I'm confused. I'm not a Devon Alexander fan, but how did Devon drop in the...

Styles make fights. Triangle theories are ****. No offense.

lmao... Sure.

 

yeah and khans style is one of skill doesn't matter who is opponent it, look at malinaggi he's got a different style than kotelnik and he got shut out so yes triangle theories do work sometimes.

 

No *******, triangle theories are ****. It's all about quadratic theories.

 

None taken. I actually agree with you about that triangle theories aren't reliable much of the time, but this isn't a case of a guy dropping significantly or being stripped of the title or something ludicrous. It's just swapping spots amongst contenders and the guy who looked better leapfrogged the one who struggled. Even if we completely discount what Khan did to Kotelnik, who performed better in their last fight? Both Paulie and Kotelnik happen to be light hitting, older, former champions with good skills so there's not a significant difference in level between them, which makes for a good comparison between Khan's and Devon's performances.

For me, the answer is clearly that Khan fought better. He also happened to be much less of a favorite over Malignaggi that Alexander was over Kotelnik- not that that means much, but something to keep in mind. Khan surpassed what the general expectation was of his matchup with Paulie; Devon disappointed against a similar level opponent. So why not reward the guy who surprised to the upside?

If Alexander had the Ring title and he got dropped, of course it'd be a travesty. But having the rankings for contenders shuffled after a fight isn't a sign that Ring's corrupt; it's actually the fair way to do it. If Khan had lost 5 rounds and there were rumblings of a robbery over Malignaggi, I can assure you he wouldn't be #2 right now. But manner of victory does (and should) play a role in the rankings.

 

I had it 11-1 for Kotelnik the first time I watched it. 10-2 second time.

That was a robbery plain and simple.

Anyways I definately see why they moved Khan up the rankings. He dominated someone who should have won a belt against the former #2 guy.

People think if you win, you can't go down the rankings. But that's bull****. If you underperform then you should be re-evaluated. Even if you think Alexander won, you can't deny that he underperformed.

Kotelnik officially "lost" and I think he stayed put or even moved up the rankings.

 

Wonder if all the same people here would have said same if Froch had dropped in ranking after beating Dirrell, or would it be shouts of Justice has been served ect.

 

How else would you rank fighters other than by evaluating their performances against the people they fight and comparing that to your evaluation of other fighters performances against the people they fight? :?

 

I believe you are looking for a computerised style of ranking where only results are taken into account and not the performance/context, etc

Boxrec.com is your friend.

 

i think it is BECAUSE HE WON CLOSE. in the only mutual opponent, we have khan winning by clear lopsided fashion. and devon edging a close encounter that easily could have goone the other way. (i thought andrei won the fight)

hard to rank devon above khan considering this fight.

 

not the same thing IMO.

he didnt drop per se, he was overtaken by khan. he wasnt overtaken by kotelnik. the only reason khan is above him is because he dominated where alexander struggled.

dirrell had never lost before froch so it aint comparable.

do you rate devon above khan considering the fght?

 

He dropped in the rankings because he only just beat/alot thought he was beaten by a boxer who was himself coming off a defeat, and had been inactive for over a year.

Whilst Khan is coming off a victory over Malignaggi, who had just beaten Diaz (twice).

 

It's very easy to understand if you're not a ****** like Nallege.

The top three in the LWW division are fairly unexposed at this point. They are young with relatively few top level fights. Every fight shows new things and makes raional observers reassess and re-evaluate their opinions. Sometimes in light of more evidence, you might give more or less weighting to something that happened before.

What has happened here is that a lot of observers underrated Khan's domination of Kotelnik and a lot of observers have overrated the value of Alexander's two solitary world level wins. Alexander v Kotelnik has led them to reassess that previous context and adjust their rankings accordingly. It's really not complicated.

 

Because many thought he lost.

 

because the boy got his ass beat.

 

it really is simple, khan/alexander/bradley not much seperating them. bradley usually gets the nod cos hes been around a bit longer. but khan and alexander have now fought a mutual opponent. khan controlled, alexander struggled. it aint rocket science.

people go on about how devon is being penalized, what do they expect? he struggled vs a guy that was nigh on shut out by khan.