Excellent fighter, would have loved to see him versus someone like Crawford but it will likely never happen. Let him dominate 140 lbs, no need to move from there for a while.
Well, Usyk's resumes both: am and pro for a lot of ppl looks far more impressive than Spence Jr resume. 1. Usyk's amateur accomplishments are levels above Spence Jr amateur achievements and there I can judge only bare facts. 2. Usyk was Undisputed at CW and also had The Ring belt, he had been ranked as champion or No1 in division by all most well known ranking boards and orgs, also websites. 4 most well known western pro boxing orgs ranked him as their champ, boxrec etc had ranked him as No1 and The Ring, US based boxing magazine, older than majority of pro boxing orgs awarded him their belt. The Ring is thing well known in US before WW2 and before even WBA and WBC had turned into notable institutions. Usyk had been ranked and awarded belts by western based organisations. He was Undisputed and had also The Ring Belt at CW. Taking in account that like bunch with very notable US boxers he was also Olympic Gold medalist and this was not only 1 thing that made him into real amateur superstar. He had World Championship bronze medal and being humble hardworking stud had improved after this and proved that he is able to get Gold Medal at World Championship, not only in Oly Games. Usyk had fought 3 undefeated pro boxing champions in their physical prime on foreign soil. This ofc adds to his legacy that he had successful title defenses vs boxers on foreign soil and Spence Jr might reach his legacy if he will do successful defense for all 5 belts on line vs U.K boxer in U.K. Usyk was successful there and then damn, excuses like weak era and weak division popped up in the internet. Of course Usyk does have flaws but if he was from US he had been worshiped here all day and night, threads about him had been created in all big forums on daily basis and so on. __________ While Spence Jr really is very good, highly talented boxer and he likes me a lot despite he too does have flaws. No one is ideal. The biggest problems for him regards to legacy value is that he today does have 2 belts from 4, lets be more open minded and include The Ring here , 5 belts, he does have 2 belts today. He does not unify titles further. If Spence Jr had turned into an Undisputed and had fought also on foreign soil+ had also The Ring belt in his division he had the same legacy as Usyk today does have. No and also below Taylor too and a lot of other boxers. Lopez vs Loma fight was ugly for casual fans, not that much like old, rich and not " hungry " Wlad vs Fury but magnitude close to this big fight.
That's how it should be unfortunately some of these rankings don't do that and just follow the money/frauds. Canelo shouldn't be in the top 5 based on his mediocre at best wins at 168 (against weak suspect opposition) and due to the fact he was outboxed By Golovkin not once but twice... And he got a gift against Lara
Win or lose ?he hasn’t lost yet) I respect his willingness to fight anyone at his weight. No ducking or smack talking, no Twitter battles he doesn’t intend to finish in the ring. He’s a great boxer and I think he will get even better with time, but I respect his courage more than his ability. He can do it all, box, slug, he has a mean streak but is always in control, and good stamina. One of the most exciting boxers in the sport and I hope he gets the recognition he deserves. Other big names are fighting lesser opponents and getting all the PFP love and headlines. Josh should get extra consideration because he always fights the best guy willing to fight him not the easiest opponent or a washed up old guy to get a name on his resume. He is a good fundamental fighter, has athleticism and good size for his weight. Boxing needs more guys like Taylor.
Taylor's resume, offensive arsenal, and gritty determination are by some measure superior to Saunders.
