MR. GREEN JEANS
It would be good to have a champ in every division and start the linear process again.Posted October 18, 2012 3:44 pm
One other thing…..boxing has been through what it is going through before in the Amateurs and the pros .Rule changes by an international body.It is not their fault if they like winning. Everyone does.We have always lifted ourselves up to the next level in America.But once again,we must do so within their rule changes.We have well over 100 years of innovations in boxing technique our mentors gave us to “peak” the sport.We have merely focussed so much on the future of our sport ,we have discarded what knowledge we have gained in Americas past .Politics reign internationally ,but need not to in the boxing gyms in America.It is not yet unlawfull for us to be innovative and fundamentally better than others.It is what we do……God bless….kenny weldonPosted October 18, 2012 1:17 pm
PHENYO…i AGREE WITH YOUR TAKE ON BIKERMIKE…He has a head on his shoulders and good introspect on the boxing game…He is very ugly though….Just kidding…God bless….kenny weldon…he often goes back to boxings future when discussing the games past.Posted October 18, 2012 1:00 pm
Yeah Biker Mike KID was good for this
I think Hidalgo is missing the point of P4P ratings …… and reading far too much into them.Posted October 18, 2012 11:20 am
Biker Mike, it is good to see that even after all these years you too are here with us at ESB and continue to make valuable contributions.
It is sad that so many folk from yester year are no longer as active as once before and all for varied and understandable reasons.
In light of this article, I too like all boxing fans see the challenges which have infected our sport, I know not yet what the solutions but more of the same is not going to solve our challenges. Thus in that case I welcome the TBR; however it too shall be assessed and I trust that they will adhere to their goals.
On a lighter note: I would like to hear James Toney take on all boxing organisations. I remember him calling the WBC ” We Be Crooks” in an interview more than 12 years ago.Posted October 18, 2012 3:34 am
Hildago…..look at the superiority that SRR displaye….time and again…..
hildago….you wanna degrade SRR greatness….cuz he didnt fight Joe louis…????? WDF
Like..your girlfriend/wife stayed true to you….cuz she didn’t know that four inches is not fair to herPosted October 17, 2012 11:14 pm
But see, P4P does’t mean squat because Robinson would never fight Louis or the opponents that Louis fought and vice-a-versa. That was just Robinson’s way of saying yeah, he’s bigger and more popular than I am but if you consider us pound-for-pound I’m better than him. Well, just like the Robinson/Louis fight that never would happen, the P4P myth also shouldn’t be happening. Besides, if we got rid of it, Braggadamus wouldn’t have a leg to stand on. Not that he has any now. The filthy lying braggart.Posted October 17, 2012 10:47 pm
Actually, Bikermike, I thought Robinson himself created the “pound-for-pound” idea.Posted October 17, 2012 10:43 pm
Old Yank…we still get a visit from Kid Blast …but lotsa the pillers of ESB …..We miss you……even if we disagreed……Remember ‘PINK’ and Bikermike’…exchanges about leonard??? Bikermike has had some great beatings from the Lennox Lewis support group…….but I was there when he was getting primed for the Olympics….here in Canada….it was like a bunch of pirhannas….different coaches trying to take credit for Lennox Lewis’s success WHat a lesson in human behaviorPosted October 17, 2012 10:22 pm
I’ll be watching the ‘Transnational Boxing Rankings’…..but I ‘v gotta tell you guys…….a growing number of posts on ESB…get me to thinking it is more of a pitch for promoters….site…….instead of good lads talking about up comming fights and some of the top fighters of the day…….Is this gone ???Posted October 17, 2012 10:17 pm
P4P is something that was given to Sugar Ray RObinson…..when he was Welterweight…and then Middleweight Champion of the world…..during most of Ray’s brilliant career….Joe Louis was still the HW Champion….so…something had to be awarded to such a gifted Fighter.. as was Sugar Ray Robinson…(when he had ample opportunity ….and willingness …to train}
Now….professional boxing….being the high standard of ethics of the professional sports of the world……..has definately ‘infiltrated’ ESB.
