Terence Crawford vs Pernell Whitaker

Facts. Great post

 

Laughable

 

Yes Spence

 

Crawfords desturction of Spence is better than Whitaker beating 144 pound Chavez (best weight at 130 and never won a title above 140) by decision.

 

I have no idea how you can say hes more versatile than someone who can fight from either stance

 

You realize that Chavez was way past his best fighting weight when he fought Whitaker ?

 

As I have already written, overall Whitaker has faced better opponents than those Crawford faced, but you can't argue with Terence's greatness. It's true that Chavez will never become world champion in the welterweight, but that was a competitive Chavez in my opinion, so I consider that victory (because he had won) of Whitaker a good victory, even if he has obtained better ones.

I agree that Crawford's victory over Spence is more important than Whitaker's victory over Chavez.

 

No it wasn't 50/50 fight.

Don't be daft he was in a horrific car crash and doctors have said he had neurological damage before the fight.

If you honestly think Spence looked fine vs Crawford then I don't know what to say.

 

How explain

 

Nope!!! That version of.Chavez was better than that version of Spence

 

Nope! McGrit was a more complete fighter a s Meldeick was the more talented fighter with a better resume

 

Hagler can fight in both stances but he isn't more versatile than Floyd, Leonard, or Jones

 

for some reason i thought hearns leonard 1 was at lightweight

 

Crawford is ahead of those guys I highlighted

The idea that he's not in their class is laughable

 

I don't agree but thanks for responding