To me, this is just a nonsense idea. Vasquez proved what a great talent he is against Marquez. And vice-a-versa. You don't think this is valid, you think its more valid to fight a lesser opponent, Penalosa, for example, than it is for Israel to fight Rafa? :huh It's not logical. It doesn't make sense.
It's a subjective opinion. Just because you have a different opinion, doesn't make those who disagree, any less "knowledgeable". You should learn to embrace different perspectives as it might help to inform your own.
this is your personal list so i won't argue with you even if i disagree with it. mine would be something like this: 1. pac 2. jmm 3. bhop 4. mosley 5. cotto 6. williams 7. darchinyan 8. hatton 9. calderon 10. dawson/abraham rafa and marquez dropped because of inactivity
Subjective my ass. You want to rank fighters? Rank them based on their performance - especially against each other. What the **** are we talking about here? You cant say JMM is better than Pac when he doesnt own a win over him in two chances and was put on his ass 4 times.
Of course its subjective. Its about considering various issues and coming to some kind of opinion. You can't say its based soley on facts, because you're ranking different fighters, from different weight classes, with different records, who may or may not have fought each other, or shared common opponents. And I thought JMM was unlucky not to get the decision in both fights.
Agreed! However, in this case my argument is soley about Pac and JMM. If they never faced each other than i would agree with your previous statement. But the fact is they fought twice and JMM didnt win either fight so one cannot put him ahead of Pac. Now if your comparing say Mayeather and Hopkins, sure its subjective beacuse they never fought so how can one really detemine who the superior fighter is. However, we have that eveidence with Pac and JMM.
But if you're making a ranking list based on your own personal subjective opinions, and your opinion happens to be that Marquez did beat Pacquiao, why would you suddenly decide to put the subjective views of two other people, who happened to be judges for that fight above your own, for that issue only?
I know what your saying. But, I consider JMM the winner against Pac in the 2nd fight, so JMM's last 3 fights have been more impressive than Pac's overall. Thats why I have him at #1.
The point is, their division is packed. Instead of fighting all the other talents in that division, they chose to fight each other. Who can say that they really are the best when they're only fighting each other and not giving the rest a chance. How sure are you that Penalosa is a lesser opponent? Have you even seen penalosa fight? After KOing Gonzales he immediately challenged both, but was ignored. So was Caballero.
He is an undefeated world title holder who has made 9 defences and dominated and destroyed many of his opponents. But you're correct, tomorrow is Saturday.
Tomorrow is Satuday, you got that one right! John has more defences and has beaten better fighters. The same goes for Calderon, for example. Why are they not ranked higher?