23 year old khan vs 23 year old broner. RESUME COMPARISON.

and why wasnt khan ranked top 6 p4p?

 

No one really cares about the Barrera fight. But yeah, Kotelnik, Maidana and Paulie were good names to rack up for a 23 year old. All back-to-back as well (bar the Salita mandatory).

Broner's shown much more to his game, though. And by the end of this year he'd have made himself the certain number one light weight.

 

True. Lightweight is weak. Only one good name there - Ricky Burns.

 

Khan clearly has a better resume at age 23 than wannabe Floyd

 

I don't see Demarco more proven than Burns. Mitchell, Katsidis and Moses were all rated top ten in the division. And if he beats Vasquez he is a lot more proven than DeMarco.

 

Linares is very talented but he doesn't have a great resume at light weight and was stopped in his next fight also. So far he doesn't have the wins to match his talent.

Still probably the best win between Burns and DeMarco though.

 

Don't forget that by the time Broner was 23 he also managed to somehow elude 1 round demolitions to unheralded fighters such as Breidis Prescott.

I'm told that not doing things such as the above have a tendency to derail your hype train.

 

agreed....Barrera win was nothing.

Maidana and Kotelnik were good wins

Demarco= Paulie win

Burns vs Vazquez winner would put him on par..... also being far more complete and not having been KO'd by an unknown Colombian certainly ranks him higher.

 

Khan v Broner... make it happen

 

Not that being undefeated actually means anything because it all depends on who you fought but Khan fought 2 undefeated fighters prior to turning 24 and he got his ass whooped by one of them.

Broner fought one (technically 2 but I'm not counting the early one) and he whooped his ass thoroughly.

And even if you wanna count Maidana, which you can't, Khan barely escaped with his life. I've never seen a fighter desperately watching the clock as much as Khan during the latter rounds of that fight.