Where would Broner be if he had beaten Maidana & Porter???

To be fair, Hatton's style if more suited to defeating a boxer than Malignaggi than Broners style. Hattons is a brawler/swarmer type with pretty quick feet. Unless you can either tie him up, or counter him and hurt him, you're going to have problems which Malignaggi did since he was feather fisted. Broner chose to stand flat footed, in the shell out night, throwing single shots, and letting maliganggi unload pitty pat scoring combos even though a lot of them weren't landing.

I think broner has the talent to be a force at 140 and below but he'd got to add more dimensions to his game and he has to get better footwork.

 

Where would Tommy Z be if he didn't suck? Where would I be if I was way more athletic? What is the point of asking impossible hypotheticals?

 

broner needs more dimensions to be able to beat top competition

 

i put broner on the same level as ortiz.

 

probably would still be called "The next Mayweather"

fortunately, he isn't good enough to even polish Floyd's boots, much less be his succesor

 

You just made my point. Broner is one dimensional, stand still with the tuck defense and if he's not much quicker and faster or his opponent has a far better reach, he's just lost.

Broner isn't multifaceted and he doesn't have a high enough ring IQ to make adjustments. In other words he's a lower case B level fighter on his best night.
The Ricky Hatton who beat Malignaggi would bloodgeon Adrian Broner.
Hatton doesn't have a real high ring IQ, but its higher than Broners, and that's saying something.

BTW, anybody with physical advantages has physical talent.
These athletes are at a physical advantage, but if you don't have actual boxing skills, theres only so much you can accomplish with just physical ability.

A level boxing ablity takes A level physical ability to school just about every time out. Juan Manuel Marquez vs Manny Pacquiao is proof of that.

 

Movement skills have much more to do with iq and technique than raw athleticism

 

The OP is basically asking where a fighter would be if they beat two topped ranked welterweights. Their ranking would obviously soar. But it's a purely hypothetical question. It's impossible to say what that Broner could do because it's not the Broner that exists in our reality. For Broner to beat Maidana and Porter, he'd have to be better than he actually is. So that Broner could be a top fighter. You're just describing the one we know of.

 

He would probably be in the middle of the top 10 making 5- 8 mill dollar purses per fight with a possibly ppv against Marquez or Khan

 

He's above average, barely world class, and trying too hard to be something he's not. Needs to learn a thing or 2 from Crawford or Spence. I was a fan of Broner's in the beginning as I was of Floyd's, but they never showed or proved their full potential or greatness.

 

Broner is top level raw athlete with very mediocre skills and no heart for the sport

 

Cash Cow!

 

You said Broner didn't because of a lifetime of choices.
I don't think his situation now has anything to do with choices, he just doesn't have the skills to compete at the top.
I think he wants to be and has worked at it, but he just looks like to me like he doesn't have natural boxing instincts.

I hear what you're saying about the OP.
Dumb question and thread imo. Its like saying where would JC Chavez Jr. be had he beaten Martinez and Fonfara.
Like Broner against Maidana and Porter, he didn't and the fights weren't even close to even consider where he'd be had he done so.

 

Still well short of billions.