Results Are In: ESB Official Rankings

[Lampley]

Starting now, ESB has its own official rankings!

After lots of discussion about rules and taking nominations for the initial Committee, then voting and crunching the numbers, here's a look at results.

You'll see a lot of familiar names, but there also were some surprises. Clearly, I believe the heavier international flavor of the ESB community shines through in these rankings.

Additionally, congratulations to the following posters, who were voted onto the Committee: Emmanuel Augustus, Calabrese, Brickhaus, Pimp C and Dekkers.

Those posters who came up short, please feel free to apply again in six months.

Thanks to everyone for participating in one form or another, whether you nominated another poster or offered feedback on rankings or the entire process itself.

Enjoy!



Pound for Pound:

1. Floyd Mayweather
2. Manny Pacquiao
3. Juan Manuel Marquez
4. Bernard Hopkins
5. Joe Calzaghe
6. Israel Vazquez
7. Ricky Hatton
8. Miguel Cotto
9. Rafael Marquez
10. Ivan Calderon



Heavyweight:

1. Wladimir Klitschko
2. Ruslan Chagaev
3. Samuel Peter
4. Sultan Ibragimov
5. Oleg Maskaev
6. Nicolay Valuev
7. Tony Thompson
8. Sergei Lyakhovich
9. Vladimir Virchis
10. Alexander Povetkin



Cruiserweight:

CHAMPION: Jean-Marc Mormeck

1. O'Neil Bell
2. David Haye
3. Steve Cunningham
4. Enzo Maccarinelli
5. Krzysztof Wlodarczyk
6. Darnell Wilson
7. Marco Huck
8. Vadim Tokarev
9. Firat Arslan
10. Tomasz Adamek


Light Heavyweight:

1. Bernard Hopkins
2. Chad Dawson
3. Clinton Woods
4. Zsolt Erdei
5. Antonio Tarver
6. Glen Johnson
7. Paul Briggs
8. Adrian Diaconu
9. Stipe Drews
10. Roy Jones


Super Middlweight:

1. Joe Calzaghe
2. Mikkel Kessler
3. Anthony Mundine
4. Lucian Bute
5. Jeff Lacy
6. Carl Froch
7. Librado Andrade
8. Allan Green
9. Markus Beyer
10. Alejandro Berrio

At No. 1 and No. 2, Calzaghe and Kessler will be fighting for the vacant title.



Middleweight:

CHAMPION: Kelly Pavlik

1. Arthur Abraham
2. Jermain Taylor
3. Winky Wright
4. Felix Sturm
5. Sebastian Sylvester
6. Javier Castillejo
7. Edison Miranda
8. John Duddy
9. Amin Asikainen (tie)
9. Mariano Carrera (tie)

Note: Roman Karmazin was voted 8th in this division, but he ranks higher at 154 and thus is excluded from these rankings. Kassim Ouma tied for 8th with Duddy, but he is listed higher at 154 and thus cannot be ranked at 160. We need to decide in the next month at which division these guys truly belong.


Junior Middleweight

1. Cory Spinks
2. Vernon Forrest
3. Oscar De La Hoya
4. Sergei Dzindziruk
5. Roman Karmazin
6. Joachim Alcine
7. Travis Simms
8. Kassim Ouma
9. Ike Quartey
10. Daniel Santos


Welterweight

CHAMPION: Floyd Mayweather

1. Miguel Cotto
2. Shane Mosley
3. Paul Williams
4. Kermit Cintron
5. Antonio Margarito
6. Luis Collazo
7. Joshua Clottey
8. Andre Berto
9. Zab Judah
10. Oktay Urkal


Junior Welterweight:

CHAMPION: Ricky Hatton

1. Junior Witter
2. Paulie Malignaggi
3. Ricardo Torres
4. Vivian Harris
5. Gavin Rees
6. Kendall Holt
7. Andreas Kotelnik
8. Jose Luis Castillo
9. Souleymane M'Baye
10. Herman Ngoudjo


Lightweight:

1. Joel Casamayor
2. Juan Diaz
3. Julio Diaz
4. David Diaz
5. Nate Campbell
6. Michael Katsidis
7. Zahir Raheem
8. Almazbek Raiymkulov
9. Yuri Romanov
10. Jose Armando Santa Cruz


Junior Lightweight:

1. Manny Pacquiao
2. Juan Manuel Marquez
3. Joan Guzman
4. Humberto Soto
5. Marco Antonio Barrera
6. Edwin Valero
7. Jorge Barrios
8. Alex Arthur
9. Mzonke Fana
10. Manuel Medina


Note: Rocky Juarez was voted 10th in this division but was ranked higher at 126, and thus was excluded from the rankings. He's another one we need to decide for certain which is his best class.

Featherweight:

1. Chris John
2. Jorge Linares
3. Robert Guerrero
4. Steven Luevano
5. Jorge Solis
6. Rocky Juarez
7. Injin Chi
8. Hiroyuki Enoki
9. Martin Honorio
10. Naoki Matsuda


Junior Featherweight:

1. Israel Vazquez
2. Rafael Marquez
3. Daniel Ponce de Leon
4. Celestino Caballero
5. Steve Molitor
6. Somsak Sithchatchawal
7. Kiko Martinez
8. Mike Oliver
9. Ricardo Cordoba
10. Sergio Manuel Medina


Note: Vazquez was one vote short of being named champion. Of course, a third showdown against Marquez could settle that issue for good.

