ESB Official Rankings Constitution: First Draft

Considering John showed himself to be in the same class as JMM, and has dominated almost all of his other opponents, then beating him would be a great victory. If someone were to impressively KO him it would certainly count for a lot. If Pavlik stops Taylor and did what Winky, Bernard, Ouma and Spinks couldn't in impressivley beating him then YES he is definitely ranked higher then Kessler. There are not that many variables at all. You are simply analyzing the performance and the opponent at the same time. If Kessler were to win a very close decision against JC, then Pavlik would be ranked higher, because his victory was more impressive yet still against a top opponent.

 

But by what you said earlier, is Taylor really that good to begin with? He is considered good because he beat a 40yr old Hopkins. So are he and Calzaghe on equal footing to start with? If not, a close victory over the better fighter may play in favor of Kessler regardless of how Pavlik wins.

 

Kessler has already dominated fighters on Pavlik's level, this is a fact. Pavlik has a stylistic advantage over Taylor and that is why he will win, he is not on Kessler's level of skill and operation, not even comparable.

 

No, Taylor and Calzaghe are leagues apart, you have agreed with this in the past.

 

Calzaghe is the better fighter yes, but Taylor is certainly world class. If Pavlik dominates him and then goes on to KO him, it will count for more then a close decision victory for Kessler over JC. To dominate a world class fighter shows a combination of two things. The first being a bad style match up for a particular fighter. The second being one fighter being in a different class. If Pavlik can dominate Taylor then he will prove himself to be a class above him, which would really put him very high on the p4p scale, considering Taylor has definitely proved himself to be extremely competitive against some of the top guys in boxing, regardless of the results.

 

And I do now, thus my point on competition and how good a fighter truly is.

 

And while I respect that opinion, I would disagree because I believe beating Calzaghe in any way shape or form is better than beating Taylor right now (though I do rank Taylor P4P unlike Amsterdam, because he does have talent and a good resume.....I rank Calzaghe higher).

 

Edison Miranda is just as good as anyone on Kesslers resume. And Miranda got KTFO and badly beaten, where as Mundine and Andrade took Kessler the distance. Although Kessler was still dominate in these fights, it was not to the same extent. If Pavlik dominates and KO's Taylor then he will have proved himself to be a better fighter at this point in time then Kessler. Thats a big IF though.

 

If he beat Taylor in a close fight then Yes i would agree. But if he dominates him and KO's Taylor, then that will certainly count for more IMO. Taylor may not be GREAT, but if BHop, Winky and even Spinks couldn't do enough in the eyes of the judges to beat him, he is certainly world class.

 

JC had a stylistic advantage over Lacy clearly... Should that have taken away from his win? NO. Definitely not. You can only go on the manner of the victory, and the level of the opponent. If you start trying to bring other variables into it you will make it to open to personal bias.

 

The difference is that Pavlik makes more mistakes and has more intangible flaws than Kessler. Kessler makes very few, if any mistakes at all and is defensively extremely sound, while Pavlik is of a similiar style and his head movement and footwork is not even remotely in the region of Kessler's, nor is his jab. The workrate is about the same.

Pavlik is simply not operating on that level, neither is Jermain Taylor for that matter.

Calzaghe vs. Kessler and Taylor vs. Pavlik are leagues apart in terms of class, this is all that I meant. And Pavlik won't dominate Taylor, he will just catch up to him whenever and his pressure will make Taylor fold, leaving him open to Pavlik's best shots, it may even come early, but Pavlik is still an evidently flawed fighter.

 

I would argue that all fighters are flawed, that is to say, they are not perfect at everything and could stand to be as good as another fighter in another area.

 

But the level of class in these 'top opponents' are not even comparable. JC is light years ahead of Taylor in terms of fighting class.

Pavlik will perhaps have the resume advantage to some for KOing Taylor, not me personally, but he could never be considered a better fighter than Kessler just off of this for the reasons that I have outlined.

Pavlik is going up against a flawed fighter who is massively overrated and has a stylistic advantage, a severe one by the way. Kessler is fighting a physical phenom and is at the severe stylistic disadvantage, it's not comparable.

 

Yes, they are all flawed to an extent. But if Pavlik is flawed at 60%, Kessler is flawed at 15%.

Roughly.

 

I know what you are saying here, but it just won't work. You are using your own judgement here, where as we are trying to establish a formal set of guidelines as criteria for the rankings system. In regards to this particular example, Pavliks incredible strength out weighs some of his weaknesses, making him a very hard fighter to properly evaluate. However, If I had to give my opinion Kessler is definitely the better fighter.