Originally Posted by zadfrak
That's not taking into consideraton a huge factor and since for that matter. Who was the guy promoted by?
That factor determined the ratings. Norton was not #2. He was an independant fighter that did things on a fight by fight basis. Tate was the #2 guy and that's because he was Arum's guy. Actually Arum's other guy--Leon Spinks was still way way up there.
Holmes and Shavers were DKP guys. Earnie's form going into that title shot was the draw with Ali. Then immediately afterwards a lopsided affair with Holmes. Then ancient Norton. Nobody liked the Acorns chances in that rematch with Larry because he was older and Larry had already dominated the guy recently.
Sure, Shavers shouldn't have been given much chance against Holmes but he was, imo, the next best fighter out there (based on recent form).
Even Ring magazine had Norton rated #2 at the end of 1978. Shavers wasn't in the top 10 but Domingo D'Elia was.
Interestingly, John Tate was NOT in the top 10 at the end of 1978 either, but Kallie Knoetze was at #6.
So, somehow Tate gets rated ahead of Shavers for doing a 15-round decision over the #6 guy a few months after
Shavers had blasted out #2 man in 1 round !
It seems obvious that Ring magazine were bowing to the plans of Bob Arum and the WBA in concocting their ratings, yes.