Bantamweight:

1. Hozumi Hasegawa
2. Gerry Penalosa
3. Silence Mabuza
4. Wladimir Sidorenko
5. Jhonny Gonzalez
6. Joseph Agbeko
7. Simone Maludrottu
8. Ricardo Cordoba
9. Jorge Arce
10. Veerapol Sahaprom

Note: Starting with this class, where were numerous fighters who received votes in two different divisions. If there is confusion over where any specific fighter belongs, we need to determine that within the next month.


Junior Bantamweight:

1. Cristian Mijares
2. Fernando Montiel
3. Martin Castillo
4. Alexander Munoz
5. Nobuo Nashiro


Flyweight:

1. Nonito Donaire
2. Vic Darchiniyan
3. Daisuke Naito
4. Takefumi Sakata
5. Pongsaklek Wonjongkam


Junior Flyweight:

1. Ivan Calderon
2. Hugo Cazares
3. Ulises Solis
4. Edgar Sosa
5. Omar Nino

Note: Calderon was one vote short of being named champion.


Strawweight:

1. Florante Condes
2. Yutaka Niida
3. Eagle Kyowa
4. Muhammad Rachman
5. Donnie Nietes

[Stinky gloves]

Probably the best ranking ever
... the lower weight calsses however are too empty
... maybe you need more people who are familiar with these calsses?

[magnificentdave]

there is a very serious error in your rankings because cory spinks is not listed : /

[theunderdog]

can i nominate that my rankings for minimumweight and jr flyweight be adopted?hahaha. i'm kidding. but seriously, this was a good job except for the last three divisions. you could have done better with those boys, they deserve as much attention as given to the bigger boys

[Stinky gloves]

I'm not arguing against it, but I would like to know why Vernon Forest is ranked over ODLH?

Is it because he won his last fight and Oscar lost his?

Probaly this is the logic, the winner go up, the loser go down.
I hope this list show recent status in the division not the whole career record.

[sues2nd]

can i nominate that my rankings for minimumweight and jr flyweight be adopted?hahaha. i'm kidding. but seriously, this was a good job except for the last three divisions. you could have done better with those boys, they deserve as much attention as given to the bigger boys

Im going to start doing more research on the lower weights. I never really spend much time on them...as you can hardly ever catch a fight. But I will do my best for next month.

As for Spinks....I think it was just an oversight. He made most of our lists at the top of Jr MW...remember, this is a whole new system that Lampley is using...bound to be a few kinks at first.

:good

[kg0208]

Probaly this is the logic, the winner go up, the loser go down.
I hope this list show recent status in the division not the whole career record.

The list doesn't reflect any one thing. With multiple people voting using their own unique criteria, it balances out and all things should be reflected.

I agree that we need to pay more attention to the lower weight divisions. Unfortunately, I am in the US of A and trying to find these fighters and their fights was HARD. And I looked all month.

However, we are going to discuss a way to get better rankings for them. We have to, to make the rankings even more credible.

[Lampley]

there is a very serious error in your rankings because cory spinks is not listed : /

Thank you for catching that. For whatever reason, Excel did not sort Spinks correctly. (Maybe Excel hates his style, too.) His totals were there, but he didn't rise to the top as he should have.

Anyway, fixed now.

[mad_takamura]

can i ask why in jin chi is sill there? i heard he shifted to k-1 already?? :huh :huh :huh

[sues2nd]

can i ask why in jin chi is sill there? i heard he shifted to k-1 already?? :huh :huh :huh

For the same reason MAB is still in there.....may be retired (or switching sports), but still have proven enough to be left in until they are "officially" out.

At least that is why I included BOTH of the two in my rankings.

[MSTR]

Good work guys.

[kg0208]

can i ask why in jin chi is sill there? i heard he shifted to k-1 already?? :huh :huh :huh

I think alot of us feel he hasn't been inactive long enough to believe he is truly retired. Kind of a judgement call.

[sues2nd]

Good work guys.

We couldve uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuused your help......:D

JK bro. Totally understand why ya had to bow out.

[mad_takamura]

thanx kg and sues2nd! you are obviously more knowledgable and wise than the likes of black and biggame. :good

[Lampley]

I thinks these rankings are very representative, with the understanding that we need work on the little guys.

The nice thing is that everyone busted it to prepare this first wave of rankings, so from here on out they'll be able to concentrate on specific areas. It's just a matter of making little adjustments from month to month, plus adding to the skill set.

The Spinks omission confuses me, but I'll figure it out.

[kg0208]

thanx kg and sues2nd! you are obviously more knowledgable and wise than the likes of black and biggame. :good

Honestly, I don't doubt Black (who is allblack if I am correct) knows more about In-Jin Chi than all of us. But boxers are known to "retire" and then comeback. It hasn't been a whole year since his last fight. At the end of the year, if he doesn't have a fight scheduled, I will remove him from my rankings.

[Lampley]

Good work guys.

Wish you were still on board. Understand, though.

