals!
Not enough of an expert to know what age these guys turned pro and how many fights they had. You're basically like "17-year-old with a modicum of amateur experience would be elite in his 7th pro fight. As evidence, I present to you a bunch of guys who turned pro in their mid 20's and had hundreds of pro fights each."
Usyk: 350 amateur fights, Olympic gold medal, debuted age 26
Rigondeaux: 475 amateur fights, Olympic gold medals, debuted age 28
Lomachenko: 397 amateur fights, Olympic gold medals, debuted age 25
RJJ: 134 amateur fights, Olympic silver medal (most agree should've been gold), debuted age 20, didn't fight anyone with a boxrec rating greater than 74 (i.e. no one in the top 25)
Mayweather: didn't fight anyone with a boxrec rating greater than 12 in his first 7 fights (i.e. no one in the top 450). Pretty bad example.
Trinidad: 57 amateur fights, debuted age 17, no amateur accomplishments
Why could you not see that these were all bad examples? RJJ was probably your closest attempt, but still pretty far off. Can you name someone who debuted closer to the age 17 ballpark, has less than 100 amateur fights, no Olympic medals, and actually beat someone near Terrence Crawford's caliber (i.e. divisional #1, top 10 p4p) in their first 9 fights? If you could come up with even just one example in the entire history of boxing would be pretty impressive.
Oh, one more thing. A boxing expert wouldn't have listed Trinidad as a light welterweight. That's something a non-expert prone to errors would do.
Tyson was very young, without solid amateur experience, without Olympic medals, but I am not sure on which level were his opponents in his first ten fights, and I do not want to use Google..........
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 17:30
by SaadOffTheDeck
Ossyrules wrote:Any fantasy fight with Crawford and Trinidad surely should be discussed at 147
Tito would have no more than the proverbial punchers chance.
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 17:32
by SaadOffTheDeck
ValMar wrote:Lackeos wrote:Jip wrote:Floyd defeated good guys like manfredo when floyd didnt have many fights. Jones looked like a atg in his debut fight. Usyk defeated glowacki (the #1 cw), when usyk only had 9 fights. Rigo beat donaire (top 3 p4p at the time), when had like 13 fights. Loma had one complicated night against a guy who didnt make weight and came to the ring as a light welterweight. Also many say loma won. Fu:..÷k experience. Talent+training wins fights. Not the amount of fights on your record.
I am amongs the biggest experts on this forum, top 5. You, watch table tennis and eat some cereals!
Not enough of an expert to know what age these guys turned pro and how many fights they had. You're basically like "17-year-old with a modicum of amateur experience would be elite in his 7th pro fight. As evidence, I present to you a bunch of guys who turned pro in their mid 20's and had hundreds of pro fights each."
Usyk: 350 amateur fights, Olympic gold medal, debuted age 26
Rigondeaux: 475 amateur fights, Olympic gold medals, debuted age 28
Lomachenko: 397 amateur fights, Olympic gold medals, debuted age 25
RJJ: 134 amateur fights, Olympic silver medal (most agree should've been gold), debuted age 20, didn't fight anyone with a boxrec rating greater than 74 (i.e. no one in the top 25)
Mayweather: didn't fight anyone with a boxrec rating greater than 12 in his first 7 fights (i.e. no one in the top 450). Pretty bad example.
Trinidad: 57 amateur fights, debuted age 17, no amateur accomplishments
Why could you not see that these were all bad examples? RJJ was probably your closest attempt, but still pretty far off. Can you name someone who debuted closer to the age 17 ballpark, has less than 100 amateur fights, no Olympic medals, and actually beat someone near Terrence Crawford's caliber (i.e. divisional #1, top 10 p4p) in their first 9 fights? If you could come up with even just one example in the entire history of boxing would be pretty impressive.
Oh, one more thing. A boxing expert wouldn't have listed Trinidad as a light welterweight. That's something a non-expert prone to errors would do.
Tyson was very young, without solid amateur experience, without Olympic medals, but I am not sure on which level were his opponents in his first ten fights, and I do not want to use Google..........
Tyson almost made the Olympics, his first opponent of note in the pros was either Jesse Ferguson or Marvis Frazier. I don't remember which one, but it was his 16th or 17th fight. He also was a Heavyweight the whole time, so it really doesn't land anyway.
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 17:39
by Counter-puncher
Lackeos wrote:Jip wrote:Floyd defeated good guys like manfredo when floyd didnt have many fights. Jones looked like a atg in his debut fight. Usyk defeated glowacki (the #1 cw), when usyk only had 9 fights. Rigo beat donaire (top 3 p4p at the time), when had like 13 fights. Loma had one complicated night against a guy who didnt make weight and came to the ring as a light welterweight. Also many say loma won. Fu:..÷k experience. Talent+training wins fights. Not the amount of fights on your record.
