The Ring rate Broner #5 P4P

People should be up in arms Guerrero is number 10

 

:good

 

#GBP running The Ring still

 

Keel in mind that these guys may already agree with us that Broner is rated too high but the majority of the others on the panel outvoted them. I've seen many times in Doug Fisher's *Monday and Friday mailbags where people have complained about the P4P ranks and he's agreed with them but said he's just member of the panel.

Still - it doesn't help with the *Ring trying to not look like its biased towards GBP when Broner an Guerrero jump ahead of so many more deserving fighters. I don't think they are pro GBP because Mares is GBP and he's more deserving than both of them and he's not there. Weird.

 

anybody know any other good sources to check for ratings? No way I can ever go back to ring after this lol

 

wait to Canelo actually fights a live opponent. Hes going to be top 3 :-(

 

You're asking the wrong question. It would be sillly of me to try to say why another man, who I have little insight on, isn't of the opinion that a particular fighter is one of the ten best fighters out there regardless of weight. My main point is that talent is more a important factor in determing a p4p list than is resume/accomplishments. Why Giampa feels one fighter is more talented than another is question that you should reserve for Giampa.

 

You're telling me the logic is flawed, when it's painfully obvious that you don't understand my logic. Again, my basic premsie is that talent, as well as resume and accomplishments are factors in coming up with such a list. I'm also saying that talent should be the more heavily weighed factor. Who is ranked in the top 10 p4p has nothing to do with my assertions. It's a subjective list that wasn't even created by me.

 

1. Mayweather
2. Ward
3. JMM
4. Martinez
5. Broner
6. Donaire
7. Pacquiao
8. Klitschko
9. Bradley
10. Guerrero


^^^ LOL!!!

 

Utter bull****. I'm cancelling my subscription.

Sad as this may sound, I often scroll through old Ring ratings on Wikipedia. It gives me an essence of who was around back in the day. Broner will eventually be pound for pound top 5 material, but now? People will look at that and see it to be true. "Bible of Boxing" my hairy arse. Sellouts.

 

Wow what a terrible list. And make no mistake, I rate Broner but his resume is very freaking thin compared to anyone on that list. And how did a win over DeMarco merit a fifth place when Trout score the significantly better win a week ago?

1. Mayweather
2. Marquez
3. Ward (kinda interchangeable with JMM really, both are absolutely terrific)
4. Martinez
5. Donaire
6. Pacquiao
7. Bradley
8. Wlad
9. Froch
10. Mares
11. Guerrero
12. Vitali
13. Viloria
14. Alvarez
15. Garcia
16. Trout
17. Broner
18. Geale
19. Salido
20. Cotto (probably a bit harsh but he doesn't look like he can take the top LMWs and two conclusive consecutive losses, albeit to great boxers, make him drop pretty hard on my list)

 

Guerrero has won world titles in 4 divisions, okay two of them were interim but still, this is an alot more merited ranking than Broner.

 

He is where he should be,he has not so quitely destroyed his last 5 opponents.Its not what you do its how you do it,Broner ,Canelo,Ward,Mares and Trout are the new school deal with it all are throw backs.