Congrats on beating a 47-year old boxer Chad. :good Chad Dawson's 'great' wins came against a 40 year old, 32 year old, 42 year old, and a 47 year old. Oh yea, and Ademek. How the hell does this a P4P boxer make? For godsakes, Chad Dawson fights in the second weakest division in boxing. Last time Dawson beat a prime fighter, he lost. Why the hype for this guy? I'd rather put my chips behind ****ing Adrien Broner. Answer the question. Why in the hell is Dawson deserving of P4P status?
Worse than that, I saw a thread yesterday asking if Dawson was HOF worthy!!! I don't think anyone agreed with the thread starter, but for the love of god... For the record, Dawson's resume isn't as bad as what you're making out; it's not like Hopkins is a run of the mill 47 y/o, is he.
Why are u soo pissed? Dawson beat tarver twice in which he move up and beat up green at crusierweight. Dawson easily beat johnson in the rematch in which johnson later on was robbed vs cloud and ko allen green and put on a great fight with froch. Dawson beat hopkins who in 2011 in everyone eyes beat pascal twice in a row. You bashing dawson for beating old fighters in which the same old fighters did very well after dawson and before dawson. So yeah stfu. Oh and dawson beat adamek but oh well.
Okay, so why is Dawson deserving to be called a P4P fighter again? He lost his spot after losing to Pascal. Okay, cool. Then, Dawson beat a 47-year old boxer. Okay, he's P4P again? What type of ****ery is this?
Did Pascal not get beat by the same fighter that Dawson just beat? P4P is about projection, it's subjective, and the man's resume is solid for a 29 year old fighter. Why is JMM on the list, he lost his last fight to PAC, he was completely outclassed by PBF, he sandwiched a win over Katsidas in there...who dropped him? I love JMM and believe he's P4P worthy. I'm just illustrating a point.
He also beat Diaconu since his Pascal loss, then and still Ring #5 LHW. He may have lost his spot in the top 10, but you'd have to be blind to have dropped him out of the top 20 echelon. So, with the Diaconu win and the Hopkins win, also a fellow top 20 guy, Dawson more than easily falls back into the top 10.
If I was trolling, I would do a helluva lot better than this. 'Glass jaws. LOL.' 'Klitschkos. LOL' 'Paquiao and Mayweather. LOL.' That's what would get you guys worked up. I'm dead serious right now.
And....Pascal didn't become a P4P fighter for it. If Pascal became top 10 P4P after beating ****ing Hopkins, you would have a point. However, Pascal didn't. Dawson is getting props for beating AARP boxers and I'm not understanding it. I don't understand this BS at all. Someone help me understand it.
Do you only think the Ring Magazine is worthy enough to have an opinion on a P4P list? Everybody has their own. And yes, I did see Pascal on some after he beat Dawson. A lot of them? No. But several. Besides, you also fail to consider that Dawson was P4P #4 when he got bounced from the Pascal loss. It is not as though he was an unproven quality back then. Adamek, Johnson X2, Tarver X2, Diaconu, Hopkins ^Name 10 active guys who have a better "Top 7 Victories."
anyone bringing age into the question in the cases of bernard hopkins and antonio tarver to a lesser extent, doesn't really know anything about their careers as of late, and therefore cannot really judge chad dawson.
Nobody should be saying he's P4P fighter but if he fights Ward next, he'll beat him, that should put him top 10.