Is Shawn Porter an elite welterweight?

That's about how I see him, he's good no doubt but my definition of elite just doesn't jibe with him

 

what about an “Elite Gatekeeper”?

As in gatekeeper to the elite.

So after some research
I see the belts he won to become champion were against
Ugas
Devin Alexandar
Danny Garcia
Adrien Granados
& Pauli Malanaggi

none of which would be considered Elite.

However He did lose to every elite champion he has faced. Albeit very close fights.

that’s why I say capable of any upset B++
gate keeper to the Elite.
If you get by him good chance you are elite.

only thing that keeps from being elite is consistency imo.

 

What up kiwi?

 

Porter always gives everyone a good tough fight. He may not be elite anymore but he will give you hell.

 

That's why I think everyone has a soft spot for him, and they even have threads like this to try and argue he's "elite", at least compared to other welterweights. The problem is...he's not.

He lost to Kell Brook, Keith Thurman, and Errol Spence. Some argue that "well if he had A-side treatment he would have WON those fights!" Eh, maybe. But by suggesting those fights were close, that means that you acknowledge the "real" results could have happened anyway. Now we add to that the fact that there are equally legitimate arguments for him losing the Ugas and Danny Garcia fights. He has arguably lost every big-time fight he's been in, and I don't think, "yeah but he's also arguably won every big-time fight he's been in," is enough of a counter-argument for him being elite. World-level? Absolutely and no argument there. A tough out for anyone at the world-level or indeed so-called "elite" of welterweights? He's proven that time and again. But in my humblest of opinions, not enough to get himself that nebulous "elite" standing.

 

Why invent new terms for a category that already exists, what you're describing is a world class fighter.

Gate keepers to me are good enough to beat pretenders and fringe contenders but will always lose to world champions and world class top contenders.

Elite - P4P contenders, very top of their division.
World Class - Usually top 10 fighters, depending on the depth of the division. so a mix of title holders and top contenders.
Contenders - Not a top contender but proven enough to beat gate keepers and fringe contenders, yet to beat a top contender.
Gate Keepers - Will beat pretenders and maybe the odd fringe contender and will give contenders and world class guys a tough fight but will always lose to world class fighters. Will never will never win a legit world title.
Fringe Contenders - Outside top 10, yet to be proven against genuine top 10/world class opposition. If they beat a gate keeper they move up to being seen as a legit contender, if they lose they get relegated to being pretenders.
Pretenders - Former fringe contender who's lost to a gate keeper.
Prospects - Unproven, usually undefeated fighters early on in their career only beaten journeymen, yet to step up and face a gate keeper or fringe contender.
Journeymen - Not good enough to be seen as a prospect will be used to pad other fighters records.

 

because “Elite Gatekeeper” has a nice ring to it.

 

He's one of the best 5 welterweights and a quality p4p fighter but to me the word elite should be reserved for those who are more than that

 

No. He is a level below. Never wins the big fights.

 

Porter beating Garcia and having tough competitive fights with the top crop >>> CRAWFORD

Porter will retire HIGHER RATED than Crawford

Who is Crawford's best win outright? lol. Who is his best win at 147?

Crawford might have more potential but he has wasted it.

Porter at least used all of his potential.

 

Elite gatekeeper and entertaining as hell to watch.

Only lost to Brook, Thurman and Spence - which was very close.

 

He's a small step under elite. If he were elite, he'd had beaten one of Brook, Thurman or Spence.

 

Most certainly he is an elite welterweight in today's division.