Boxing  

Forum Home Boxing Forum European British Classic Aussie MMA Training
Go Back   Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > British Boxing Forum


Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 10-11-2012, 03:00 PM   #1
ishy
P4P King
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 22,626
vCash: 500
Default A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

Ring Magazine's rankings were for ages regarded as arguably the most reliable set of independent boxing rankings out there. But as we all know they've gone increasingly to pot over the past few years and can't really be relied upon anymore.

So this press release has been put up on the ESB front page: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

A group of writers from around the world have got together to create their own rankings. Rankings that are more reliable than that of the Ring's. Interestingly amongst the panel members there's ESB's own McGrain and I'm sure Stuart Howe is Longcount who used to post on here

Interesting to see what comes off this. Rankings are subjective but that doesn't mean you can come up with any old shit and say Kell Brook is the world's third best welterweight
ishy is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Sponsored Links
Old 10-11-2012, 03:08 PM   #2
JFT96
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,323
vCash: 75
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

On this subject, I noticed Sky Sports have made an updated top 30 list for each division. I've only skimmed through but they're not the worst I've ever seen.
JFT96 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2012, 03:18 PM   #3
D-MAC
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Belfast, NI.
Posts: 7,653
vCash: 75
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

We already have a legitimate alternative in the boxrec rankings.
D-MAC is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2012, 03:21 PM   #4
cheekyvid
Detroit, I shall return.
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: That gum you like is going to come back in style
Posts: 3,677
vCash: 4289
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

Quote:
Originally Posted by JFT96 View Post
On this subject, I noticed Sky Sports have made an updated top 30 list for each division. I've only skimmed through but they're not the worst I've ever seen.
No chisora in the top 30 i noticed yet Bob Helenius is at 11...is it because he's "banned"? Haye is at 4
cheekyvid is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2012, 03:29 PM   #5
JFT96
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,323
vCash: 75
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

Quote:
Originally Posted by cheekyvid View Post
No chisora in the top 30 i noticed yet Bob Helenius is at 11...is it because he's "banned"? Haye is at 4
Probably. I assume they have some sort of rules around it given that Pascal isn't there eitger, for inactivity I'd guess. Cleverly in the top 5 is a joke.
JFT96 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2012, 03:33 PM   #6
DrMo
Team GB
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 10,802
vCash: 122
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

Bobby Palmers rankings > the rest
DrMo is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2012, 05:54 PM   #7
wrimc
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Liverpool
Posts: 5,255
vCash: 1000
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

Quote:
Originally Posted by DrMo View Post
Bobby Palmers rankings > the rest
quoted for wisdom
wrimc is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2012, 05:57 PM   #8
tyewil
Journeyman
ESB Jr Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 221
vCash: 677
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

I always thought the ring mag rankings were bias towards american fighters anyway
tyewil is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-11-2012, 06:43 PM   #9
Jack
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 11,319
vCash: 15000
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

As good of an idea as it is...does anyone really care? The Ring ratings will always carry weight behind them, even though they do sometimes make mistakes. All the respectable sources will still cite The Ring's opinion along with the official scores from the judges, so I'm not sure what this can actually do. I'd love to see a proper 'unofficial' title which was respected by everyone in boxing but that simply isn't going to happen unless this TBRB group can create some legitimacy.

There should also be a P4P list.
Jack is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2012, 02:23 AM   #10
Longcount
boxing
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 2,532
vCash: 1034
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack View Post
As good of an idea as it is...does anyone really care? The Ring ratings will always carry weight behind them, even though they do sometimes make mistakes. All the respectable sources will still cite The Ring's opinion along with the official scores from the judges, so I'm not sure what this can actually do. I'd love to see a proper 'unofficial' title which was respected by everyone in boxing but that simply isn't going to happen unless this TBRB group can create some legitimacy.

There should also be a P4P list.
There will be a P4P list and the board already has some major support within the industry. It's early days yet but there is a plan.
Longcount is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2012, 02:31 AM   #11
Bill C84
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Kent. UK.
Posts: 5,165
vCash: 81
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

Quote:
It begins with language. Words and phrases like “undisputed,” “title holder,” “belt holder,” “slice/piece of a title,” and “unification bout,” are the stuff of delusion. We recognize who is behind the delusion and resolve to respect neither the alphabet organizations nor their belts. We will ignore them. But we will not ignore history
Bill C84 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2012, 03:17 AM   #12
gashalasha7
Belt holder
ESB Addict
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 2,022
vCash: 500
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ishy View Post
Ring Magazine's rankings were for ages regarded as arguably the most reliable set of independent boxing rankings out there. But as we all know they've gone increasingly to pot over the past few years and can't really be relied upon anymore.

