Terence Crawford might be the best unproven fighter of all time.
No one doubts that the three-division titleholder is loaded with talent, which is why he’s on every credible pound-for-pound list. The problem with him – at least in some circles – is his resume.
Herein lies the great debate on whether “Bud” deserves to be called the best fighter in the world pound-for-pound going into his 147-pound title defense against Kell Brook (39-2, 27 KOs) on Saturday in Las Vegas.
The first question you have to answer is this: What does pound-for-pound mean?
To me, the definition couldn’t be simpler: The best fighter regardless of weight, I think most knowledgeable observers generally agree with that definition, although they take different paths to arrive at their conclusions.
The process of determining pound-for-pound is a balance of accomplishments and the eye test, which leads to the second question: Which, if either, criteria should get precedence?
Is it 50-50 resume-eye test? Or is it appropriate to lean in either direction?
Crawford (36-0, 27 KOs) fares well in the eye test, as he has dominated one opponent after another. He doesn’t do as well in terms of his resume, which is one reason he’s not No. 1 on most lists.
Let’s look at a few pound-for-pound lists. Here is the Top 3 of eight outlets I respect:
- Boxing Junkie – 1. Crawford, 2. Canelo Alvarez, 3. Naoya Inoue
- The Ring Magazine – 1. Alvarez, 2. Inoue, 3. Crawford
- Transnational Boxing Rankings – 1. Inoue, 2. Alvarez, 3. Crawford
- ESPN – 1. Crawford, 2. Alvarez, 3. Inoue
- Yahoo Sports – 1. Alvarez, 2. Crawford, 3. Inoue
- CBS Sports – 1. Alvarez, 2. Inoue, 3. Crawford
- talkSPORT (U.K.) – 1. Alvarez, 2. Crawford, 3. Inoue
- Boxing News (U.K.) – 1. Alvarez, 2. Inoue, 3. Crawford
All eight outlets have the same three fighters in their Nos. 1,2 and 3 slots, which is remarkable given the diversity of opinion in boxing. So it’s reasonable to argue that these are the three best fighters in the world pound-for-pound.
Let’s take another step. Let’s use a point system to determine the order based on the eight outlets’ lists. No. 1 is three points, No. 2 two points and No. 3 one point. Here are the results:
- Alvarez (21 points)
- Crawford (14 points)
- Inoue (13 points)
Of course, that’s not a definitive list but the average of eight such outlets carries some weight.
I agree that these three fighters are the best in the world, although I don’t agree with the order that resulted from our points system. I’ll get into that later.
First, I reached out to two of the most astute boxing analysts and historians I know, Tom Gray of The Ring and Cliff Rold, to get their thoughts on the pound-for-pound debate and where they believe Crawford fits in.
I made this request of them: “I want to know where you have Crawford ranked pound-for-pound, why and whether you believe his lack of top-level opposition has hurt his standing or legacy.”
Some background: Of the top three, Alvarez clearly has the strongest resume. He has fought a litany of elite opponents and has slipped up only twice in his peak years, a loss to Floyd Mayweather and a draw in his first fight with Gennadiy Golovkin.
The track records of Crawford and Inoue don’t compare with that of the Mexican star. Who is the best fighter Crawford has fought? Yuriorkis Gamboa? Viktor Postol? Amir Khan? You get the idea that Crawford’s critics want to convey.
“Terence Crawford is one of the best fighters in the world today,” said Gray, who is based in Scotland. “It was a pleasure seeing him live in Glasgow – when he won his first world title – even if it was at the expense of my countryman Ricky Burns.
“Is Crawford’s standing affected because we haven’t seen him in against Errol Spence Jr.? Maybe, but that also hurts Spence. Politics to one side, Crawford, for me, is still the most sophisticated and complete boxer out there.
“He’s 33 years old now, so time isn’t on his side, but he remains a handful for any welterweight that dares to take him on. In terms of his pound-for-pound status, I’d have him rated No. 3 behind Canelo Alvarez, who trumps him on resume, and Naoya Inoue, who trumps him on form.
