How many top 10/5 contenders/fighters did Crawford, Usyk and Inoue Beat: The Ring's List

I checked the Ring annual ratings archive, and then accounted for whether or not a fighter beat a contender before they fought Usyk/Crawford/Inoue that year if they weren't included. Here's the list according to that research.

Wins over top 10 fighters/contenders :

Inoue: 20

Crawford: 11

Usyk: 9

Wins over top 5 fighters/contenders:

Inoue: 14

Crawford: 7

Usyk: 8 (the only top contender he fought who wasn't ranked in the top 5 was Huck)

*Updated for Inoue-Junto

 

Looks like you are not counting rematches?

 

I am counting rematches, it's a total win counter. Usyk, Bud and Inoue received credit for rematches. I was surprised, but Dubois wasn't ranked by The Ring in the first fight. Usyk had some bad luck, because Mchunu and Dubois were both top 5 quality fighters afterwards but not when he fought them. Burns wasn't rated in the division when Crawford rematched him.

 

It's unfortunate, but the pound for pound fighters Inoue could have fought until now weren't willing to fight him at 115. There weren't any great or almost great fighters at 118/122 (besides Donaire, who was still good enough to be the best besides Inoue most likely, but he was older), so the criticism is reasonable in my opinion. To receive credit on the level of an ATG (by most fans, I'll consider him an ATG regardless of his career from here on out), Inoue is going to have to beat Junto/Bam and their careers are going to have to continue to progress. If he does manage that, though, the sheer numbers he's beat and multiple pound for pound wins will secure his status as an ATG I'm sure.

 

Unless I am not reading this correctly, but Burns and Crawford never had a rematch.

 

Yeah, you're correct, I misremembered. I guess I missaw somehow. either way, it didn't affect the count. I checked every fighter, whether or not they were rated the year before or beat a contender that year, and then made the list, one by one.

 

Theres nothing like getting high and just sorting through the Ring annuals thinking about new statistical categorys you can make out of them.

 

Crawford never rematched Burns. Burns lost to that African dude in a unification fight, and then Bud fought him.

Was Mchunu really not ranked by Ring at the time? Bit of a surprise, not surprised by Dubois tho as his resume was non-existent and it was a joke of a fight at the time.

Glowacki, Huck, Briedis, Gassiev, Bellew, Joshua, Joshua, Fury, Fury, Dubois - that´s 10. Maybe Bellew was not ranked due to his long absence from the division, but he should have, and even then its still 9... well, would you look at that! I have answered my own questions

 

Furyx2
Joshuax2
Duboisx2
Bellew
Briedis
Glowacki
Gassiev
Huck
I'm not sure for Hunter.

 

Haha I don't get high, worried about going crazy/becoming stupid, but yeah, sounds like fun.

 

Weirdly Bellew wasn't ranked, and Dubois wasn't the first time. Hunter wasn't either. Bellew should've been ranked though definitely

 

I don't think Bellew was ranked because that fight was at Heavyweight I'm sure. He had only previously boxed at Cruiser and Light heavy.

 

I love the lower weight classes, but one thing I always think about with these things is that with the weight classes so close together there are simply more potential top ten guys to face down there.

In higher weight categories, there are simply fewer top ten guys to fight.

Just something to consider...

 

Just to clarify cause rereading my post, I'm not sure I was very clear:

In a ten pound range from 105 to 115, you'd have 40 top ten guys by a single ranking system (the ring magazine for example)

But, from 160 to 175 (a 15 pound range) you'd only have 30 total top ten guys you could face.

So, comparisons like this always tend to favor the lower weights.