***Ring Magazine pound for pound [latest rankings]***

Discussion in 'World Boxing Forum' started by hellblazer, Jun 10, 2008.


  1. PaddyD1983

    PaddyD1983 Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,919
    2
    Dec 24, 2007
    Fair enough, and I agree that Hatton is losing his grip on the the top ten. But I think resume and form are STILL enough to keep him in there. Unimpressive his wins may have been, but someone like Pac has a controversial win over JMM - still a win and Pac is #1. Same goes for Hatton a win is a win. Also - from memory - I had Hatton about #6 approx pre - Mayweather and most observers had him around that figure. One loss to a #1 doesnt kick him straight out of the top ten.

    As for other people being worthy, yes arguments can be made for a lot of fighters for example... I have Mijares at #10 but Campbell, Casa and Guzman are not on my list and all have a shout. But for me Hatton is deserving.
     
  2. onourway

    onourway Haye KTFO1 Wlad Full Member

    5,774
    3
    Mar 31, 2008
    You just named Dawson, which is a poor suggestion.

    You can't on one hand say that Hatton has had unimpressive wins....and then say Dawson's win over Johnson puts him above Hatton, despite many people thinking Dawson didn't even win
     
  3. PrideOfWales

    PrideOfWales Winston Zedmore Full Member

    11,684
    1
    Apr 20, 2006
    Bernard Hopkins is WBC Emeritus Champion and WBO Champion of what exactly?
     
  4. pelican

    pelican Guest

    JMM too high. hatton too low. but their top 2 is same as mine
     
  5. Daft P

    Daft P Active Member Full Member

    1,434
    128
    Feb 27, 2005
    Look, I recognize Pac's record but most of boxing fans agree that he lost twice against Marquez and it is clear he lost to an "already shot" Morales as well (after Erik - MAB 3). "Actually" you seem to have a weird logic... you don't accept Raheem had a legitimate win against Morales on the other hand you put Pacquiao p4p no. 1 because he stopped LATER an even more "shot" Morales. Or do you put Pacman no. 1 because he "launched" Morales downhill before the Raheem fight? Is Pac's resume based on his defeat against Morales according to your logic????

    I also recognize his destruction of Barrera and I do not try to explain Barrera's defeat by reminding everyone how Marco underestimated Pacman...

    My point is that two very very controversial so-called wins against JMM excludes the possibility to put someone p4p no. 1.

    The only thing why Calzaghe deserves it more that he is undefeated and faced who he had to face (except Ottke and now Pavlik but the later fight will happen). Calzaghe is undefeated and gave B-Hop his first REAL, clear, not controversial, convincing loss since Roy Jones. That is the explanation.

    Pacquiao had slightly better opposition but he was defeated at least two times against this opposition and he was defeated before as well more times. That's why he is not p4p no. 1.

    As for Guzman: I just tried to refer to the fact that here at ESB I saw several polls about the possible outcome of Pac-Guzman and the overwhelming majority thought Guzman schools Pac. At the same time most people favour Calzaghe over Pavlik. That's the difference.

    If Pac becomes the undisputed lightweight champion (which he won't be able to do without facing the winner of Cambpell-Guzman) I will recognize him as p4p no. 1.
     
  6. TFFP

    TFFP Guest

    Dawson was not unimpressive, it was a close fight against a very good fighter. A fight where both enhanced their reputations in my eyes. Hatton looked unimpressive against Maussa and Urango for christs sake, its not comparable.
     
  7. CJLightweight

    CJLightweight Lightweight Kingpin Full Member

    6,598
    2
    Feb 23, 2008
    its easily pac...

    1. being undefeated doesn't mean **** unless you faced the best there is.
    2. ring champ for 2 weight classes? Pac was ring champ more than 2 weight classes, and is on his way to become a 4rth division champ.
    3. 2 weight classes doesn't mean ****, compared to 112 to 130. Lets see joe then at CW and HW shall we.
    4. Resume, the names on the resume. Clearly for pac
    5. keep bringing jmm up even if it is irrelevant cause even if pac lose to jmm he would still have a better resume, its about facing the best.
    6. past morales, yeah he is past prime but..at least morales is not 40+ years of age and his age and pacman are close
     
  8. Silvermags

    Silvermags Boxing Junkie Full Member

    9,268
    0
    Oct 28, 2007
    " Most boxing fans agree that jmm won over pac?!!!! "
    Says who?! If what you are saying is TRUE then why IS IT STILL PAC who is #1 not JMM the so-called winner in your EYES which you claim is the MAJORITY?!

    Is it a POLL that will determine wether somebody won or not? Or is it the official judges Since when was the TRUTH DETERMINED BY THE POLL?!

    If it's really the so-called "MAJORITY" which you claim then why is JMM stuck in #3? or #4?

    Your so-called imaginary "MAJORITY" did not or was not ENOUGH to BRING down PAC to #3 or 4 p4p?!

    I guess OBVIOUSLY you choose the wrong choice of words here...
     
  9. puga_ni_nana

    puga_ni_nana Dempsey Roll Full Member

    41,814
    5
    Apr 14, 2007
    well we can all put down any boxer's accomplishment in a way we want to see it. perhaps some see that calzaghe's fight with hopkins was close and some gave it to hopkins. does this affect the real decision by the judges?

    pac-marquez was close and i admit to it but pac is the one who knocked-down marquez. on the other hand calzaghe was the one who was knocked-down on the b-hop fight.

    and more importantly, the pac-marquez fight was 10 times the fight of calzaghe-hopkins. you can say that the jmm-pac was close but on this fight, both were equally amazing and impressed a lot of people. calzaghe-hopkins is aguably a clearer win for calzaghe (even with his kd) but this fight hardly raised both fighters stock.
     
  10. THN

    THN Boxing Addict Full Member

    5,386
    0
    Apr 8, 2007
    What is Hatton and Hopkins doing on that list ?
     
  11. hmi

    hmi Boxing Addict Full Member

    6,257
    0
    Sep 14, 2007
    No love for the heavies? Wlad deserves to be in the top 10. He doesn't have any serious challenger in the heaviest division. Put him in Hopkins' place.
     
  12. CJLightweight

    CJLightweight Lightweight Kingpin Full Member

    6,598
    2
    Feb 23, 2008
    jmm is even better and fresher than hopkins, the fight was close and even if pac lose he still should get more credit. Hopkins, old and past prime on the other hand still gave joe a bit problems and even knock him down with only like less than 10 punches per round. Marquez and pacquiao are so full of energy.

    Hopkins was taylor's leftover, had wins over a blown up wright and tarver who was good but never on the elite level
     
  13. TFFP

    TFFP Guest

    Taylor's leftover? :lol:

    You havn't seen those fights, have you?
     
  14. CJLightweight

    CJLightweight Lightweight Kingpin Full Member

    6,598
    2
    Feb 23, 2008
    i know first fight. controversial, i had hopkins winning but still at the end of the day its a W for taylor and a L for hopkins
     
  15. fitzgeraldz

    fitzgeraldz And the new Full Member

    21,873
    3
    Feb 27, 2008
    I don't know why Joe Calzaghe is rated so high ... its obvious that he has the weakest resume of all top p4p fighters.

    I wouldn't have him ranked in the top 5 with only 1 victory over a p4p top 15 fighter.

    I agree with Pac being #1 p4p