IN THEORY, is it better to dominate 1 division, or win titles at multiple divisions?

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by DINAMITA, Aug 13, 2008.


  1. puga_ni_nana

    puga_ni_nana Dempsey Roll Full Member

    41,814
    5
    Apr 14, 2007
    :good

    if level of opposition is almost the same, the one who fought in higher weights would be rated more highly p4p.
     
  2. catasyou

    catasyou Lucian Bute Full Member

    38,466
    21
    Apr 7, 2008
    Well then it's fighter b
     
  3. joecaldragon

    joecaldragon Guest

    I agree
     
  4. 196osh

    196osh Mendes Bros. Full Member

    14,565
    11
    May 10, 2007
    If a fighter dominates a strong divison then it is better than a fighter who moves up in weights and cherry picks the weaker belt holders.

    Basically the highest a fighter can get ranked if he moves up and beats the best fighter in each divison which they move up into.

    Just as an example in theory:

    Juan Diaz dominating and unifying lightweight would not be as good as him beating: Pac, Hatton and Margarito/Cotto/Williams.

    But Juan Diaz dominating and unifying lightweight would be better than beating say: David Diaz (when he was WBC), Malinaggi and beating Judah if he won.
     
  5. Rico Spadafora

    Rico Spadafora Master of Chins Full Member

    45,285
    3,675
    Feb 20, 2008
    Skipping from Division to Division winning one or two belts does not mean **** and it does not make you the champion either.
     
  6. mexican legend

    mexican legend MVP! Full Member

    17,356
    1
    Jul 19, 2008
  7. Doomas

    Doomas Active Member Full Member

    841
    3
    Jan 11, 2007
    To answer the thread the one moving in weights, to answer this qeustion in reality, we have to look at the level of opposition.
     
  8. ron u.k.

    ron u.k. Boxing Addict banned

    4,920
    12
    Feb 14, 2006
    well it purely comes down to the level of opposition.to me if a guy stays around at the top of one weight division and stays there for 6,7 or 10 years then the chances are over that over a period of time such as that he usually has fought some strong opposition.on the other hand if a fighter moves up and wins alphabet titles from mediocre title holders,then hops up again and wins another against another relatively weak belt holder then while on paper it may look the greater achievment,in reality it isn't. to me it simply comes down to resumes and the calibre of fighter they're taking on.
     
  9. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    Yes that is obviously obvious! But what I'm asking is, IN THEORY, which is the greater achievement, or which is your personal preference. I said at the start of the thread that fighters A and B's resumes were said to be generally accepted as being of a very similar quality, so I could find out in theory which feat u guys think is greater.
     
  10. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    Yes that is obviously obvious! But what I'm asking is, IN THEORY, which is the greater achievement, or which is your personal preference. I said at the start of the thread that fighters A and B's resumes were said to be generally accepted as being of a very similar quality, so I could find out in theory which feat u guys think is greater.
     
  11. Loewe

    Loewe internet hero Full Member

    5,479
    12
    Jul 15, 2008
    Both are about equal great in my book. Not much of a difference there when they beat opposition of the same class.
     
  12. DINAMITA

    DINAMITA Guest

    So you don't buy into that the guy who goes up in weight is achieving more by beating guys with natural size, weight and strength advantages??
     
  13. FlatNose

    FlatNose Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,800
    25
    Feb 16, 2006
    The best case scenerio is for a champ to dominate one division for a while, and then go big game hunting in other divisions.
     
  14. K0NPHL1C7

    K0NPHL1C7 Well-Known Member Full Member

    2,624
    0
    Jun 15, 2006
    I agree.
     
  15. Loewe

    Loewe internet hero Full Member

    5,479
    12
    Jul 15, 2008
    No, i don“t. Why? Look at the guys who move up and have success. Those normally guys who are physically so much more talented than all the other guys in their natural weight class - more athletic, speed, power and so on. So, if they would stay there they would always have an advantage over them but if they move up their advantages will be neutralized by the size advantage the fighters of higher weights have over them. Of course there are exceptions to the rule-