Why does Crawford have 0 good wins?

Because he is a cherry picking fraud.

 

Undefeated gamboa and postol were both favourites in this forum when they fought crawford. You forgot about them in your list.

 

No they weren't

Gamboas fkin tiny & Postol had one good win, no one ever thought he was anything special.. Arent u ashamed that even to date those are his best wins , despite having numerous divisions to choose from and the privilege of being an American fighter lmao..

 

aka Terence Coward.

 

lol, were you in this forum when both fight happened? no, you werent. A lot of people picked him to lose in both fights. And they both, gamboa and postol, were undefeated and arguably at their prime.

This forum was specially high on postol. I never understood why, but in this forum postol's nuts were hugged like no tomorrow. After crawford beat the **** out of him, suddenly.... nothing but silence.

Gamboa was the best since sliced bread when crawford knocked the **** out of him. Btw.

People just have no memory, that's all. But I have.

 

It is what it is.

 

Weak era for WW to be honest.

I don't know what fights he didn't make other than maybe Pacqauio (an older Pac where Crawford wouldn't get credit for). It's like with Vitali Klitchsko, I think he was a great fighter but his only other great fighter around in his era was Lewis, who he did come up short against. However, he dominated a weak era and is resume is weak because of it. It's not always the fighter's fault.

 

He has a decent collection of good wins, just no very good or signature/defining ones.

 

Now he’s fighting Avanesyan who has losses to guys he and Spence already beat. Meanwhile Spence is taking on a dangerous undefeated prospect. It’s always been clear to me who the real ducker was.

 

Crazy.

 

You never understood why Postol was hyped on this forum?

Comon man.

 

We know who Spence is fighting?

 

Yeah he's similar to Fury, hyped up but poor resume