I am amongs the biggest experts on this forum, top 5. You, watch table tennis and eat some cereals!
Not enough of an expert to know what age these guys turned pro and how many fights they had. You're basically like "17-year-old with a modicum of amateur experience would be elite in his 7th pro fight. As evidence, I present to you a bunch of guys who turned pro in their mid 20's and had hundreds of pro fights each."
Usyk: 350 amateur fights, Olympic gold medal, debuted age 26
Rigondeaux: 475 amateur fights, Olympic gold medals, debuted age 28
Lomachenko: 397 amateur fights, Olympic gold medals, debuted age 25
RJJ: 134 amateur fights, Olympic silver medal (most agree should've been gold), debuted age 20, didn't fight anyone with a boxrec rating greater than 74 (i.e. no one in the top 25)
Mayweather: didn't fight anyone with a boxrec rating greater than 12 in his first 7 fights (i.e. no one in the top 450). Pretty bad example.
Trinidad: 57 amateur fights, debuted age 17, no amateur accomplishments
Why could you not see that these were all bad examples? RJJ was probably your closest attempt, but still pretty far off. Can you name someone who debuted closer to the age 17 ballpark, has less than 100 amateur fights, no Olympic medals, and actually beat someone near Terrence Crawford's caliber (i.e. divisional #1, top 10 p4p) in their first 9 fights? If you could come up with even just one example in the entire history of boxing would be pretty impressive.
Oh, one more thing. A boxing expert wouldn't have listed Trinidad as a light welterweight. That's something a non-expert prone to errors would do.
Yeah, but.... you eat cereals!
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 18:10
by Lackeos
ValMar wrote:Lackeos wrote:Jip wrote:Floyd defeated good guys like manfredo when floyd didnt have many fights. Jones looked like a atg in his debut fight. Usyk defeated glowacki (the #1 cw), when usyk only had 9 fights. Rigo beat donaire (top 3 p4p at the time), when had like 13 fights. Loma had one complicated night against a guy who didnt make weight and came to the ring as a light welterweight. Also many say loma won. Fu:..÷k experience. Talent+training wins fights. Not the amount of fights on your record.
I am amongs the biggest experts on this forum, top 5. You, watch table tennis and eat some cereals!
Not enough of an expert to know what age these guys turned pro and how many fights they had. You're basically like "17-year-old with a modicum of amateur experience would be elite in his 7th pro fight. As evidence, I present to you a bunch of guys who turned pro in their mid 20's and had hundreds of pro fights each."
Usyk: 350 amateur fights, Olympic gold medal, debuted age 26
Rigondeaux: 475 amateur fights, Olympic gold medals, debuted age 28
Lomachenko: 397 amateur fights, Olympic gold medals, debuted age 25
RJJ: 134 amateur fights, Olympic silver medal (most agree should've been gold), debuted age 20, didn't fight anyone with a boxrec rating greater than 74 (i.e. no one in the top 25)
Mayweather: didn't fight anyone with a boxrec rating greater than 12 in his first 7 fights (i.e. no one in the top 450). Pretty bad example.
Trinidad: 57 amateur fights, debuted age 17, no amateur accomplishments
Why could you not see that these were all bad examples? RJJ was probably your closest attempt, but still pretty far off. Can you name someone who debuted closer to the age 17 ballpark, has less than 100 amateur fights, no Olympic medals, and actually beat someone near Terrence Crawford's caliber (i.e. divisional #1, top 10 p4p) in their first 9 fights? If you could come up with even just one example in the entire history of boxing would be pretty impressive.
Oh, one more thing. A boxing expert wouldn't have listed Trinidad as a light welterweight. That's something a non-expert prone to errors would do.
Tyson was very young, without solid amateur experience, without Olympic medals, but I am not sure on which level were his opponents in his first ten fights, and I do not want to use Google..........
Tyson is not a terrible example aside from the fact that his best opponent in his first 10 fights had a boxrec rating of 22 and Terence Crawford has a boxrec rating of 883. I think most everybody would universally argue that Crawford is better p4p than Bonecrusher Smith; but whether they would or they wouldn't, Bonecrusher Smith was Tyson's 29th professional opponent.
Re: How wouldve Crawford done against past 140 greats
Posted: 01 Jul 2017, 18:15
by Counter-puncher
I note the absence of any refutation of the charges of cereal-eating. Case closed m'lud