[Stinky gloves]

For the same reason MAB is still in there.....may be retired (or switching sports), but still have proven enough to be left in until they are "officially" out.

At least that is why I included BOTH of the two in my rankings.

Isn't Morales comming back to fight eartly next year?

[Lampley]

can i nominate that my rankings for minimumweight and jr flyweight be adopted?hahaha. i'm kidding. but seriously, this was a good job except for the last three divisions. you could have done better with those boys, they deserve as much attention as given to the bigger boys

Is there some reason you won't apply for the Committee? You obviously have a great deal of knowledge about the small ones, and while everyone will value your opinion as a poster, you might as well have an official vote.

You don't have to mess with HWs or the other larger classes, if that doesn't interest you.

[sues2nd]

Isn't Morales comming back to fight eartly next year?

Nothing on boxrec yet.

Not why I didnt include him tho. Being 1-5 in his last 6 with 2 KO losses.....and no wins since 2004 will bump ya out of the top teir.

Still one of my all time favorites tho.

[theunderdog]

Is there some reason you won't apply for the Committee? You obviously have a great deal of knowledge about the small ones, and while everyone will value your opinion as a poster, you might as well have an official vote.

You don't have to mess with HWs or the other larger classes, if that doesn't interest you.

i know little about the big boys outside the topcontenders as i am a fan foremost of the lighter divisions and now that i have seen your product, i'm happy with what you came up with and will nominate myself next month. i will be glad to help you out with your rankings.


good job you guys. this is a very good unbiased ranking system:good

[kg0208]

i know little about the big boys outside the topcontenders as i am a fan foremost of the lighter divisions and now that i have seen your product, i'm happy with what you came up with and will nominate myself next month. i will be glad to help you out with your rankings.


good job you guys. this is a very good unbiased ranking system:good

Excellent

[M.I.G.]

Everything looks really good. I still don't see why Ivan Calderon is so high... Although he has beaten some good fighters, he hasn't done it very convincingly. His D is excellent but he'll get caught soon. I'd take Solis over him in their division.

[KO Boxing]

Very good rankings, well done boys... Very few arguments from me, if any really.

:good

(And well done Lampley too, wasn't quite sure how it was gonna turn out, but it's looking damn good... thanks a lot to you).

[Lakris]

Good rankings, but but but
Abraham is NO WAY better than Taylor!!

[McGrain]

I think alot of us feel he hasn't been inactive long enough to believe he is truly retired. Kind of a judgement call.

I voted for him.

For just the reason you state.

[McGrain]

will nominate myself next month. i will be glad to help you out with your rankings.

:good

There's also plenty of time (and now a really good reason) to open a thread about the smaller guys and have a bit of a public chat about it all.

Nice job Lampley.

[Carlos Primera]

very solid list, and very balanced out. a few things i find unusual though, such as abraham higher than taylor? seems unusual from my perspective considering abraham has fought no one of note. mijares domination of arce was a very good performance (the guy is the future king of the division), but imo not enough to put him no.1 at super fly.

[Marnoff]

Wow, excellent lists. I wasn't sure if it would turn out as well as it did, but I guess with people having their own certain biases, these are washed out to an extent as the other lists balance it. Very awesome. Congratulations to the committee and a big thanks to Lampley, because this obviously takes some time to do.

[China_hand_Joe]

It might have been solid were it not for Hopkins be ing at 4. Calzaghe may be a little high now as well.

[Marnoff]

Calzaghe may be a little high now as well.

We'll find out soon enough.

[China_hand_Joe]

People are 10 years too late onto the bandwagon, I think Kessler will show Calzaghe up as badly faded.

[McGrain]

It might have been solid were it not for Hopkins be ing at 4. Calzaghe may be a little high now as well.

Of course if you'd bothered to vote like you said you would, twice, it might look different to the tune of what you describe.

[Amsterdam]

I thinks these rankings are very representative, with the understanding that we need work on the little guys.

The nice thing is that everyone busted it to prepare this first wave of rankings, so from here on out they'll be able to concentrate on specific areas. It's just a matter of making little adjustments from month to month, plus adding to the skill set.

The Spinks omission confuses me, but I'll figure it out.

It's good we got it done, but the rankings turned out pretty 'standard' after all, save for a few corrections that Ring magazine missed.

I wish more guys would have participated to even this out...

Oh well, maybe next month?:yep

[Drew101]

I know that I'm not part of the commitee, but, I'll be happy to help fill out the bottom part of the lower-weight rankings for you, if you'd like. Oh, and I'm not certain if this is the proper venue, but I might as well use this as a means for self-nomination for membership to the commitee (given the recent departure of Cross_Trainer, et al.)

[Marnoff]

It's good we got it done, but the rankings turned out pretty 'standard' after all, save for a few corrections that Ring magazine missed.

I wish more guys would have participated to even this out...

Oh well, maybe next month?:yep

Then maybe we can look at it as something of an experiment, which proves (or attempts to prove) that the Ring is overall on track. We put their name to the test (Bible of Boxing).

[McGrain]

It's good we got it done, but the rankings turned out pretty 'standard' after all, save for a few corrections that Ring magazine missed.

It's a thing of our own though. Something to argue about besides Ring. In an ideal world we would have some debate on the boards about the ESB rankings, where we are going wrong, who we should be considering.

