Terence Crawford’s ESPY win raises question: What does Best Fighter really mean?

Crawford’s historic victory over Canelo Alvarez secured another Best Fighter award, but fans remain split over how the honor should be judged

Terence Crawford’s third ESPY Award for Best Fighter has reignited debate over what the honor is meant to recognize. While his victory over Canelo Alvarez delivered one of boxing’s biggest achievements of the past year, some fans argue activity and a stronger overall résumé should have carried more weight.

Crawford earned the award after his historic victory over Canelo Alvarez last September, becoming the first boxer to claim undisputed championships in three divisions during the four-belt era. The achievement was one of the biggest moments in boxing over the past year.

Not everyone agrees it made him the sport’s best fighter during the ESPY voting period.

Some fans argued Crawford’s win over Canelo wasn’t among the year’s most entertaining performances, pointing to a fight they felt lacked sustained action through much of the early rounds. Others noted that Crawford fought only once during the eligibility period, while several other top fighters stayed busier and produced more action-packed performances against high-level opposition.

The discussion also highlights how the ESPYs differ from traditional boxing awards.

Unlike honors selected exclusively by boxing writers or industry experts, ESPN chooses the nominees before opening the final vote to fans. That means achievement is enough to earn a place on the ballot, but popularity and fan support ultimately help determine the winner.

The ESPYs are intended to recognize achievements from the previous year rather than lifetime accomplishments. That means a fighter doesn’t have to be active throughout the entire period to be eligible, but ESPN has never published a formula explaining how activity is weighed against the significance of a single victory. The final result is left to the judgment of the selection committee and the fans who cast the deciding votes.

Crawford’s victory over Canelo was unquestionably one of boxing’s defining moments during the eligibility period. The debate is whether that one accomplishment should outweigh fighters who competed more often and delivered a stronger overall body of work.

Supporters of Crawford argue the magnitude of defeating Canelo outweighs concerns about activity or entertainment value. Critics see it differently, believing the Best Fighter award should recognize the boxer who put together the strongest overall year rather than the one who produced the single biggest victory.

The split reaction to Crawford’s latest ESPY shows there is no universal definition of what makes the year’s best fighter. For some, history carries the greatest weight. For others, activity, quality of opposition and excitement inside the ring deserve just as much consideration.

Share on Facebook

Post on X