Not sure why you would use amateur records for a professional boxing ranking. Second, P4P is an opinion. Third, how may pro fights have Rigo been in? I am not a fan of the Klits either but they do have a deeper resume than Rigo's theoretical one. Yeah Broner is way to high for beating lesser names. At least Rigo beat a P4P champ that was favored against him. It is a wildly inconsistent list either way.
What, exactly, does who beat who in the amateurs have to do with professional P4P ratings? I'm not saying they are accurate, but NOTHING from the amateurs counts in pro -- I guess Audley should be ranked in the top 10 in heavyweights because, you know, gold medal?
Well normally nowadays yes the Ring are joking, well let me get it right Chuck Giampa is, as p4p is his list and his list only. By the way Amateur results count for 0 when you're pro except experience and marketability
That's not Giampas actual list though. He's forcing other people's agendas and in doing so is ruining what was once the bible of boxing. **** him.
broner is deserving at the top 10 p4p, the ghost was also on my top 10 p4p list after he demolish a solid champ jumping up in weight, and of course its only right he gets removed after beating floyd and canelo won against trout so I don't see whats wrong with doing so:huh
Amateur experience doesn't count. Donaire never belonged on that list. Rigondeaux treated him like amateur so Donaire better give all those pro FOTY awards back.
The Ring is really difficult to take seriously anymore. Their list is godawful and the best defense anyone on the site can give (Dougie) is that we shouldn't care that the list sucks. On top of that, did anyone read the writeup they posted of the Burns fight? It's like they don't even try anymore.