In time, we may be able to come up with something more definitive (As opposed to standard, which I don't find objectionable personally), but it would need to be a serious community effort IMO.

[Lampley]

Of course if you'd bothered to vote like you said you would, twice, it might look different to the tune of what you describe.

Exactly. We even waited on you.

[Lampley]

I know that I'm not part of the commitee, but, I'll be happy to help fill out the bottom part of the lower-weight rankings for you, if you'd like. Oh, and I'm not certain if this is the proper venue, but I might as well use this as a means for self-nomination for membership to the commitee (given the recent departure of Cross_Trainer, et al.)
You are an excellent candidate. I'll try to remember your nomination, but make sure to post again later in the month on the official self-nomination thread. Now that this thing is a reality, hopefully more people will apply and more of the current members will participate.

[Lampley]

It's good we got it done, but the rankings turned out pretty 'standard' after all, save for a few corrections that Ring magazine missed.

I wish more guys would have participated to even this out...

Oh well, maybe next month?:yep

I thought some of the subtle differences were a positive in ESB's favor, but perhaps I'm biased. I'm not sure what you were looking for, exactly.

It certainly would be fun if more of our European contingent votes next month.

[Brickhaus]

Question: Can we vote for someone as champion when they weren't previously voted as champion (i.e. Calderon or Vasquez)?

Great ranking though people. Looking forward to adding my input next month.

[Lampley]

Question: Can we vote for someone as champion when they weren't previously voted as champion (i.e. Calderon or Vasquez)?

Great ranking though people. Looking forward to adding my input next month.

No. This was the only month to do that. I think what happened is some posters just philosophically are opposed to voting on a champion, because even Pavlik received only like 66% votes as the actual champ. Calderon was one vote short, and some of those who *were* voting on champs didn't get to the little guys.

I was hoping he and Vazquez would get the nod, but that's the way it goes. The good news is that the Vazquez situation will get settled in the next few months, at least.

[boxfan99]

Probably the best rankings I have seen.:good

[Lampley]

Question: Can we vote for someone as champion when they weren't previously voted as champion (i.e. Calderon or Vasquez)?

Great ranking though people. Looking forward to adding my input next month.

I'm happy to have you on board. Just don't do what some members did this time and wait until the last minute. It definitely takes some work.

[Brickhaus]

No. This was the only month to do that. I think what happened is some posters just philosophically are opposed to voting on a champion, because even Pavlik received only like 66% votes as the actual champ. Calderon was one vote short, and some of those who *were* voting on champs didn't get to the little guys.

I was hoping he and Vazquez would get the nod, but that's the way it goes. The good news is that the Vazquez situation will get settled in the next few months, at least.

Thanks. Just looked back at the constitution and saw that. The unfortunate part is that there just isn't much activity with the top guys fighting each other in the 105 and 108 classes, if for no other reason because the guys are evenly split 50/50 between Asia and Latin America....

[Lampley]

Thanks. Just looked back at the constitution and saw that. The unfortunate part is that there just isn't much activity with the top guys fighting each other in the 105 and 108 classes, if for no other reason because the guys are evenly split 50/50 between Asia and Latin America....

I know. It's unfortunate in Calderon's case. But what can you do?

If there were a formal uprising, the committee could rewrite that section of the Constitution, but then you'd have to have a very high rate of people willing to change it in order for the rewritten rule to take effect.

[Axe]

A very respectable set of rankings. :good

P4P is a bit off imo, but all in all great work everyone, and a big "thank you!" to Lampley for all the hard work!

Right, and before I forget:

MODS CAN WE GET THIS STICKIED PLEEEEASE??? :D

[klion22]

I think it's great that knowledgable posters on this board are taking the time to put together a ranking for this board.

[Pimp C]

Glad I made it truly an honor. When can I vote?

[kg0208]

Glad I made it truly an honor. When can I vote?

In the next official voting:good

[4Rounder]

Good list.

But Israel Vazquez should have been considered champion at 122lbs. He did beat the previous champ in Oscar Larios after all.

[Lampley]

Glad I made it truly an honor. When can I vote?

Next vote starts on November 4 and lasts until the early morning of November 7.

Happy to have you on board.

[Lampley]

Good list.

But Israel Vazquez should have been considered champion at 122lbs. He did beat the previous champ in Oscar Larios after all.

Yeah, I thought he'd be voted in as champ. But rules is rules. As long as the trilogy is completed with Marquez, however, it shouldn't be a problem.

[sues2nd]

Glad I made it truly an honor. When can I vote?

Honestly bro...I was surprised you didnt make the cut originally. Glad ya got it this time around...Welcome aboard!!

[klion22]

Just curious, how many members do you have on the panel and what are the qualifications? Is it just through reputation and proving yourself over time?

[sues2nd]

Just curious, how many members do you have on the panel and what are the qualifications? Is it just through reputation and proving yourself over time?

1000+ posts....proven track record....you nominate yourself and we vote on ya.

[Lampley]

Just curious, how many members do you have on the panel and what are the qualifications? Is it just through reputation and proving yourself over time?

Yep. If you stick around here for a while and display good knowledge without irritating bias, you'll have a shot.