“But Crawford is only a hair behind those guys and, in all honesty, they’re interchangeable. Bud has accomplished some great things, and when he’s on form he’s as good as it gets.”
Said Rold: “I think Crawford is still clearly one of the best four, five guys around once the bell rings but I understand why pound-for-pound aficionados are cynical on him right now.
“At some point, where you are and what you’re doing matters. He’s not a new welterweight anymore. He’s been there three years and his level of opposition, no matter the reason, is lackluster.
“That said, his career body of work is easily underrated by many because of that. He got a lot of quality business done at 135 and 140. For me, this kind of parlor debate is a combination of evident physical talent and in-ring evidence.
“Right now, in 2020, the best ‘resume’ might be Alvarez, Crawford has a case for best ‘eye test’ with a few guys — Spence included. How often is the best welterweight not in the race? — and Inoue in my opinion is the best combination of those two things.”
Now it’s my turn.
I believe Crawford is the best fighter in the world for several reasons.
Let’s start with eye test. In my opinion, Crawford and Inoue top the list in this category alone, although I believe strongly that Vasiliy Lomachenko could still be a force at 130 pounds.
Alvarez doesn’t have the speed, reflexes or athleticism of Crawford or Inoue. And while he obviously is skillful – and still getting better — I don’t think he has better than either the American or Japanese fighters in that department.
In other words, if I were to watch the three of them without knowledge of their names or resumes, I would say that Crawford and Inoue are better than Alvarez. That’s the eye test.
Rold hit the bullseye when he said that Alvarez doesn’t do anything profoundly well. He’s successful because he does everything very well, which is why he must be considered near the same level of Crawford and Inoue even in terms of the eye test.
I also want to draw attention to part of Gray’s quote above, which I believe says a lot: “Politics to one side, Crawford, for me, is still the most sophisticated and complete boxer out there.”
Now onto resume. Again, Alvarez is the runaway winner here. And, from y perspective, the young Inoue is No. 3 in this department. So let’s focus on Crawford.
I’ll acknowledge once more that the Nebraskan doesn’t have the resume of Alvarez and some other top fighters. That’s clear. At the same time, I don’t think his body of work is as weak as some would have you believe.
Crawford hasn’t beaten a pound-for-pounder but he has taken down a long list of legitimate contenders over the past six or seven years, almost always in dominating fashion.
To make my point I want to borrow from a project Rold put together for BoxingScene.com to determine the best fighter of the 2010s, which was based entirely on accomplishments.
Rold devised a points system using The Ring and Transnational Boxing rankings. He examined top fighters’ records against ranked opponents. The higher the ranking of the losing fighter, the more points the winner received.
In the end, Crawford (57.78 points) ranked behind only No. 1 Alvarez (82.5) and No. 2 Mayweather (65.48). Crawford was 11-0 against ranked fighters. Alvarez was 11-1-1, Mayweather 8-0.
Rold wrote: “With alphabet titles in three weight classes, Ring and TBRB (Transnational Boxing Rankings Board) championships at lightweight and Jr. welterweight, and a rare four belt unification of Jr. welterweight, the pride of Omaha quietly amassed more wins against rated fighters than almost anyone in the top twenty.
“While questions of his quality of opposition grow louder at welterweight at the dawn of a new decade, his overall body of work was exceedingly solid. With three wins against the men rated best, or next best to Crawford, in his favor across lightweight and Jr. welterweight, Crawford did everything he could with what was available and never came close to losing before arriving at welterweight.”
Will that change the mind of Crawford’s critics? Not a chance.
I’ll tell you what might do the trick, though: if Crawford fights and beats two or three of the best welterweights, fighters like Spence, Manny Pacquiao, Keith Thurman, Shawn Porter and Yordenis Ugas, all of whom happen to be affiliated with Premier Boxing Champions.
Crawford, promoted by Top Rank, is 33. There’s still time for him to build a resume that will win him more pound-for-pound support.
[lawrence-related id=15447,15441,15430,15418,15091]