thurman fans are awfully quiet around here

Total domination of Collazo>>>razor thin decision over Gavin :deal

 

Sure, Bundu is no great fighter, but he certainly isn't bad either.

He's an awkward guy, a decent fighter for sure. Top 15 welterweight, at least.

He was also undefeated - so yes, Thurman didn't look great, but he also dominated and displayed his boxing ability again.

 

There you go! I agree. Now you're getting it.

Bundu's entire record at WW >>> Khan's entire record at WW

See?

Unless you really have a hard one for Collazo in the creepiest of ways. Power to you if that's the case.

 

Collazo? when was the last time Collazo even relevant?

 

Same thing I was thinking about the Zavek fight.
I'm usually joking when I say it, but I guess people really don't watch fights

 

Bundu was a tough cookie. Good defense and toughness. Who at Welterweight would have KO'd him last night?

 

Floyd Pac Bradley Brook Alexander weren't available. Thurman was fighting. There's 6 names that don't count.
Maidana and Guerrero already turned down fights with Thurman.
Chalk Marquez up to politics. Porter coming off a loss and they already used the "If the money right" line for Thurman.
What kind of opponent were you expecting for a guy who only fought 3 rounds this year and had shoulder problems?

 

All im saying is I prefer Khans 2 wins at WW to Bundus best win. That in my eyes and others such as Ring magazine is enough for Khan to leapfrog him in the rankings

 

I wasn't knocking Thurmans choice of opponent, just questioning Nonito saying Bundu was a top ten guy

 

So you always only rate fighters based on their best individual win? Or only when it suits your agenda?

And citing Ring Magazine is not a good look anymore. They had Broner top 10 P4P, always rank and discuss GBP fighters and ticket sellers who will buy the magazine higher than they should, and wouldn't you know it Khan is a GBP fighter...

I can't explain TBR having had Khan ahead of Bundu other than to say, "everyone makes mistakes."

Bundu dropped down and Khan elevated to now be inside the top 10 clearly. I'm done bickering about it. Before last night, Bundu > Khan AT WELTERWEIGHT and I'd be shocked if you were the only non-Brit or non-troll to disagree with that.

 

Fair enough.

 

They really don't.

And they live in the moment far too much. Emotional...

 

You called me out and you were correct; #11 is my revisionist opinion.

Either way, our debate became about Bundu or Khan and who deserved to be higher ranked BEFORE their fights last night.

 

Surely what Khans achieved at 140 also propels him higher in the WW rankings as well as his 2 victories at the weight. I take your point about Ring magazine but it wasn't just them ranking Khan higher. S'all good, we'll agree to disagree

 

I think Bundu is/was a top 10/15 welterweight.


He's a quality operator but he fought all european level boxers all his career up until Thurman. When he stepped up to world level he got shut out 12 - 0 against a hard puncher who is partially unseasoned.

He could probably do better due to styles against other top world class welterweights in the division.

Although, I think Khan on paper is a better boxer than Bundu and obviously has the much better resume overall if you aren't talking weight classes. Julio Diaz and Luis Collazo were decent wins at welterweight but if you stay strictly to the rankings you could discredit them.