The percentage for being voted in is 66.67, which is tough but not impossible. I originally had it set up to be 75%, but others thought that was too high and now I agree.

[McGrain]

MODS CAN WE GET THIS STICKIED PLEEEEASE??? :D


I will second this.

I think these rankings are a good stab. I think they could become something to be pround of. Why not? A lot of guys fuck up. I bet collectively with Lampley's guidance we can find the best possible rankings voted upon by a crew of boxing enthusiasts.

If a community effort like this doesn't make the front page, what should?

[kg0208]

I will second this.

I think these rankings are a good stab. I think they could become something to be pround of. Why not? A lot of guys fuck up. I bet collectively with Lampley's guidance we can find the best possible rankings voted upon by a crew of boxing enthusiasts.

If a community effort like this doesn't make the front page, what should?

I think an article should be written about it for ESB.

[Marnoff]

I will second this.

I think these rankings are a good stab. I think they could become something to be pround of. Why not? A lot of guys fuck up. I bet collectively with Lampley's guidance we can find the best possible rankings voted upon by a crew of boxing enthusiasts.

If a community effort like this doesn't make the front page, what should?

Agreed.

[brooklyn1550]

Great job Lampley! Good work!

[McGrain]

I think an article should be written about it for ESB.

I agree.

I think you should do it. You're pretty heavily involved, and you're pretty articulate...Lampley would be the other suggestion I would make but he has already done so much. You should think about it.

[Boom_Boom]

can i get on the committe and do the full rankings for Super flyweight and below since the rest of the committe doesnt want to.

But besides that you guys did a great job

[Axe]

I will second this.

I think these rankings are a good stab. I think they could become something to be pround of. Why not? A lot of guys fuck up. I bet collectively with Lampley's guidance we can find the best possible rankings voted upon by a crew of boxing enthusiasts.

If a community effort like this doesn't make the front page, what should?

Well said. :thumbsup

[kg0208]

can i get on the committe and do the full rankings for Super flyweight and below since the rest of the committe doesnt want to.

But besides that you guys did a great job
Nominate yourself...see how it goes. The better the posters, the better the rankings, the more credibility.

[Fab2333]

good list. Good work
I applaud the commitee

[Lampley]

can i get on the committe and do the full rankings for Super flyweight and below since the rest of the committe doesnt want to.

But besides that you guys did a great job

Be sure to nominate yourself later this month. We definitely need help with the lower classes.

I understand the skeptical eyes that were directed at this project initially by many, but hopefully now that it has become a reality -- and a pretty solid effort, too! -- we'll have many new nominees for next month.

The first month is difficult, to be sure, but after that voting gets a lot easier.

[Lampley]

The overarching philosophy behind the whole thing is that no one person can compile a set of accurate rankings. It's asking way too much.

As long as the Committee is very careful about whom they vote in, the more people to contribute, the better.

[McGrain]

can i get on the committe and do the full rankings for Super flyweight and below since the rest of the committe doesnt want to.

But besides that you guys did a great job

Nominate yourself man. I think you belong on the commitee.

[Shake]

:love

:thumbsup

[sues2nd]

good list. Good work
I applaud the commitee

I applaud your avatar....:good

[Pimp C]

In the next official voting:good
Thanks!

[China_hand_Joe]

The rankings are definitely amongst the best I have ever seen, except the Hopkins thing. Don't take on a load of yanks now, they'll ruin what you have.

Take one on, they'll try and vote in more crazy yanks. It would be an exponential disaster.

[Pimp C]

Next vote starts on November 4 and lasts until the early morning of November 7.

Happy to have you on board.
Thanks for comming up with this. We've needed something like this for a long time now.

[Pimp C]

Honestly bro...I was surprised you didnt make the cut originally. Glad ya got it this time around...Welcome aboard!!
:good

[sues2nd]

The rankings are definitely amongst the best I have ever seen, except the Hopkins thing. Don't take on a load of yanks now, they'll ruin what you have.

Take one on, they'll try and vote in more crazy yanks. It would be an exponential disaster.

:verysad

[Lampley]

The rankings are definitely amongst the best I have ever seen, except the Hopkins thing. Don't take on a load of yanks now, they'll ruin what you have.

Take one on, they'll try and vote in more crazy yanks. It would be an exponential disaster.

I tried to encourage a more international feel, but not everyone could be persuaded to participate. Cough, cough.

[McGrain]

The rankings are definitely amongst the best I have ever seen, except the Hopkins thing. Don't take on a load of yanks now, they'll ruin what you have.

Take one on, they'll try and vote in more crazy yanks. It would be an exponential disaster.


You were voted on and accepted the nomination. Lampley held the vote back to include your contribution at your request. Every American who has contributed to the process has contributed a great deal more than you.

Additionally, all the raw data is public and at your disposal. If you're going to attack the American posters the least you could do is provide examples. Shame none exsist then.

[China_hand_Joe]

Hopkins at number four caused me to give up on humanity all together mate.

He beat Tarver soundly.
Guzman did the same to Barios, Mosley to Collazo, Hatton to Castillo, Calzaghe to Lacy, Barrera to Juarez (and Barrera should be nowhere near the rankings. Don't guve me the weight rubbish either, Hopkins was very comfrotable at LHW. How does Bernard end up above all these other superior fighters? None of the others lost to Taylor either.

