Canelo belongs in the top 10. He has good names in his resume, controversial or not. Crawford though....
Is that with the clenbuterol, Peds, "friendly" decisions & & State commission backing ? Cause on his own he aint **** Now he's raised Oscar's & DAZN's hackles he may well find things have changed. He's screwing up his own career
Those are some highly objective views, Canelo has indeed lost twice to GGG. He also legitimately lost to Lara, but DLH, and his hookups with Judges, who know that a rising tide lifts all boats have given Canelo, some dubious victories. The cards in the Trout, bout should have been much closer than scored. The Kovalev bout is one where shenanigans were in play, the window of time Kovalev was given to accept the fight and well there is question as to whether that Kovalev, was at full strength, still Kovalev should have been able to smash the smaller man to bits. I give Canelo two victories 1 vs Jocobs and 1 vs Kovalev. Alvarez, regardless of record, for me has 4 losses and should be lower in P4P . Crawford, is another fighter, I fail to see how the pundits can sit him atop the P4P lists. Cawford has fought absolutely no one, Jeff Horn????? the one Paquiao lost to, in one of this Century's greatest robberies. I don't count Horn as a premier opponent. Crawfod, however has two wins against what would be considered a name opponent, Gamboa, and Kahn. Gamboa looking like a dwarf in a Disney fantasy hadnt truly fought anyone of merit his whole career and almost had Crawford out, and Kahn had been smashed, so often that his real relevance had ceased to matter at the time of their bout. Then again literacy has given way to propaganda, but its refreshing to hear the lucid opinions of someone who is spot on. You are not alone, I am in accord with you. I am sure there are many others who deal in reality and are not taken in by the P4P propaganda. Canelo and Crawford do not belong on top of the P4P lists.
It's like pistol whipping a blind man... dance always tries to go after me for some odd reason. Crush maybe
You are too dumb to even realize you prove my point. Ask yourself...WHY 155? What's the point in that? Did I mention anything about an advantage? Why even bring that up unless YOU think it has some merit. Did canelo need that one extra pound? care to try and answer?
Ask Cotto, he's the one who was defending the MW title at catchweights. Canelo simply ahered to Cotto's request, and when he defended the title at 155 he did so becuase Khan wouldn't fight him at 160.
Well 155 was needed to make big fights. Canelo has shown a willingness to put himself at a disadvantage to cater to other fighters weight demands. The idea that Canelo is a weight bully is laughable.
No it didn't helped at all, Canelo was probably drained that's why he moved to 160, on the other hand Pacquiao WAS draining his opponents
Canelo around #8 and Crawford around #6 wouldn't bother me. Crawford is especially hard to gage at this point as he LOOKS like he's the goods, but his best win remains a UD over Postol. Canelo lost to GGG twice and had a good, but close bout against Jacobs. Canelo being #1 and GGG being #8 is hilarious. Was it the Jacobs win that vaulted him up? Really? Drunk Kovalev who mocked people for betting on him?
Both excellent fighters but Clenelo's greatest asset is the size of his pockets and the amount of judges he can fit in them and Crawford's are his weight bullying ways and his ability, with 1 or 2 exceptions, to beat up on C level light-average punchers in his backyard he holds weight and reach advantages over. His best win is a stink out the joint performance against Pity Pat Postol for goodness sake and his second best a grotesque size mismatch between a natural 147 and a blown up natural 126 Cuban leprechaun who he had 7lbs in weight on and a whopping 9'' reach advantage over.
