I didnt say he fought him, did I?:yep What I mean is, in spite of Macklin deserving to get a good boost up the rankings for his performance against Sturm, he still did not beat Felix, so therefore I dont see how you could rank him above the likes of Pirog.
I don't agree. There all on a par the IBO probably means less. The Ring is different. I get why people like the ring but I also think its meaningless. you need a combination off all of them. and only 1. thats the only way it works.
I personally think losing an SD to Sturm is better than anything Pirog has done. Pirog KO'd and over hyped prospect for a vacant title, and since then has done **** all.
You said you were ranking on official decisions though, so in which case Macklin has not done a whole lot to deserve a number four ranking. Not trying to nit pick or anything though, because I know you cant disregard good performances regardless of the result. Stillwould have him quite as high up as number four, even though Sturm is one of the best middlweights in the world.
The Ring's not perfect but its the only one I give any credit to. The alphabets are all so abysmal that ranking them seems pointless. I don't know if this was the Daily Mail's opinion or how they felt the belts were perceived generally?