Who is/was more skilled Crawford or Pernell

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by BoxingIQ, Jun 28, 2022.


  1. turbotime

    turbotime Hall Of Famer Full Member

    42,532
    3,733
    May 4, 2012
    Hard to tell but when Tapia, Marquez, Barrera etc are bottom rung on these lists you know it is stacked.
     
    Levook, Oneirokritis and Loudon like this.
  2. BoxingIQ

    BoxingIQ Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,047
    946
    Nov 6, 2017
    He's not lying. Just like you can't compare Jordan and Lebron. Athletes get better overtime. The fighters in the 90s didn't have YiuTube
     
  3. turbotime

    turbotime Hall Of Famer Full Member

    42,532
    3,733
    May 4, 2012
    No they just fought the best, no need for youtube.
     
    Oneirokritis likes this.
  4. Loudon

    Loudon Loyal Member Full Member

    40,832
    10,202
    Mar 7, 2012
    Let us stop with this absolute nonsense once and for all.

    The boxers do NOT get better over time.


    This is a ridiculous assumption made by ignorant people, based mostly from athletics based sports such as sprinting and swimming.

    Yes, those sports have seen athletes record faster times, in a sport that is timed in milliseconds.

    Fractions of seconds.

    In athletics, power = speed.

    Racing from point A to point B, in the quickest time possible.

    The guy who puts up the better athletic performance = is the fastest.

    The better athlete = the quickest.


    Boxing is 2 guys in a ring, pitting their styles against each other, in a physical game of chess.

    In boxing, the most powerful guy doesn’t always win.

    The fastest guy doesn’t always win.

    The bigger guy doesn’t always win.

    The technician doesn’t always win.

    The southpaw doesn’t always win.

    The swarmer doesn’t always win.

    Skills and styles determine the winner.


    Do you understand this?

    Although sprinters and swimmers etc, have to have great technique, power and stamina are the most important factors in their sport.

    Whereas in boxing, it’s far more skilled based.


    The sprinters of the 80’s weren’t as fast as the sprinters of today.

    However, there’s MANY fighters from the 80’s and EARLIER, who were better than MANY of today’s guys.


    Any great fighter from any era could beat any other great fighter, depending on how they matched up stylistically on the night.


    I’m sick of reading this BS.

    Now I’ve told you and that other fool the same thing over and over:

    There are MANY divisions which are WEAKER today than what they were 20-40 years ago.

    So: No. The boxers do not keep getting better.


    Just view the lists and educate yourself on the fighters on them.

    Go and look at the list from 1999.

    Where on earth is the progression from that list??

    There hasn’t been any.


    The sport of boxing does not keep progressing.

    It reached a plateau a long time ago.

    The sport simply ebbs and flows.


    Now instead of ignoring these responses from very knowledgeable fans, go and educate yourself.


    That absolute clown who believes that Pea couldn’t have competed in today’s LW division, needs throwing into shark infested waters.


    Stop digging your heels in and questioning our knowledge.

    Instead of fighting us, absorb the information and expand your own knowledge.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2022
  5. Loudon

    Loudon Loyal Member Full Member

    40,832
    10,202
    Mar 7, 2012
    Why don’t you tell us in your own words how boxing has come a long way from the 90’s.
     
    Last edited: Jul 12, 2022
    Oneirokritis and Noel857 like this.
  6. turbotime

    turbotime Hall Of Famer Full Member

    42,532
    3,733
    May 4, 2012
    http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/2012/11/deal_with_it-Lakers.gif
     
    Oneirokritis and Loudon like this.
  7. heerko koois

    heerko koois Obsessed with Boxing Full Member

    24,013
    17,476
    Apr 26, 2006
  8. Richmondpete

    Richmondpete Real fighters do road work Full Member

    7,140
    5,026
    Oct 22, 2015
    Crawford or Buddy McGirt would be a more compelling question
     
    Cobra33 and Noel857 like this.
  9. BoxingIQ

    BoxingIQ Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,047
    946
    Nov 6, 2017
    Buddy wad another Ugas. Very overrated
     
  10. Richmondpete

    Richmondpete Real fighters do road work Full Member

    7,140
    5,026
    Oct 22, 2015
    I'd like to hear you try to back that up
     
    Levook, Loudon, Oneirokritis and 2 others like this.
  11. BoxingIQ

    BoxingIQ Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,047
    946
    Nov 6, 2017
    Buddy had a tremendous jab, underrated power, and decent boxing skills. But he lost every big fight and would be too small for today's welders. Its 50/50 against Porter and Brook. But I would favor Thurman, Ennis, Spence, and Crawford to stop him
     
  12. BoxingIQ

    BoxingIQ Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,047
    946
    Nov 6, 2017
    Don't make it seem like Leonard, Hagler,Hearne, Duran, and Benitez didn't lose to lesser fighters compared to Manny and Floyd
     
  13. BoxingIQ

    BoxingIQ Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,047
    946
    Nov 6, 2017
    So did Duran. Manny would've been a stylistic nightmare for Duran
     
  14. mark ant

    mark ant Canelo was never athletic Full Member

    36,654
    16,558
    May 4, 2017
    Duran`s fundamentals were awesome.
     
    Oneirokritis likes this.
  15. BoxingIQ

    BoxingIQ Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,047
    946
    Nov 6, 2017
    Not really. If Crawford was a natural MW, he would be a more rugged Lara. If Spence was a natural MW, he would be a more athletic GGG. Porter would be Hurd. Mayweather would be James Toney of he was a MW.