I have only been copied twice(to my knowledge)..as per posting under my name
When millions are at stake…..putting a locust of posters …to say one thing or another…is hardly unexpected.
ESB is a victim of its’ own success.
Still I’m an ESB guy…..and I miss some of the lads’ comments.Posted October 17, 2012 9:55 pm
the best site for boxing has been ESB …for several decades.
World wide participation soon followed…after UK began to knock the Yanks off….and if they didn’t..the Eastern European athletes did so….well and often. IT got to the poing where HW North American would take a string of blasting melons off a stump….instead of messing with the tuff fkrs across the atlantic…..So it was…and so it is today…Posted October 17, 2012 9:50 pm
It was said long ago…by much more inteligent people than you or me will ever be…………THERE ARE STATISTICS..AND STATISTICS…..AND DAMNED LIESPosted October 17, 2012 9:46 pm
Hidalgo,True.I laugh when somebody says floyd or whoever has fought 2/3 whatever so called p4p fighters in a row,what does that even mean haha(a 39 yr juice-less Mosely p4p cause he exposed a cheating margarito?lol please. Try beating a undefeated/prime juicing Mosely twice like Oscar(not the old,drained oscar floyd/pac fought.Fact of the matter is people are always going to overrate/underrate a fighter p4p or not.P4P ratings aren’t accurate or a fact far from it’s actually just useless biased opinions to hype or downgrade the other fighter that isn’t so called p4p caliber/worthy.Posted October 17, 2012 6:56 pm
I think the TBR seem pretty fair – I’m sure we can all think of personal favourites that we think should rate higher however all in all I think they’re pretty good.
I assume the omission of Rios and Broner are because they have left their previous weight divisions and have not fought in their new divisions yet – at least until last saturday for Rios; I’m sure the 140lb ratings will be updated soon.
I agree that the P4P ratings should be dropped as they are ridiculously subjective and seemingly impossible to get agreement on. Also I see that Mayweather is listed on the welterweight and light-middleweight lists – I’m not sure why this is the case however does it mean that at a certain point in RJJ’s career he would be listed in super-middle, light-heavy and heavyweight divisions?Posted October 17, 2012 12:04 pm
@itsonlymy… you clearly have no idea what your talking about. So you think David Price is the real deal but David Haye, Tyson Fury and Amir Khan aren’t. I like Price but he has not fought the quality of opponents yet to back up your ridiculous statement. Haye has not fought many worldclass opponents but he has fought a few , in addition to Wlad, and Khan has always fought at the top level – winning many more than he’s lost despite what his haters may say. Unfortunately your post is typical of many posts that have become the norm on ESB – it is simply a statement reflecting your own prejudiced view of how things are with virtually no facts to support it.Posted October 17, 2012 11:43 am
Recommendation: Lose the P4P webpage.Posted October 17, 2012 10:18 am
One more thing:
I am disappointed to see that TBR even considers the P4P ideology and moreso, that they include the mythology on their website. I have no problem determining, for instance, if Nonito Donaire is a better boxer than Devon Alexander. What I’m saying is, there is no need for P4P ratings. Just look at the fighters, their records, their performances, the caliber of their opponents and rate them against each other based on their skills, heart, courage, ring IQ etc. Weight means nothing. Look at the “sweet science” for what it is and not for what it is not. It certainly isn’t a myth.Posted October 17, 2012 10:17 am
Those who haven’t read the TBR Charter need to so you know what this organization is all about. That being said, I do have a question about one of the “tenants” in the Charter:
The Charter states: ” If over 75% of the Board agrees that the judges’ decision in a non-championship bout is egregious enough to constitute a “robbery,” then the official winner may be ranked lower than the official loser. At least eleven votes are needed for a quorum.”
