No, beating a faded Kovalev isn't as good as beating a prime Beterbiev or Bivol. In the past you didn't rate even a prime 2013-2015 Kovalev very high, remember? Why do you now rate a faded Kovalev as such a great win for Alvarez?
Most on the round by round had Nakatani drawing or winning by a point. He didn't stop him and that's hardly decisive.
Beterbiev- because he has the best win of that lot. Gvozdyk is himself a future hall of famer and Beterbiev chopped him down like a tree and stopped him
Not really, the fight was pretty competitive up to the 8th round. Gvozdyk did run out of gas partially due to the body shots, but also because he tends to run out of gas, he did the same thing against Amar. But the fight itself was fairly nip and tuck, far from a one-sided beatdown.
Can see the argument for Pacquiao given his age. Broner and Thurman is a great year for him. Can also understand the Canelo side of this. Kovalev and Jacobs is very very strong, although Kovalev was CLEARLY past it and drained to the max. Personally I went for Josh Taylor though. Baranchyk is dangerous for anyone to go up against, and Prograis is very talented. Taylor showed he can go toe-to-toe and isn't just a flashy show-off boxer. Don't understand why Josh Warrington is on there. The Kid Galahad fight was razor close, I had it to Galahad. Josh struggled in that fight. And his other opponent towards the end of the year was a bum so nothing special achieved there.
Warrington is quite a ring warrior, he's always in good fights and he has lots of heart. I wanted to give people the full 10 options, so I included Warrington. And also Vasyl Lomachenko, who had two wins over decent but not top opponents.
But most of boxing's biggest stars fight only twice per year. I'd prefer to see the top boxers fight three times a year, though.
