I agree, he sure does pass the eye test. I also think there is some truth to the other side of the argument. I feel like he’s gotta fight and beat the winner of the Usyk-Joshua rematch before he can truly by considered an ATG. He looks to be the real deal, but for me he’s gotta do more than beat a 58yr old Klitschko and then slap around Deontay Wilder repeatedly.
dan...that is what I am telling people constantly. I have been telling people forever that Lee was not a fighter and therefore it is impossible to rate him.
The rough thing about boxing is that the sport as a whole has endless complexity but a lot of fights go in an unexpected direction because one guy wasn't focused on training/doesn't want to get punched anymore/got old all of a sudden/has been hiding a shoulder injury/politics and business/etc. A lot happens to a person in the 6 months between fights and unless you're a mind reader you'll never know if you got it wrong of if the ground moved under your feet.
No it doesn't, however I listed more than that as far as Crawford goes. I just feel if you are one of only five or six people to accomplish something in the history of the sport, you are a great, otherwise it would have been done more. You are free to disagree. Michael Spinks gets the same nonsense, people ignore what he did at light heavyweight and heavyweight because Tyson obliterated his soul.
I like Jack Dempseys statement on the matter: "I was a pretty good fighter but it was the writers who made me great" Great is just a word, does it change anything when applied to a boxers credentials? NO. Hagler resolutely did not want to fight outside his natural class, others won titles in multi weight classes does that make one great and the other less so? Fury is stated as a great yet has only defended title once and that against fighter he dethroned, does that make him greater than fighter who has defended numerous times? possibly and possibly not. I am quite happy to view those that win a genuine world title in the ring as a great, i will leave the ranking of levels of greatness to others.
Boxing isn't a real sport, its a business. In each weight class you have a handful of contenders, maybe if you are lucky 1 or 2 special talents. The rest are cannon fodder. Promoters pick fighters they think will sell the most tickets and build up their records buying opponents on the way. Its like a circus show.
Ortiz seems pretty good. But he's beaten no one. We can never know how good that win is for Wilder because grandpa never fought anyone.
Pretty much any fighter that has managed to fight their way up to a point that you know their name is elite. The pool of boxers that make it to a level where they are widely known is a very small minority. Take Hughie Fury as an example, he is an elite fighter, he is well known and ranked above thousands of other boxers. If you rank him at 15 in the world that means you only rank 14 others higher than him.
Interesting perspective. I guess I look at it through a more narrow scope. I consider the top 3 P4P elite. Not too many, if anybody can beat them in or around their division or H2H at the moment. But, your perspective is fair and legit. It makes perfect sense to look at it that way.
This is why this Porter fight have huge ramifications for how his career is perceived. He won a vacant belt at 135 against Gamboa whom never had a belt at 135. He won his belt at 140 against Ricky Burns who was coming off a gift draw against Beltran and lost to Zlaticanin is his very next fight. He unified against Postol who is good but hasn’t won another championship fight since in losing to Taylor and Ramirez. This is the “great” Bud Crawford’s best win. He then becomes undisputed by KO3 against Indongo who goes on to lose his very next fight by TKO2 to Prograis and has lost 3 of his last 4 by KO2, KO2 and KO4 all immediately after Bud. At WW he beat Jeff Horn for the WBO and hasn’t fought one top 10 WW since. It’s all about context he’s hardly proven to be great maybe very good but to say he’s great and P4P #1 was a stretch. Mikey Garcia and Adrien Broner have won belts in 4 divisions and they are not considered great by accomplishing those feats. And being a 4 division champ was considered an impressive thing until it was cheapened by them and Leo Santa Cruz but at least Leo fought the number 2 guy in at least one of those divisions.
And his unifying all four belts at 140? Unifying four belts is not an easy task, so much so that only five or six people ever have it across the weight classes. I understand what you're saying but Crawford has accomplished something very few other boxers have in that distinction. It matters more to me than guys who pick up a belt and then move weight classes to duck fights.