My question is this: What if it’s a championship bout and a “robbery” has been determined?Posted October 17, 2012 10:09 am
SVDC – I think Ademek position is about right …. but id drop him down a place or 2.Posted October 17, 2012 7:51 am
Where is Gamboa, Rios and Broner in the rankings?Posted October 17, 2012 7:45 am
Well, Adamake does not belong in the top 5 probably, but he is active and fighting decent (not great) competetion. There are in my opinion perhaps 10 HW’s who are better, but they rarely fight, and most often against very weak opposition (Bojtsjov, Solis being a prime example). So I can live with Adamek being that highPosted October 17, 2012 7:19 am
Itsonlymyoppinionbut – What is it with the British?? with a comment like that anti-British sentiment… I can only say what is it with you!!Posted October 17, 2012 6:27 am
David Price isnt in the top 10 becuase he is still at the prospect stage and the best opponent he has faced yet is a 40-year-old Harrison. Price doesnt deserve to be anywhere near the top 10 yet. For all Furys faults, he has proven more and is more tested. Haye is at number 3 becuase the state of the division is poor. He’d slaughter Ademek …. but both K-brothers would always beat Haye. Haye has beaten Ruiz, Chisora, Valuev, Barrett, Bonin and Harrison at heavyweight … nothing spectacular true! but Ademek has had more heavyweight fights but the level of opporsition has been no better … possibly even worse.Posted October 17, 2012 6:23 am
Yawn, here we go again. David Haye at no 3? David Haye has not beaten one decent heavyweight, not ever. He has only ever fought one, and he was completely out classed and humiliated. It used to be that to move up the rankings you had to beat the guy above you while moving closer to a shot at the champion. David Haye is a hyped up British fighter who will not even fight anyone in the rankings. And Tyson Fury? oh please. He ran from David Price and yet Price is not even in the top ten. What is it with the British? They have guys like David Price and Carl Froch who are the real deal but they rave over people like Haye, Fury and Khan. Maybe they they have been braiwashed by reading their tabloids and watching the commie BBC.Posted October 17, 2012 4:02 am
Boxrec is good too but they don’t have anyone who is the world champion. They just have fighters as #1. They would have to change everything to mirror these ratings which would be difficult because they use formulas by computer to rate where a fighter is at
Spontaneously I must say that I consider the boxrec ratings more reasonable. Just look at the Heavys. Why are Adamek and Pulev ranked behind Haye and Povetkin on your list?Posted October 17, 2012 1:52 am
” “The TBR’s goal is to create a set of clearer (and cleaner) rankings in a hugely muddled sport.””
Good. Perhaps the Board will begin by attempting to unmuddle the heavyweight division, the ONLY weight division in boxing that allows gross weight and size differences between fighters. The heavyweight division as it now stands is a farce. If all other weight divisions were structured the same straw weights would be fighting middleweights and light heavy weights would be fighting welterweights.
The “muddle” is a lot bigger and deeper than just rankings. WORK on it!Posted October 17, 2012 1:26 am
Best thing to happen to boxing since… EVER!Posted October 16, 2012 8:01 pm
MR. GREEN JEANS
Yeah, you would think that that would have gotten floyd the jm title. But it’s difficult to keep track of what’s going on in the sport.Posted October 16, 2012 5:23 pm
This multiple champion nonsense pisses me off, especially having multiple champions in the same organization. What crap. I try to get casual fans into the sport and they roll their eyes when they ask who the champion is and I have to give them a list.Posted October 16, 2012 5:11 pm
The light middle ranked number 1 has beaten the light middle ranked number 2 but remains in the same place, what gives?????Posted October 16, 2012 5:01 pm
I wish you all the luck in the world. I have visited your rankings page, and I am curious to see if the “business” of boxing has any effect on them. In the middleweight division you have SM as champion as he should be. You have Geale at 1 and Glovkinat #2. Geale’s team has chosen to face Mundine, a fighter that is not ranked in your top 10 rather than face Golovkin. Does Geale keep his #1 ranking or does he drop in your rankins for not facing his #1 challenger. You say you want to change boxing for the better, send a message that your ranking doesn’t support the promoters practice of sidestepping the other top ranked fighters.Posted October 16, 2012 4:38 pm