Taylor is very skilled. Is he as skilled as Loma no but no one in the game is as skilled as Loma who is a freakish talent and like Loma he's been on a very steep learning curve and the KOs generally tend to dry up when you're fighting at the very top level 15-0 Ohara Davies in his 10th fight 39-5 Miguel Vazquez in his 11th - former IBF 135 champ 29-1 Postol in his 13th - former WBC champ 22-0 Ryan Martin in his 14th 19-0 Baranchyk in his 15th - IBF champ 24-0 Prograis in his 16th - WBA champ 16-0 Khongsong in his 17th 26-0 JCR in his 18th - unified WBC and WBO champ That's a hell of a resume and very diverse set of styles to overcome and genuine punchers for someone of just 18 fights and they all had more fights than him. If he had more experience and hadn't been on such a steep learning curve he would've beaten some of the ones he struggled with more decisively Postol is Crawford's best win in 37 fights and Taylor was just 12-0 when he fought him Even long reigning lightweight champ Vazquez had only suffered one legitimate loss in just under a decade when Taylor fought him because his SD loss against Bey was a robbery. With the exception of his loss against Algenis Mendez, Vazquez last legit loss was in 2008 against Clenelo and the one prior to that was in 2007 to Tim Bradley Don't get me wrong, Vazquez was past his prime but the only fighters to legitimately beat him prior to 10-0 Taylor doing so were Clenelo, Bradley and Mendez and Taylor was the first to stop him Lovely skills This content is protected This content is protected
This is good because Loma had too long mileage in am ranks. I hope that Taylor does not have too long mileage under belt and will be smart. Not to fight in US, do his mandatory lad at 140 lbs etc.
Crawford's best win is Postol but it's Taylor's third best win only 18 fights in. Crawford's résumé is an embarrassment and your ranking of him so far above his superiors is ridiculous.
No, I'm serious. Mikey Garcia has been champ in four weight classes, is fighting in his fifth. That's the technical definition of being a pound for pound fighter. People are disputing whether Terence Crawford deserves to be considered above Taylor when he's champ in his third weight class? Taylor is still in his first? What are we even talking about here? What has Taylor really achieved? He unified the titles in a graveyard division? So what? Crawford did the same thing four years ago also without fighting anybody important. "The manner he did it?" You mean the super series? The thing designed to help any boxer do that? Seems more like a Sauerland and Schaefer accomplishment to transcend promotional bull****. I'll name you sixteen more guys who could do what Taylor did if they had the same opportunity. Back in the day, it was the norm. The eighteen fight thing is misleading, the same as it is with Lomachenko, Usyk, Beterbiev, etc. He didn't turn pro until he was twenty-four with over 150 amateur fights. How many fights did he have in the World Boxing Series? You have to grade that on a curve. He had plenty of experience. Guys like Wilfred Benitez winning the title at 17 are so much more impressive. I think we ought to consider the number of ring rounds they have in experience rather than professional fights. Duran had the title at 21. Sure it took him 29 pro fights, but he only had about 20 amateur bouts. His pro career had been 125 rounds since he mostly got KO1s and KO2s. I don't think I'm asking too much to when I expect people to defend their opinions. They care enough to assert something but not to explain it. It's ****ing lazy. To everybody who's saying that Taylor belongs in your top ten, tell us who else is in that list so we know who you are leaving out, or have some idea of how you came to that conclusion. They are leaving all their premises and context unstated. Why shouldn't Joshua be p4p ahead of Taylor? He had three titles in twenty fights and actually had to fight the old p4p long reigning champ for them. Whyte's as good as anyone Taylor's fought and Povetkin is better. They're both single division champions but Joshua has twice as many victories in title fights, hence more accomplished. Joshua is also more physically gifted with impressive power and athleticism for his size. Davis isn't as technical or accomplished, so I'm rating him above Taylor entirely based upon his physical ability. He's faster and stronger, and that counts for a lot in pound for pound status. Both are undefeated, and have defeated every man to stand in front of them, but Taylor has a 72% knockout rate to Davis' 96%. Strength is important. I don't think that Joshua, Beterbiev, Golovkin, Lopez, Inoue, Donaire, or Wangek would have anything approaching their levels of success in the sport without their massive power advantages. Their claims to p4p supremacy rest largely on how hard they can hit. You can build a whole career around that one trait, such as David Lemieux, Joe Smith, or Deontay Wilder have. That's why I place Davis so high. Saunders is not as accomplished as Taylor but their skillset is the same. I see them as the same thing. If Taylor had stepped up to Crawford or possibly Spence then I foresee him being swatted down by the physically superior fighters the same as Saunders was.
