Crawford proved why he’s one of the best fighters right now

I can deal with it, I like them both equally. They both have VERY Good resumes.

I could care less, I want Usyk to win a HW title.

 

His HOF career is based off of what he does in the HW division... Was Holyfield a hof'er i
As a CW,? TINMAN IS still wet behind the ear's when it comes to boxing.

 

That COULD be true but none of them are hofs as of this moment, ridiculous. HOF status don't grow on trees.

I think it's so close but I'll give a slight edge to Crawford. It's a race where any of them could climb ahead with any good win.

Loma, Crawford, Usyk all have outstanding resumes. Any denial of that is ridiculous.

 

Sometimes, emotions get the best of people, happens to me too tbh.

Doesn't matter though, any argument is good. Some people like Usyk, some like Crawford more, some like Loma.

 

TINMAN thinks Ledwaba is Pacs best win... Lol

 

Has nothing to do with liking or not. Stylistically I'm actually biased towards Gassiev rather than Usyk. The reason why I rate Usyk over Crawford is because he has a better resume.

There is no emotional cloud blocking thoughts here. We're saying Usyk has the better resume because well, his resume is better.

 

Completely plausible still he’s never been hurt in that manner and wouldn’t estimate his chances accurately enough to ensure and employ proper damage control. The stoppage was a bit unnecessary but it was the lesser of two evils.

 

It's really not, you just underrate Crawford's, it's stacked with very good fighters spanning 3 divisions. You're also of course kind of overrating the lvl of competition up there at 200. It's stacked but it's not ground breaking competition.

Which one of those guys that he beat were even p4p fighters? Gassiev? Briedis? Glowacki?

None of them were p4p.

He's 15-0 and beat very good fighters yes but he's not close to hof. Arguing against that is ridiculous. That being said, Crawford isn't HOF either at the moment.

In NFL terms, this is like thinking having 2-3 GREAT years means you should be HOF. Nope. I guess Aaron Donald and Todd Gurley should be HOF now? Hell no!!! Aaron Donald had 4 great years, but he's NO HOF atm. He will be if he keeps it up though!

In most other sports (Not so much NBA), sustained excellence for many many years gives you that distinction.

 

Gamboa was more accomplished than Gassiev, Breides, and whoever put together. TINMAN is really inexperienced in the boxing game.

 

Eh, I've had my many run-ins with him, he's just an emotional guy!

Tends to overrate certain achievements though, especially Pacquiao's, to the nth degree. His fav fighter though, so it's no surprise.

 

You need to stop with this biased ref nonsense! Is this how you're gonna play this? Everytime a fight doesn't go the way you want, it's a biased conspirecy? If that was Ward getting pummeled by Kovalev instead of Benavietas, you would be saying how great a fight it was and that the stoppage was agood one because Ward could have gotten seriously hurt! SMH
One more thing.... Crawford may have lost 2 maybe 3 out of the first 6! 3 if you stretch it! Crawford was fighting an undefeated, confident, big counterpuncher. Once the #1 fighter in the world figured it out, it was easy work.
My top 5
1- Crawford, obvious
2- Ward, he will always be in the top
3- Canelo, He beat G twice
4- Inoue, Guys a beast
5- Stevenson, Stopped an unstoppable opponent in 1 round.

 

Neither Crawford, Usyk or Lomachenko has fought anyone who can competently DREAM about being in the Hall of Fame, but Crawford has twice as many wins as Usyk and 3x as many as Chenko, and Postol is probably better than anyone the Ukraine boys have fought. And Crawford is not even a GREAT fighter.

1. Crawford
2. Garcia
3. Canelo
4. Lomachenko

 

no idea why people argue about p4p. the whole notion is silly. it is totally built on the imagination of whoever is doing the ratings, with no way to ever prove.

 

Hey it keeps the discussion going in boxing. It's like arguing who is better, Jordan's Bulls or Magic's Showtime Lakers.