You should all be sectioned for somehow percieving this 42 years old as one of the best 5 boxers in the world. He is so inactive, visably slower now and lacks power. It is absolute insanity.

[kg0208]

Hopkins at number four caused me to give up on humanity all together mate.
You didn't know Hopkins was number four until after the vote was over. I didn't even rate Hopkins, but thats not the point. I understand if in the end, the commitment was too much, but at the same time, you can't criticize after not holding up your end of the deal.

[McGrain]

Hopkins at number four caused me to give up on humanity all together mate.


Hopkins wasn't yet at four when you decided not to vote.

Had you voted, he may not have been.

[China_hand_Joe]

He would have been, it was guarenteed. And Calzaghe was just below him.

About 85% of them commited the crime.

[McGrain]

He would have been, it was guarenteed. And Calzaghe was just below him.

About 85% of them commited the crime.


See, I got no problem with you slagging of fighters (most posters do) but I think it's a total joke that you were invited to contribute, couldn't manage it, then start attacking the Americans who did contribute.

[sues2nd]

He would have been, it was guarenteed. And Calzaghe was just below him.

About 85% of them commited the crime.

How was it guarenteed?

That doesnt even make sense. The system in place makes it so that NOTHING is guarenteed.

If you had voted, he would have lost points in the system and in all reality and probability dropped.

So, fact is, you didnt even participate....then complained about the outcome.

You have become increasingly anti-anything american lately....especially Hopkins. You bash anyone who in your eyes displays any level of American "bias", then you go and contradict yourself by doing the exact opposite.

I have been one of your supporters on here for awhile, but as of late...Im losing hope.

:verysad

[China_hand_Joe]

I'm not slagging Hopkins off, he is an old man and would probably agree more or less with my assessment of his abilities at this time.

Having read the interview with Hopkins on teh front page, it should be clear he knows his stuff. He is just about the smartest American fighter out there (picking Calzaghe and Kessler over Pavlik). He applied this knowledge well as a businessman, when he hand picked Tarver and Wright.

[Zakman]

Hey what's the story on the vote for new committee members?? Any word on that.

I scanned the ratings, and they look excellent from what I can see. And, whether people like Bernard Hopkins or not, or think that he's one of the best at 42 years old or not - he is there on his accomplishments in the ring - with a victory over the acknowledge LHW champ, Tarver, and a P4P entrant in Wright. There really shouldn't be any question that he's among the ten best in the sport.

[China_hand_Joe]

How was it guarenteed?

:verysad

Unless I could have somehow deducted all of Hopkins' points, then it was guarenteed. He had simply been listed top 5 so many times.

[China_hand_Joe]

Hey what's the story on the vote for new committee members?? Any word on that.

I scanned the ratings, and they look excellent from what I can see. And, whether people like Bernard Hopkins or not, or think that he's one of the best at 42 years old or not - he is there on his accomplishments in the ring - with a victory over the acknowledge LHW champ, Tarver, and a P4P entrant in Wright. There really shouldn't be any question that he's among the ten best in the sport.

Tarver is shocking, the fact he was the percieved man at 175 just tells you how credible the American media are. Now that lie has been passed on from Tarver to Hopkins. And a 170 pound Wright is nothing like a P4P fighter.

[kg0208]

Hey what's the story on the vote for new committee members?? Any word on that.

I scanned the ratings, and they look excellent from what I can see. And, whether people like Bernard Hopkins or not, or think that he's one of the best at 42 years old or not - he is there on his accomplishments in the ring - with a victory over the acknowledge LHW champ, Tarver, and a P4P entrant in Wright. There really shouldn't be any question that he's among the ten best in the sport.

Yah, its in there. The new members were listed on the first page I think.

[kg0208]

Tarver is shocking, the fact he was the percieved man at 175 just tells you how credible the American media are. Now that lie has been passed on from Tarver to Hopkins. And a 170 pound Wright is nothing like a P4P fighter.

Now now, Tarver was the man at 175. Surely you don't believe Erdai was? Or Clinton Woods?

[Lampley]

Hey what's the story on the vote for new committee members?? Any word on that.

I scanned the ratings, and they look excellent from what I can see. And, whether people like Bernard Hopkins or not, or think that he's one of the best at 42 years old or not - he is there on his accomplishments in the ring - with a victory over the acknowledge LHW champ, Tarver, and a P4P entrant in Wright. There really shouldn't be any question that he's among the ten best in the sport.

It's listed in the first post. I believe we have five new members. Additionally, I hope some of those who abstained will join in next month.

Granted, you guys had to work very hard and not everyone can or wants to do that for this sort of project, but hopefully at least a couple will see the forest through the trees.

[jopez707]

Was a very good list. I had few qualms with it.

[China_hand_Joe]

Tarver was considered the man. He was indeed the percieved man. But he wasn't any good. There are plenty of fighters in the relatively weak division better than he was at that point in time. And several better than Hopkins.

[sues2nd]

Unless I could have somehow deducted all of Hopkins' points, then it was guarenteed. He had simply been listed top 5 so many times.

Im only speculating here. Maybe Lampley can touch more in detail, but I am guessing (and a quick scan of the votes validates my assessment) that you get a certain amount of points for each time you are ranked at each position.....

