Why? I have canelo p4p #1 which is the right choice. Loma and ggg lost and have no case of being p4p #1. Don't get mad at me because you can't handle the truth.
There is no way Va-SILLY Lose-a-chenko is number 1 P4P or even top 5. The dude got decisively beat up by an inexperienced 23 year old (a kid that I expected to be KO'd by Va-SILLY). Let's not even bring up getting out-hustled by Salido. I wouldn't even have him in the P4P top 10. Personally, I'd love to see Josh Taylor go down to 135 and slam this bum to the canvas. Tank Davis too!
Bjs has always been been a b level fighter. Always fought like one. How anyone ever saw more than that, I’ll never know.
Makes no ****ing difference. Same as Tyson Fury. You don't stay in shape and stay disciplined your potential means jack ****.
While I'm definitively against Mythical Prime discussions as folks are likely to have about the Saunders of the Lemieux fight, Billy will certainly be remembered for having underachieved. At 160 he had all the tools to win against just about anyone. 168 was simply a fat weight class. Still, no one should make time for coulda woulda shoulda's in boxing. It doesn't matter if you have skills, talent, heart, etc if you don't WANT it bad enough.
Lol butthurt? Saunders is a quitter and he's best win of his career was Lembum Canelo made him quit deal with it
Saunders would have outboxed him. Still would be a close fight, but Saunders would win a 7-5/8-4 type of fight. He won atleast 3-4 rounds of the actually fight imo.
Using Saunders' footwork against Lemieux to gauge how he would do against Canelo is like using Canelo's KO win over Khan to gauge how he would do against Golovkin.
Don’t forget Canelo was in nappy’s when he fought floyd, floyd didn’t fight a peak Canelo if that’s why your rating him no1
Saunders has always shown to been inconsistent as far as his commitment. I don't buy that there has ever been a better Saunders than what we saw against Canelo.
Yet canelo didn't fight a peak pbf. Funny how you like to leave that out. You actually think he was peak at 36??? Lol!!! I'd rather be 23 than 36 when I'm competing in boxing anyday.
I would defs have him 2-3 on my list, I just think Canelo has been more active lately, 2 undefeated champions and a champ at 175( way above where he should be fighting). Anyways respect to you for actually stating a name... Not just bagging Canelo. Do you even rate Canelo top five? If not who you got? Just curious!
I'm just referring to the fact that he was too flat footed vs Canelo, and that he didn't use enough lateral movement. If he fought like he fought vs Lemieux I don't think he would have been caught and ran into that big uppercut. BJS was very capable of going the distance, he just made a mistake and got caught. If he gave Canelo more consistent movement, like we saw against Lemieux, if he fought more upright instead of hunched over, I doubt he gets caught like that. Obviously Lemieux is levels below Canelo, but in terms of how he fought Lemieux that version was a completely different way of fighting than how he fought Canelo. When people talk about how awkward he was which is why they thought he could beat Canelo, it was because of how he fought vs Lemieux.
The reasons people said he would school Canelo is because they were imagining BJS the night he fought Lemieux and how that style would match up against Canelo. He was much more flat footed when he fought Canelo than the fleet footed BJS that fought Lemieux and the way he fought Lemieux is why people said he would school Canelo. He still had some success against Canelo before he was caught, but he didn't perform vs Canelo at the level he fought at vs Lemieux. He was not as quick on his feet and he did not give Canelo the kind of consistent awkward lateral and backwards movement or the kind of ring generalship he gave Lemieux. That style that he utilized vs Lemieux would have given Canelo a lot of problems and that's why a lot of people including me fancied his chances if he fought that way.
