BoxRec

pac & money are gone, what your list of top ww, regardless of who they fought, simply who you feel are the best. even with the departue of the big 2, still a prety loaded division.

1. spence
2. brook
3. thurman
4. porter
5. garcia
6. broner
7. bradley
8. peterson
9. vargas
10. vasquez

bradley and peterson pile up points all night on broner.
his only chance would be if they got careless, which has happened, before.
i'm not even sure broner could beat berto or khan.
good news is that we will have thurman-porter soon and brook-vargas later
in the summer. spence hasn't earned his place on top, yet. he has potential.

How can they be ranked when they don't fight each other and barely fight any good opposition ???

boxing_rocks wrote:How can they be ranked when they don't fight each other and barely fight any good opposition ???

we rank them...at least we can do this, fantasy. boxing is the only sport in the world where reality and fantasy dont match, wounder what would happen if real madrid never wanted to face fc barcelona or federer djokovic

sucracristo wrote:bradley and peterson pile up points all night on broner.
his only chance would be if they got careless, which has happened, before.
i'm not even sure broner could beat berto or khan.
good news is that we will have thurman-porter soon and brook-vargas later
in the summer. spence hasn't earned his place on top, yet. he has potential.

spence beats anybody...what have the others proved, brook proved he could beat a slugger with b level skills in porter and thurman proved he can beat a grandpa in guerrero, well that doesnt surprise me, as i am concerned, all spence, thurman and brook proved nothing, none of them ever faced a quality, or an elite puncher in his prime, they are all prety much the same record wise, just spences skills and athletism surpase any other boxer at ww, thats why i have him #1

Spence!

Chepppaaa wrote: spence beats anybody

spence is definitely the #1 guy for the top guys to avoid, but he is angling
himself toward mandatory position this year so that can't last forever. the
only way you know how somebody compares to the top guys is to put him
in with them. it doesn't really matter what he does against gatekeepers
relative to others. algieri's best win was against provo at 140, where he
unarguably outworked provo but many feel the one or two hard punches
per round provo was throwing/landing were enough to deserve the win. that
is algieri's level. he was still an undefeated champ one division down, former
kickboxing champ with ambercrombie and fitch model appearance, so he was
still a semi-legit looking opponent for a macao card featuring pac in front of
asian high rollers, but we saw pac mop the floor with him. he put up a competitive
fight against khan, who maybe looked better than he really was against alexander,
considering alexander's next fight. looking back i think khan is bordeline top 10
at welter, probably more of a top 15 guy. for me that puts algieri at the point he
fought spence a top 20 welter at best, but maybe top 10 at light welter. it doesn't
really matter to me what spence did to algieri at that point relative to pac (who
dominated him in different way) and khan. algieri was a known quantity and
spence had all the physical advantages and international amateur experience
before going pro and walked through algieri. when spence beats even a berto,
guerrero, broner, ali, mosely, chaves, or someone in that range i'll figure out
where he belongs in the top 5 depending on how he does it.

sucracristo wrote:bradley and peterson pile up points all night on broner.
his only chance would be if they got careless, which has happened, before.
i'm not even sure broner could beat berto or khan.
good news is that we will have thurman-porter soon and brook-vargas later
in the summer. spence hasn't earned his place on top, yet. he has potential.

Broner is not top 10. He never was.

i bet chaves would fight spence if the price was right.

sucracristo wrote:

Chepppaaa wrote: spence beats anybody

spence is definitely the #1 guy for the top guys to avoid, but he is angling
himself toward mandatory position this year so that can't last forever. the
only way you know how somebody compares to the top guys is to put him
in with them. it doesn't really matter what he does against gatekeepers
relative to others. algieri's best win was against provo at 140, where he
unarguably outworked provo but many feel the one or two hard punches
per round provo was throwing/landing were enough to deserve the win. that
is algieri's level. he was still an undefeated champ one division down, former
kickboxing champ with ambercrombie and fitch model appearance, so he was
still a semi-legit looking opponent for a macao card featuring pac in front of
asian high rollers, but we saw pac mop the floor with him. he put up a competitive
fight against khan, who maybe looked better than he really was against alexander,
considering alexander's next fight. looking back i think khan is bordeline top 10
at welter, probably more of a top 15 guy. for me that puts algieri at the point he
fought spence a top 20 welter at best, but maybe top 10 at light welter. it doesn't
really matter to me what spence did to algieri at that point relative to pac (who
dominated him in different way) and khan. algieri was a known quantity and
spence had all the physical advantages and international amateur experience
before going pro and walked through algieri. when spence beats even a berto,
guerrero, broner, ali, mosely, chaves, or someone in that range i'll figure out
where he belongs in the top 5 depending on how he does it.

Man forget all this in depth rational it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that Spence Jr is the MAN RIGHT NOW.

Yeah he's not the official champion yet but you know for 100% it's coming he's way too skilled and brutal. Just like when Tyson was beating guys

like Marvis Frazier & Mitch Green you knew it was only a matter of time lol it's the same way with Errol Spence. He's young, level headed very

level headed in fact, extremely polished, and the best finisher in boxing today. There is nothing else he needs to show me I know what I am looking

at! Just like back in 2012 I was raving about Canelo Alvarez and many on this same forum bashed me saying he's too green and limited NOW look

at him he's the #1 draw in boxing! Don't ever doubt me!

I'd prolly say from the list provided at this current stage it's between Thurman and Bradley for top spot, but that's sure to change in near future I would imagine.
147 has almost always been a hot division with snipers all over the place, you got to be on your game if the plan is to fight the best at Welterweight.

bnovelist wrote:Man forget all this in depth rational

of all people on here to say something like that, lol. pot kettle

Thurman v Porter is a big fight.
Porter can be straight on at times, will that benefit or hamper him is a good question.
Thurman has some pop to his punches and can let it go, Keith's all round boxing ability is steady at high level but unconvincing enough to stake a solid claim as number 1.
Can Porter take Thurman's big shots early ... I think Porter has shown enough to suggest he could barge his way through if the chin holds up, if Thurman keeps his cool racks up the points and Porter hasn't got enough for a stoppage then it might be enough.

Thurman
Spence
Garcia
Chaves
Porter
Bradley
Vargas
Brook
Guerrero
Vasquez

Thurman is everything you want to see in a fighter.
Poise, positioning, surgerical precision, technical ability, efficiency, intelligence and power.
I never saw Charles Burley fight, but judging from those who avoided him (including the great Ray Robinson) and those who praised him. You would have to conclude he was one of the best to ever lace gloves.
Burley is a forgotten great due to the fact he couldn't get those career defining fights.
If not for the fact Thurman is a decade younger than Mayweather and Pacquiao his career may have followed a similar path to that of Burley's.
Avoided and ignored.

I may have missed Burley in his pomp, but I won't miss Thurman. Thurman is a hardcore fight fan's dream.