Ring’s rankings are Oscar’s rankings. ESPNs rankings are Dan Rafael’s rankings. Boxrec rankings are just a computer and the sanctioning bodies are the promoters rankings. TBR is the people’s rankings. Evry boxing fan should support this.Posted October 16, 2012 3:28 pm
These rankings are superior to Ring Magazine. No Golden Boy influence, and none of this “no.1 or no.2 can potentially fight no.3, no.4 or no.5 for the title” business. TBR is about as fair and imprtial as you could make a set of rankings. Hopefully all the fans and boxers themselves will get behind it.Posted October 16, 2012 3:25 pm
Brilliant. Good work ESB!Posted October 16, 2012 3:18 pm
Carlos El Guapo
Well Floyd can be champ if he fights
I think only the readers of ring are
Well it would be good for the fighters to just forget about the alphabet organizations and go for some title like this rather than paying the sanctioning fees. But the abc group champs would be sanction fee paying contenders. The wbc, wba etc. would be something comparable to the nabf, nabo,usba,
Well the Ring was once run very much like this until Oscar bought it. Lets hope that TBR can survive in the cesspool that boxing has become. If the YV companies backed them and only recognized and covered only one champion the current sanctioning bodies would eventually disappear. TV is everything in modern sports.Posted October 16, 2012 2:15 pm
Nice idea, but until someone billionaire gets his hands into multiple sanctioning bodying and just unities them into a larger org, there will never be a truly great list. I’ll stick with Ring’s until that happens.Posted October 16, 2012 2:05 pm
MR. GREEN JEANS
I wonder what they’re going to do if a champ doesn’t defend for a long time?Posted October 16, 2012 2:00 pm
MEXICO is number one with most ranked fighters then any other country, just sayingPosted October 16, 2012 12:22 pm
Ring needs to turn the other cheek and abandon their own rankings and adopt these TBR listings.Posted October 16, 2012 11:50 am
Well nice try OscarPosted October 16, 2012 11:31 am
Yes, when the rankings are updated we crown a new champ.Posted October 16, 2012 11:25 am
RIP RING MAG
Oh and while it says Donaire is number 2, he just beat the number 1 guy which means when the update the rankings, he’ll be listed as the champion. Saw that on twitter from board member.Posted October 16, 2012 11:22 am
Hopefully now we won’t hear about how great someone is because “He had 11 titles in 5 weight divisions” and”That’s a lot more than Duran, Robinson, Leonard ever had”.Posted October 16, 2012 11:03 am
So Floyd isn’t a champion but needs to fight either Bradley or Cotto to be one.
didn’t see Broner’s name anywhere on the list? Also interesting to see Nonito Donaire at #2. Overall, I’m just happy to see a singular ranking system that, at least for the moment, seems unbiased.Posted October 16, 2012 10:55 am
Carlos El Guapo
Hey!, this is getting to be a pretty good site.Posted October 16, 2012 10:50 am
Good to see this, just hope it works.Posted October 16, 2012 10:43 am
Ring magazine hasn’t really been Ring magazine for a long time, they just use the name. Anyway they should also adopt these new ratings and
… and well done ESB for not recognising the alhabet boys …. these days the WBA, WBC, IBF and the WBO are all as bad as each other. Take them completely out of the equasion as they are only TV titles now and not “World” titles …… The only fighter I recognise as a true world champ is the boxer who holds the Ring Magazine belt.Posted October 16, 2012 10:14 am
I have got to say …. that is the best set of rankings I have seen in a while.Posted October 16, 2012 10:12 am
Why not go back to elminators for eg mithel v pulev arreola v fury. If the bodies did this you would have to beat contenders for a shot at gold and it gives us great fights along the way. The names used were an example doesnt have to be those but you get the pointPosted October 16, 2012 9:17 am
Well it`s good to see ESB take a stand and raise objections to the current corrupt boxing rankings and advocate and switch to the Transnational rankings.These corrupt boxing organizations are nothing but puppets,pawns and instruments of the promoters.Posted October 16, 2012 9:10 am
Hey gents. I’m not particularly interested in getting invovled with a war of words about Ring. They do their thing, we do ours and that’s the way it’s going to be. But as I understand it, the discord created in the Ring committe related to their neglection to consult (and then, supposedly, tell) the Ring committe about the change in policy as to the Ring championship. Many members didn’t approve and at least three resigned (they now abide with TBR).
