yeah. because he is agressive and his opponents have to resort to holding rather than fight him. i admit he can be sloppy. but he comes to fight. and he will fight anyone. brook on the other hand, along with thurman, need their arms twisted to face non-scrubs and both fight like bitches.
LMAO! You describe Porter as if he's some Duran/Chavez-like pressure fighter. Dude has no fuckin skill. Yeah, he's aggressive, but he doesn't know how to be aggressive so he fights like a wild grappler. Thurman ain't exactly a great fighter, so Porter DOES have a chance. But I think Thurman can exploit Porter. I do know for a fact that Spence would KO Porter, in a one sided fight.
no i did not (describe him as duran/chavez)! you can disagree without making shit up about what i did and did not say. :: wtf does spence have to do with this?
How was Brook-Porter close?? Being generous, he won 4 rounds. It was more like 9-3, to be honest. He hardly landed and Brook was countering the shit out of him all night.
It's an interesting fight because Porter is such a shitty boxer and a good inside fighter and Thurman is a decent athletic (I said it!) boxer who doesn't seem to fight inside at all. I'll take Thurman to outbox and potshot him until he stops him. But if Porter can consistently get close he may be able to beat Thurman up.
Same. Porter does have a chance if Thurman is troubled by his swarming, but Brook doesn't hit as hard as Thurman and he solved the puzzle.
They weighed in. Thurman looked good and healthy, and came in at a ready 146. Looking like he made the weight effortlessly. Porter came in a 147, but had to get ass naked to do so. Makes me wonder how much longer Porter can make welter. I'm sticking to my guns. Thurman late TKO.
Thurman should just walk him down and let his hands go instead of persisting with this delusion that he's Roy Jones
I think that Thurman power might be overrated. I gonna praise him though for being the first fighter (at least that I saw) who fought porter without clinching constantly.