For example...

Floyd gets the top slot and gets 10 points for it.
Cotto gets the tenth spot and gets 1 point for it.

(just using random fighters)

So if Bernard isnt in your top ten.....THEN HE GETS NO POINTS. What if 3, 4 and 5 were separated by 5 points? Then you dont have Hopkins there, but the other guys right below him you DO HAVE at the top. Well, he drops....they rise.

That is why we used a committee and voted.

Again, I dont know EXACTLY how Lampley worked it out...or how it works, but by looking, it seems to have worked.

Spouting off that anti-american shit and complaining about the rankings is an insult to everyone who participated (considering you were SUPPOSED TO!!! And we WAITED FOR YOU TO!!!) and to Lampley himself for the hard work.

Get off that nationalistic bullshit. YOU are far more biased than 99% of the American posters on here.

[Zakman]

Tarver is shocking, the fact he was the percieved man at 175 just tells you how credible the American media are. Now that lie has been passed on from Tarver to Hopkins. And a 170 pound Wright is nothing like a P4P fighter.

Just a couple of questions - Was Tarver not generally regarded as the LHW champ when Hopkins fought him? And was not Wright in the P4P top ten when Hopkins beat him?

We can quibble at the margins - I think it's WAY too premature for Povetkin to be in the HW top ten - but overall, these ratings are pretty solid.

[Lampley]

I feel I contributed the most.


JK, my list was half-assed, not enough time or energy, I was about to pull out like MSTR, we had a convo about it, too much work to be doing on a website for fun, what with school and all.

Of course, but aren't you glad you did? And now, you won't have to work nearly as hard next month. A change here, addition there. Maybe add a few guys in a couple divisions. From your perspective, by far the hardest part is over.

[China_hand_Joe]

I am complaining about one ranking, not teh rest of the list. As I have stated, the rest is extremely solid. Hopkins though? Unbelieveable.

When so many persons had ranked Hopkins so highly it was beyond doubt he would end up top 4, with only mine and Guru's rankings to be given.

[kg0208]

Tarver was considered the man. He was indeed the percieved man. But he wasn't any good. There are plenty of fighters in the relatively weak division better than he was at that point in time. And several better than Hopkins.

You are talking about Tarver being perceived the man, but your only argument here is your perception. You just want everyone to agree with your perception over their own.

Who were the "many better fighters" in the division than Tarver at the time he lost to Hopkins.

[kg0208]

I am complaining about one ranking, not teh rest of the list. As I have stated, the rest is extremely solid. Hopkins though? Unbelieveable.

When so many persons had ranked Hopkins so highly it was beyond doubt he would end up top 4, with only mine and Guru's rankings to be given.
And if it's ONLY one ranking, then it should not have prevented you from filling out your ballot. If that is the reason you didn't.

[Lampley]

Just a couple of questions - Was Tarver not generally regarded as the LHW champ when Hopkins fought him? And was not Wright in the P4P top ten when Hopkins beat him?

We can quibble at the margins - I think it's WAY too premature for Povetkin to be in the HW top ten - but overall, these ratings are pretty solid.

Fortunately, we'll see soon enough on Povetkin whether he deserves to be ranked. I hope so. That division needs new blood in the worst way.

And while I think Hopkins has fallen off dramatically, and slipped since even the Taylor fights, he still boasts an outstanding recent resume.

[Amsterdam]

I ranked Hopkins at #10, respectfully put him in there about where he belongs because he did do the job on paper and on paper counts for a bit, plus, the P4P rankings is not sorted out and will be by the end of 2007, where Hopkins will no longer be there.

KG didn't even add Hopkins, that's fine also. 'Lampley', the gentleman who took the time to calculate everything and came up with the idea in general, would have also dropped Hopkins low or out all together. Both KG and Lampley are American fans, so it's not so much a Nationalistic thing.

'Axe', a Canadian, ranked Hopkins high.

Believe me CHJ, I was displeased with Hopkins 'at this point' being rated so highly, I feel lower top 10 or simply not even top 10 was adequate to where he currently stands, but I think overtime that everything will be sorted out, not enough people participated and about 70% of those who did felt that Hopkins needed to be ranked highly in boxing's P4P elite, even with him being low on a H2H basis...

This is democracy, however CHJ, our perspective has been looked out by many knowledge posters on here as well and some agree and that number is growing, so with more members to this ranking system and evolving thought, things will even out to a more realistic stand point.

The rankings are pretty 'standard' in view, but I will say that they are more correct than any other rankings list out there right now, so that's a good note on ESB.

Another thanks to Lampley for putting this all together, I'll be around to contribute in the following months for certain.:good

[China_hand_Joe]

Just a couple of questions - Was Tarver not generally regarded as the LHW champ when Hopkins fought him? And was not Wright in the P4P top ten when Hopkins beat him?


Yes and Hopkins is the man at LHW now, it doesn't make these things so. They are just the americanised media perspective.

There should only be 12 months or so to wait until Hopkins is 'exposed' at least. Unless he somehow manages to find another opponent he can hand pick.

He'd love for Trinidad to miraclously beat Jones for example. Then he could be moved to P4P number two perhaps after beating him again.

