On what basis do people rank Crawford so highly pfp???

Yea, he really dominated that cripple.

 

Ability and making B level fighters look average.

 

Wait, aren't something like 14 out of 16 fights title fights?

 

But P4P is a nebulous concept. It's not really based on win record.
It's more based on the simple idea of who is the best/most skillful boxer.

 

I rank him pfp the best for the same reasons you rank the fighter that you like the best pfp. So whoever you think is pfp the best, use your own reasons on why I rank Bud the best pfp. In other words, pfp is opinion. No close fights, NO LOSSES, dominant, skills and has beaten good comp.

 

Nobody. Bud hasn't fought a man who has had to come up two weigh classes either. And he hasn't lost to a Salido either.

 

But his best win was against a much smaller man, who was coming off a year lay off and only his second fight at 135 and had Crawford doing the chicken dance.

 

If you think that, that was his best win I'm not mad you. To each his own. Name 1 fighter who has not been wobbled or put down and you get a medal.

 

Oliver McCall

 

I rate him very high, I think he is the best fighter America has, unbeaten multi weight world champ which has all the PBC welters hiding from him. Plus the eye test, it's not just who he's beat it's how he beat them.

The guy just oozes class in the boxing ring.

 

His best win is Postol, easily.

 

Not really elite though is it?

Not being childish but personally for me Gamboa is the better win but if Postol was you defining fight as a 3 weight world champion hardly sets the world alight.

 

I can't even imagine how the forum members here would **** themselves if Lomachenko shutout a 5'10-11 undefeated lightweight who knocked out someone of Mattysse's caliber.