My personal concern is with the change in policy that originally always called for the number 1 ranked contender to be involved in a match to crown the champion (against the #2 or very rarely the #3 contender). Now, the #2 and #5 contenders can crown a champ.
Ring has never been about filling championship births until this change of ownership. It was about absolutes leading to clarity in the huge swathe of boxing divisions. That is removed when the rules are changed.
These are ratings that are aimed at promoters – or perhaps, at best, boxers. Ease of crowning champs at the expense of clarity. But this was not what Ring rankings were for. They were for clarity. They were for us, fans, so we could understand who was the “real” champion and what was going on in the rest of the division. That is no longer the case and the additional (and valid) concern that a PROMOTER now owns the publication that prints these rankings also cannot be ignored, whatever the intentions of those involved.
And I hope, that is where The Transnational Boxing Rankings step in. We’re not gunning for anyone but fans. We don’t care about filling championship births or having the appearance of being fan friendly – we just want to get at the least deniable version of the truth.Posted October 16, 2012 9:02 am
This is a step in the right direction.Posted October 16, 2012 8:50 am
The writer makes a very compelling argument. Something urgent had to be done.The Povetkin – Rahman fight was a unquestionable joke. Logically, it is mismatches like these that are very malignant to the sport of boxing.Rahman, at this stage of his career is not a respectable opponent.He isn`t even a semi – respectable opponent.Posted October 16, 2012 8:45 am
I have to agree that Box recs ranking are probably the most accurate out there. And even their ranking are a little flawed. the problem is that boxing is an independant sport. It seems anyone can arrange a fight between two people. Whether it be for 4,5,10 or 12 rounds. At what ever weight they choose, be it a ‘catch weight’ or what ever. The Haye Chisora fight showed you dont even need your local govenring bodies approval any more. Boxing to too far down the line to be effectively changed now.Posted October 16, 2012 8:43 am
I know Golden Boy bought the Ring, but I was always under the impression the rankings were in the main by journos independent of the Ring itself – please correct me if I’m wrong though? Also, a lot of people moan about the new policy regarding how a Ring title may be won/lost, but I’m all for it, especially in the case of those boxers that haven’t fought for a long time.Posted October 16, 2012 8:20 am
When De La Hoya bought the Ring, this magazine lost previous credibility.Posted October 16, 2012 8:10 am
Ermm….The Ring magazine have been doing this for years! Or did I miss something?????Posted October 16, 2012 8:04 am
Well, that’s nice. But what’s wrong with boxrec.com rankings? As far I understand, they are solid, acceptable and reasonable. How Transnational Boxing Rankings rankings are better than boxrec.com or cyberboxingzone.com? It makes no sence. And one last (funny) thing – WBC, IBF and WBO were crated, because “other sanctioning bodies was corrupt, unreasonable, etc, etc.” My point is – how Transnational Boxing Rankings is different from other ranking sites and – at some sense – how is different from alphabet soup governing bodies?Posted October 16, 2012 7:49 am
RAY GORDON REID
GREAT 7.45AM 10/16/2O12Posted October 16, 2012 7:44 am
I am a big fan of ratings like these, looking through most divisions there are a couple of minor changes i’d make but nothing controversial.Posted October 16, 2012 6:48 am
Swedish Boxing Fan
I agree. The recognised world title organisations (WBC, WBA, IBF and WBO) have created rankings that rarley these days are working proppertly anf often there have been fighters there who havent earned there shots at all. Also the inflation of title belts from all organisations are crazy with “Super champion, Diamond champion, North Asia champion, Fecarbox champion, Americas continental champion and many more and that just takes the worth frolm them. I mean once it was fine with the 4 world title belts, Ring title, european champion, British and commonwealth titles, NABF, Inter-continental and USBA. That was enough title belts to fight for for all fighters but then it came more belts no one cared for and still dont do. Im looking forward for this changesPosted October 16, 2012 6:47 am