So this press release has been put up on the ESB front page: [Only registered and activated users can see links. ]

A group of writers from around the world have got together to create their own rankings. Rankings that are more reliable than that of the Ring's. Interestingly amongst the panel members there's ESB's own McGrain and I'm sure Stuart Howe is Longcount who used to post on here

Interesting to see what comes off this. Rankings are subjective but that doesn't mean you can come up with any old shit and say Kell Brook is the world's third best welterweight

Just had a look, agree with a lot of the rankings. Good stuff
gashalasha7 is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2012, 03:26 AM   #13
jc
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 6,503
vCash: 419
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

People should get behind the Ring rankings and title more. Its the only half legit one.
jc is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-12-2012, 03:59 AM   #14
Jonsey
Champion
East Side Guru
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 5,720
vCash: 500
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

Have seen the rankings. Mine our better.
Jonsey is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Old 10-15-2012, 06:45 PM   #15
Jack
Undisputed Champion
East Side VIP
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 11,319
vCash: 15000
Default Re: A legitimate alternative to the Ring's rankings?

"Hi, I am a huge fan of The Ring. I was just wondering what your feelings are on the newest endeavor called Transnational Boxing Rankings. I am not sure if you are aware of it or not but basically it is an organization that wants honest boxing rankings in an objective format. It has 25 boxing writers that will vote, etc.

Have any of your staff writers been contacted to be part of it? It seems this organization is a direct counter to your magazine as they state in their blog that The Ring is no longer objective. I wonder what makes these 25 writers more objective then other writers? Any insight would be appreciated. Thank you for your response. – Sean


I don’t have a lot of insight on the Transnational Boxing Rankings but I’m familiar with some of the American writers who are on the panel – including Cliff Rold, Michael Woods and Jake Donovan – and I think they are among the best in the business. I recognize some of the other names. I follow TBR founder Tim Starks, Adam Abramowitz and Kelsey McCarson on Twitter and they seem to know their stuff. I’m sure the others are knowledgeable and passionate about boxing as well.

I don’t know if any RING contributors or Ratings Panel members have been contacted by TBR. Personally, I would have no problem if they were part of TBR.

I don’t feel like we’re in competition with other ratings groups, be they sanctioning organizations or independent media.

I don’t care for anyone saying that THE RING’s ratings are not objective because I don’t think any rankings are “objective.” There’s always opinion involved in ranking boxers and hardcore boxing fans NEVER agree with those opinions 100 percent.

The fine folks at TBR will soon learn that once their ratings get out there a little more. I Google searched the name “Transnational Boxing Rankings” to find the website – here it is, please check it out – and I came across a thread of *********** message boarders already bickering about TBR’s ranking Marco Huck over Yoan Pablo Hernandez and Gennady Golovkin over Felix Sturm and Floyd Mayweather over Pacquiao (the usual bulls__t), as well as too many Americans being on their ratings panel.

I took a look at TBR’s rankings and I think they’re great. I agree with the placement of most of the fighters in most of the divisions. I don’t agree with all of the rankings, but I don’t have a problem with any of it.

Ya know why? It’s pretty much the same group and order in all 17 divisions that we have with THE RING’s ratings.

If you have a few hours to kill, go and check out ours and theirs.

You’ll see seven or eight of the same boxers in each division’s top 10 with only slight various among the top five of each weight class.

So I don’t see how TBR is a “direct counter” to RING magazine’s ratings. I know some fans and media will state that they just feel better about a ratings organization that isn’t owned by a promotional company (in our case, Golden Boy Promotions).

I get it. I don’t think we give any extra boost to GBP boxers in our rankings, but I understand the skepticism. Having said that, I’d like to end this mailbag by pointing out that TBR ranks the following GBP boxers higher than THE RING:

Peter Quillin, Floyd Mayweather, Erislandy Lara, James Kirkland, Victor Ortiz, Robert Guerrero, Daniel Ponce de Leon and Abner Mares. (Oh my God! They’re a bunch of GBP shills!)"




He's pretty much right. I agree more with the TBR rankings but it's hardly a monumental difference here. I'm not sure how they can form much of an alternative to The Ring without spoiling their credibility because I don't think The Ring's ratings are as biased as is being made out. If anyone has any specific glaring examples rather than the usual line about GBP owning the magazine, I'd be interested to read it.
Jack is offline  Top
Reply With Quote
Reply

Boxing News 24 Forum > Boxing > British Boxing Forum

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump





All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Boxing News 24 Forum 2013