Yes: You've somehow missed it: Golovkin has proven to me personally that he's the best middleweight in the world. That is based upon how he looks to me personally his defeat of: the #4 contender the #4 contender the #9 contender the #4 contender the #6 contender Since the rankings inception. That, in it's entirety, is composed of fact and reason. Media ("lol") and people ("irrelevant") DO see us as injecting some honesty into the sport. From your subjective point of view, that is not going to happen. So i'd suggest you find other rankings to follow. Good luck finding one that doesn't have Golovkin on its p4p list (there isn't one).
Well, politics may exists everywhere else but, according to you, they must not exist in boxing. Oh no, there are no politics in boxing and of course the TBRB's P4P rankings aren't politically motivated. Is this what you'd have me to believe?
No, i have said SPECIFICALLY the opposite of this: "They [politics] exist everywhere. Why would i be denying that?" How have you managed to miss this? What I said, again: I, for example, find the notion that all of boxing is compromised by "politics" if they disagree with you in this matter to be BS. How you can get from this that I believe that there is no such thing as politics in boxing is utterly bizarre. In case it hasn't been clear up until: i don't care what you believe. Not even a little bit. It means literally nothing to me. But, for the record, TBRB rankings aren't politically motivated, no.
Here is a fact that you have yet to address. Bumlovkin has never beaten a #2 ranked contender @ 160. Jacobs has and did it in a more impressive fashion than Bumlovkin did in beating the only top 5 guy(s) he's faced. And yet you rate Bumlovkin ahead of Jacobs? How do you explain this inconsistency?
No; but i can offered up my informed opinion through association and share it. Just as you can offer up your completely uninformed opinion and share it. Golovkin has a better resume than Jacobs. It's why every serious rankings organisation ranks Golovkin higher.
Oh? So then you can't say definitively and with 100% assurance that the TBRB's rankings, or at least those who vote on them, aren't somehow motivated by politics? Am I reading you correctly?
No; but i can offered up my informed opinion through association and share it. Just as you can offer up your completely uninformed opinion and share it.
Bumlovkin has never beaten a #2 ranked contender @ 160. Jacobs has and did it very impressively. And BTW - the #2 contender that Jacobs KO'ed in 1 round was undefeated. So, exactly HOW does Bumlovkin have the "better resume"? Come on, lets hear your "reasoned" and "objective" explanation... Well there you go again with that same ole herd mentality. Bumlovkin must have a better resume than Jacobs because all these people over here say so. Oh, and BTW - the Earth is FLAT. LOL....
Lots of guys to rank p4p haven't beaten a #2 contender. Lots of guys who have don't. Golovkin has a better resume than Jacobs. I also expressed that it was my opinion; I don't think your determination to dismiss the opinion of every serious boxing person in the world that I know of can be dismissed by Is serious. I think it's utterly pitiful.
Well, so far, you have proven that Bumlovkin has a better resume than Jacobs because of ALL the guys Bumlovkin has beaten who were ranked LOWER than Peter Quillin and, unlike Quillin, also had previous LOSES. Good job. If this is an example of what we can expect from you and the TBRB then please excuse me while I... LMAO...
What i've shown is that Golovkin beat more ranked guys than Jacobs. And that almost everyone in the boxing world agrees with my position, and disagrees with yours. What you've added to the conversation amounts to And a series of bizarre misunderstandings that I had to very carefully explain to you. Sometimes twice.
No. What you have shown is that Bumlovkin beat lower ranked guys - and did so less impressively. Congratulations.