It's not based on resume. This isn't a list of accomplishment. It's a ranking of skill. How I expect them to perform not how they have in the past. You don't see Manny Pacquiao or Donaire in my top 18 do you? If you want to make your list based on resume while ignoring Taylor's lack of any outstanding physical qualities then you are entitled to. Personally, I think this is a sport, and I rate the most gifted athletes at the top.
I think that he shows high ring IQ and excellent technique even if he's not super physically gifted. Usyk clearing out cruiserweight against the names he did really impressed me for the same reasons everyone is championing Taylor for in this thread. I also think it's notable that he's moved up to heavyweight where he is undersized to challenge himself. Maybe, I'll see Taylor in a similar light if he moves up and takes the test. I have Saunders in there because he's got better technique and Ring IQ. I've long been impressed with Saunders in spite of his lack of physical gifts. He managed to hang with Canelo on even terms right up until that bone crunching injury. That's a lot more than I expected from him. His stock rose in my estimation off of that recent loss. The Lemieux thing everyone pissed their pants about was good but you can't judge a guy off of one performance, especially when it's a career best against a guy specially built for you to shine against. I don't think that I have Saunders unreasonably high. He's not top ten, but I'd say that he's skilled and proven to a certain extent. Even though he'd faced fairly light opposition, you could tell a few things about him, kind of like Andrade. Like I've already said, my list isn't as heavily weighted toward resume as some people's. I think the resume crew are making critical mistakes both in the weight that they give to the resume as well as to how they assess a resume, but that's up to them. Lopez is where he is because he hasn't impressed me. Did you think that Salido deserved pound for pound accolades when he beat Lomachenko? Or did you think that he got lucky, fought a smart fight, and wouldn't get lucky again? I'm not talking about Ryan Garcia. I'm talking about Mikey, the four weight champion ranked in his fifth, the one everyone was splooging themselves over saying that he was top ten up until Spence spanked him.
So multiple weight classes is your thing? Right. Why do u have Joshua, Spence, Bivol etc over Garcia & Davis then? Joshua?! He literally had a brain fart on his American debut & got sparked by a plum pudding & then ran from the same guy who decided to eat his own body weight weekly in training for the rematch.. that's P4P worthy is it? As for Garcia, he's fought TWICE since 2018 ffs.. a loss to spence & a win over Vargas.. what's Taylor done in that time? Fought 6 times, won a tournament, all 4 belts & taken numerous 0s.. the guy was little more than 5 years a pro too.. that's amazing **** that mate.. yes Garcias multiple weight but a lot of these North American fighters turn pro late teens/early 20s and boil down to beat up on fighters naturally smaller than them and then when they move up in weight because they can't make it anymore to fight at their more natural weight classes they get praised & hyped for being multiple weight champions (look at Garcia, Mexicans are short but he has the frame of a LWW/WW & has had for many years).. It's NOT that Taylor couldn't do that , it's that he turned pro 6 years ago, when he was pretty much fully developed physically.. I think you're whistling in the wind on your own out there buddy with that list of yours, sorry.. & I can't be arsed breaking down the rest of your post because I don't have the time & a lot of it is just dumb.. 'Saunders is as good technically but less accomplished'.. yet you still rate him higher than Taylor?! LOL, that makes sense.. yes Technically Saunders is a good fighter ya but he's also prone to laziness, has stamina & discipline issues & other negatives that Josh DOESNT have, he has also struggled with low calibre fighters on numerous occasions, Josh never has. He hasn't done anything lately either! On no planet are BJS & Joshua higher p4p than Taylor. It is insulting to suggest otherwise.. Saunders has never got close to an official top 10 ranking. So basically you've only really demonstrated here that pound for pound is a wishy-washy concept just like I said, because in making all these lists you only end up contradicting yourself , being inconsistent & going round in circles.. best to steer clear & not go too deep with it in future.. & BTW, Taylor would beat Garcia if they fought P.S You don't need to be in multiple weights for you to be considered pound for pound material… Usyk already demonstrated that a couple of years back.