ESPN's Pound-For-Pound rankings after Kovalev-Ward 1

Surprised no one has posted this yet. The rankings are done by a panel of 9 ESPN writers/observers of the sport. The voting can be seen at the end of the list, as can the names of the people in the panel.

Yes, this list was made AFTER the Kovalev-Ward fight.
http://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/18120960/where-does-andre-ward-rank-win-sergey-kovalev

1. Gonzalez
2. Golovkin
3. Kovalev
4. Ward
5. Crawford
6. Pacquiao
7. Alvarez
8. Lomachenko (think rankings done before Loma-Walters)
9. Rigo
10. Thurman

Here's what I like about this list: If you believe, as I do, that Kovalev beat Ward then you should have the guts to back that up in your rankings. And apparently the ESPN panel believes that Ward lost the fight.

In fact, I think I saw Nigel Collins (one of the ESPN panel) saying after the fight that he felt Kovalev won. And we know Fat Dan (also on the panel) scored the fight for Kovalev, as well.

 

That's good to see. Most thought Kovalev won the fight, and the "official" decision has no impact on who was or is the better fighter. We have our own eyes, no need to be influenced by 3 people writing down bull**** scores.

 

That's some horrible rankings, truly horrible.

 

I actually am in pretty much agreement with those rankings.

Kovalev beat Ward, so he stays on top of him. Neither Kovalev nor Ward distinguished themselves in the fight, so they are below Gonzalez and Golovkin.

The Ward that fought Kovalev gets stopped by Golovkin. Ward is losing his speed and reflexes, or at least it looked that way at the higher weight.

 

I love Pacquiao but he's not top ten anymore.

 

Yeah, that's probably true.

 

Good list.

 

http://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/18179115/vasyl-lomachenko-makes-statement-win-nicholas-walters

Results are through Dec. 1.

1. ROMAN GONZALEZ

2. GENNADY GOLOVKIN

3. ANDRE WARD

4. SERGEY KOVALEV

5. VASYL LOMACHENKO

6. TERENCE CRAWFORD

7. MANNY PACQUIAO

8. CANELO ALVAREZ

9. GUILLERMO RIGONDEAUX

10. KEITH THURMAN

 

Both Kovalev and Ward and significantly better fighters than Golovkin, worlds apart. It's like saying West Ham are a better team than Barcelona, they are leagues apart and it's obvious to seasoned boxing fans. They also have advantages in size and strength. Golovkin wins his fights based on his physicality and attrition (aggression, power, strength, chin), he doesn't win his fights on boxing ability. Kell Brook P4P is a better fighter than Golovkin, as proven in their fight when he got dominated in round 2 by a very good boxer. Golovkin won that fight based on the attributes I just mentioned.

You can't have Golovkin above fighters like Kovalev, Ward, Loma etc...because P4P meaning if fights were the same size as weight. If Loma/Rigo/Crawford were GGG's size they all beat him rather handily. In fact Kell Brook would too.

 

YET the weight for Kov (63) and Ward (62) on that list shows how CLOSE the two are in non-nuthugger eyes.

edit: ESPN has him above Kov now

 

I get your reasoning re: Ward vs Kov and ESPN disregarding how the judges saw the fight when doing their top 10 P4P. They based it on what they saw in the ring not what the judges wrote on the scorecards. And that's fine - that's their prerogative. But then they put GGG above Kov and Ward, and he's not fought an elite level opponent yet. So he's not being judged by what has happened between the ropes. That's contradictory and renders this list beyond a joke...

 

It's pound for pound, not resume for resume.
Today I read a comment that makes things very easy to understand. "If it was based only on resume, Pac would still be #1 and sh_t all over the rest of the top10" (or something simular)

 

Mosley is still an active fighter and look at his resume. He would be #1.

 

Yeah I get that. But P4P cannot disregard resumes totally. Otherwise we would have to include leading amateurs. There's a formula which takes into account skill-set and how that skill-set has been successfully applied in actual fights and the quality of the fighters subjected to that skill-set - which is really the only way skill can be properly assessed ie: is it effective?. So resumes count. And count against GGG. He's in my top 10 but not number 2 for that reason.

 

I'm a massive GGG fan, but I can't put him 2. As much as Canelo should fight him, it's not fair to give GGG advance credit for destroying him until it actually happens.