I agree with the folks who say Sanchez deserves maybe more respect. Doesn't deserve to be ranked in the top-5, mind you.... just deserves higher-profile, ranks-solidifying fights. Maybe Anderson or Kabayel ... and depending how he does there, maybe Hrgovic, Zhang or Parker. Let's get the fights made.
No one really. Parker won against Wilder but lost to Joyce recently. I put Hrgovic over Parker because of punch output. Thats the biggest differences between the two of them.
But he beat Zhang who beat Joyce who beat Parker who beat Zhang. True. Are you okay with my ranking if I give Parker the 4th slot and Hrgovic the 5th?
"You actually have to beat someone in the top 5 to break into the top 5." It's an eye test list, not an accomplishments list. For me it goes against logic for me to rate fighter X higher than fighter C, if I think that fighter C would beat fighter X.
As of 03/11/24 I would rank the top 5 Heavyweights (after Champion, Oleksandr Usyk) as follows: Lineal Champion: Oleksandr Usyk, Lineal, WBA, WBC, IBF. #1 Contender: Tyson Fury, WBC. #2 Contender: Anthony Joshua. #3 Contender: Joseph Parker. #4 Contender: Zhilei Zhang. #5 Contender: Filip Hrgovic
The biggest difference is Parker has a solid resume with wins over multiple contenders and gatekeepers... Whilst Hrgovic has beaten Zhang (possibly fringe contender, but has only beaten one top-200 fighter in Joyce) and then you're into journeymen and jobbers. Parkers resume is solid. Hrgovic's resume is thinner than concentration camp toilet tissue. They're not remotely comparable in proven-ness - Parker's miles ahead.
The eye test is worthless without considering the level of competition. It's easy to look good against crap opponents - then get destroyed when you step up. You can't just set aside accomplishments.
Which brings me to my main problem with "eye tests". It's easy to look good beating up Journeymen, not so easy actually fighting top contenders/champions. The difference between the two should be important when deciding the top 10, let alone the top 5.
And here's where the eye test totally breaks down. Joshua against contenders can look cautious... Against lesser fighters, he's more willing to let his hands go - of course he is, it's not as risky against guys who can't punish him as well. Maybe he'll keep the aggression if/when he steps back up to fighting the better fighters in the division... Maybe not. And that's exactly the problem - what will guys who haven't really fought at that level look like when you put them in with the more dangerous fighters? Will they be able to cope, or will the "eye test" observations from fighting mostly journeymen look like a completely different fighter? Hrgovic is a good example - he's fought one contender (maybe - at best) in Zhang who he struggled with... Beyond that he's fought only journeymen - it's much easier to look great against those, and he has, but it doesn't mean anything much.
I saw how Parker handled Fa, I saw how Sanchez handled Fa, I think Sanchez is a better operator than Parker and not just solely on that one common opponent. "You can't just set aside accomplishments". What you mean is you don't 'want' people to set aside accomplishments, people set aside accomplishments all of the time and sometimes it even manifests in reality, case in point, a 0-1 boxing novice just fought Joshua based purely off the eye test, a very profitable experience for the boxers and promoters. How do you think sporting scouts pick talent? How do you choose whats the best lobster in the fish tank at a sea food restaurant? There's no question Parker is far more accomplished than Sanchez. I personally believe though if Parker and Sanchez were to have a boxing match, I think Sanchez would outbox him to a comfortable UD win. Based off that, it would be going against my own logic for me to rate him higher.