Why Oleksandr Usyk Should Be P4P Number 1 Over Both Terence Crawford & Naoya Inoue.

You've exposed nothing you oddball. For a relatively lengthy period of time, every match PBC darling Danny Garcia was involved with was a split decision or a majority decision. That's pretty much common knowledge and carries zero weight whatsoever. My scorecard for Thurman-Garcia is far from egregious. Check the RBR, the average score was 116-112 with a few 117-111 for Thurman. A handful of 115-113. Most of them were from the people that picked Danny Garcia to win. There was nothing remotely controversial about that victory. Thurman schooled him on the back foot, whereas Spence walked him down and won on the front foot. The two fight nothing alike so it's pretty much pointless to compare them and their efforts. However, once upon a time slickness used to impress people on this site and was valued just as highly as aggression. But somewhere along the way the Mayweather fanboys morphed into Pacquiao fanboys, after all Spence fights a hell of a lot more like Manny than Floyd.

I had to write a wall of text tearing down Crawford's resume to lay out an open and shut case to undermine the legion of assholes like you who were invariably going to come here to attempt to discredit it, in advance. See, unlike you I'm actually thorough. You have no leg to stand on, you're not making a good argument that Crawford has the better resume. Now you're resorting to trying to discredit me because I said Thurman who beat Danny 116-112 did as good of a job as Spence, who beat Danny 116-112. How about a different tact? Thurman was the guy that took the 0 of Danny Garcia back when he was still prime and actually give a ****. Spence beat a partially retired disinterested going through the motions Danny Garcia by roughly the same margin, who'd been dealing with mental health issues after losing his 0 to Thurman and being schooled by Porter, who completely lost his fire and mojo. So ultimately who has the better win of the two? Clearly Keith Thurman does.

 

So, did you do an extensive poll and interview fans the world over to come to this conclusion? Last time I checked that wasn't one of the most vexing and highly debated topics in the sport. Thurman fought the fresher and hungrier undefeated Danny Garcia. A fact no one can dispute. Spence fought a Danny with 2 L's who was disinterested in the sport and going through the motions. Yet still performed against him in terms of rounds won in a similar manner to both Thurman and Porter. Of course all three of them perform differently. Spence with pressure, Thurman off the back foot and Porter with ambushes. All three had similar level of success with their approaches. I'm not sure what isn't computing here for you. There's nothing remotely delusional about that, the only one who's delusional is you for thinking it's delusional.

Is what I did tearing down a resume or simply a thorough, honest and fair assessment? If you're an easily triggered fan like yourself, it's going to look like the former but for everybody else it's the latter.

Crawford has long had one of the shittiest resumes in the sport in terms of ranked P4P fighters. No amount of spin from you is going to change that. Especially the newest "what have you done for me lately thing" line of bull**** reasoning. AJ was not coming off of the loss he was coming off of two wins, and more than obvious looked far more impressive than the post Usyk version we're seeing now. He certainly wasn't drained, compromised and potentially brain damaged shell of a human being that Spence clearly was, that most of the fanboys seem to be in denial of, when most of the trainers are not. Now I'm very sorry that you don't follow the sport very closely and don't seem to be aware of anybody at Cruiserweight and the level they were operating on when Usyk beat them. Usyk's resume is unquestionably superior, both before and after the Joshua win. This whole debate is reminiscent of the Chocolatito P4P #1 debate going on a few years back. All of the casuals are in love with the glamor division Welterweight, whereas the hardcores, who know what they're talking about a hell of a lot more than the casuals, we're not as distracted by a shiny things, false perceptions or masturbatory commentator hyperbole, and offer up a far more fair, balanced and accurate assessment of the sport and everything within it. Because we follow every aspect of it not just the glamour divisions. You're as transparent as they come and everyone can see through you. You're simply wrong and are increasingly sounding like the delusional one. Do you get it now?

 

You're absolutely deranged. Spence was a shell of a man when he fought Crawford, you know it, but you're in denial. If you thought that was a 100% healthy specimen standing across the ring. Then you need some serious help. If you can't see with your own two eyes that the version of AJ that Usyk fought both times, was more dialed in, sharper, more accurate, less lethargic, had better punch resistance, better balance, better footwork, more mentally focused than Errol Spence. Then you're hopeless and it's pointless arguing with a mental patient like you. Clearly you're very emotionally invested in all of this and this discussion has you all hot and bothered. So you obviously lack objectivity. So nothing you say should be taken at face value, and based on the lack of likes your posts are receiving, it's pretty obvious no one is.

And wow, you mean.... they both had two losses!!!! You got me! Wait... no, you don't. It wasn't the two losses, many have far more than two losses, and still hand in top tier performances. It's the two losses of Danny's, combined with the inactivity, depression and lack of interest. Pre-losing to Thurman, Danny was one of the more active fighters in the sport, fighting 2, sometimes 3 times a year. Post lost to Thurman, Danny has fought 7 times in 7 years. Clearly his heart isn't in it any more. The mother****er took a year and a half off after he fought Spence, and decided to move up to 154, hoping that could explain his streak of lackluster performances. Both his performance against Redkach and Spence was flat and uninspired, as was his pisspoor effort against Benavidez. That cannot be said about AJ going into the first match against Usyk. He looked sharp as a tack in the rematch with Ruiz, and dominated Pulev with relative ease.

Also, there's no set of rules or some universal standard on how you're supposed rank fighters P4P, everyone has their own criteria they utilize. So spare me with that bull****. You're merely choosing to believe, by way of being totally irrational and in denial, not even listening to countless trainers who said Spence wasn't all there for that match. Because that's what you want to believe. We're not going to agree or convince each other of anything, and I highly doubt you'll even agree to disagree.... so just don't waste your breath responding to me.

 

So... the ref didn't call a knockdown is your big argument. Yeah, just like what happened with Kavaliauskas. Spare me Fury dickrider.