[kg0208]

Yes and Hopkins is the man at LHW now, it doesn't make these things so. They are just the americanised media perspective.

There should only be 12 months or so to wait until Hopkins is 'exposed' at least. Unless he somehow manages to find another opponent he can hand pick.

He'd love for Trinidad to miraclously beat Jones for example. Then he could be moved to P4P number two perhaps after beating him again.

Well if he fights the winner of that fight, I will drop him further in my LHW rankings.

[Lampley]

I am complaining about one ranking, not teh rest of the list. As I have stated, the rest is extremely solid. Hopkins though? Unbelieveable.

When so many persons had ranked Hopkins so highly it was beyond doubt he would end up top 4, with only mine and Guru's rankings to be given.

Ok, then, why ask for an extension at the last minute? If you look at the thread, that was about the same point that you'd have figured Hopkins was a shoe-in for his spot, so why did it not offend you then, but then it did offend you enough later to inhibit you from voting?

It's fine, I think everything turned out well, but your reasoning confuses me.

[Zakman]

Fortunately, we'll see soon enough on Povetkin whether he deserves to be ranked. I hope so. That division needs new blood in the worst way.

And while I think Hopkins has fallen off dramatically, and slipped since even the Taylor fights, he still boasts an outstanding recent resume.

Agreed. If Povetkin beats Byrd, then there should be no question he belongs in the lower ranges of the top ten. Now, imo, it's a bit premature.

Thanks for the pointer toward the commitee vote. Looks like we have some solid "new blood" for next month's ratings! :good

[Amsterdam]

Just a couple of questions - Was Tarver not generally regarded as the LHW champ when Hopkins fought him? And was not Wright in the P4P top ten when Hopkins beat him?

Yes on both counts. However, Tarver had essentially held the division Hopkins with in circle fighting, ducking Paul Briggs and facing no YOUNG fighters and he honestly just was not that good anyway. On top of it, he was weight drained coming into it. A solid victory, but romanticised far too much.

Wright at 170 was totally ineffective and looked awful, both guys just looked like past it fighters, not the types that defeat young and hungry typed if you know what I mean.

So fair enough, it's on paper, but this is where CHJ is trying to get at and he's pretty much on target... Hopkins won't be defeating any young, talented LHW's, he has to fight guys that he can fight at a lowered workrate and conservative pace to win, that alone means he's not very good H2H.

If this makes much sense...


We can quibble at the margins - I think it's WAY too premature for Povetkin to be in the HW top ten - but overall, these ratings are pretty solid.


Well, if Tony Thompson is a top 10...:yep

[sues2nd]

Yes and Hopkins is the man at LHW now, it doesn't make these things so. They are just the americanised media perspective.

There should only be 12 months or so to wait until Hopkins is 'exposed' at least. Unless he somehow manages to find another opponent he can hand pick.

He'd love for Trinidad to miraclously beat Jones for example. Then he could be moved to P4P number two perhaps after beating him again.

That again...doesnt even make sense.

What would a win over a man he already decimated when the guy was prime matter now that he is FAAAAAAAAR past it?

Ridiculous.

American this....American that.....STFU with that shit.

[kg0208]

Well, if Tony Thompson is a top 10...:yep

Well he does have a more solid resume.

[Amsterdam]

Hell, I'm the only guy who ranked Mijares a top 10 P4P. Hopefully Mijares gets a fight with Montiel or Munoz, the number 2 and 3 respectively in the division, or Donaire, Takefumi, Naito moving up in weight to solidify this...

Castillo will be fighting Arce, sadly, I wanted Mijares to have another coming out party against Castillo.

Any of these bouts should get him into star status, as he's pleasing to watch.

[sues2nd]

Well, if Tony Thompson is a top 10...:yep

WHOA....while I agree that AP is a great talent. He hasnt accomplished half of what Thompson has as a pro. Lets be serious for a second.

[Zakman]

Yes and Hopkins is the man at LHW now, it doesn't make these things so. They are just the americanised media perspective.

There should only be 12 months or so to wait until Hopkins is 'exposed' at least. Unless he somehow manages to find another opponent he can hand pick.

He'd love for Trinidad to miraclously beat Jones for example. Then he could be moved to P4P number two perhaps after beating him again.

How is the high regard in which Hopkins is held an "Americanized" media perspective?? I regularly read the British boxing mag, Boxing Monthly, and they seem to rate him quite highly too!

If Hopkins loses, then he'll deserve to be dropped. But right now, it's hard to argue for his exclusion from the top ten - and the ratings reflect this balanced and justified understanding.

[kg0208]

I am pleasantly surprised to see Calderon on the top 10 P4P rankings.

[Amsterdam]

Well he does have a more solid resume.

Indeed, I actually think he's pretty solid as a 2nd tier type guy, but I just know that Zakman has picked against him twice and generally can't stand his presence in the division, but that he rated the guy top 10...

Thompson sure does look shitty doing his work, but he's really pretty decent overall, durable.

[Amsterdam]

WHOA....while I agree that AP is a great talent. He hasnt accomplished half of what Thompson has as a pro. Lets be serious for a second.

Well, Pov won every round against Donald, Krasniqi AND T. Ibrag are realistically about on the same level.

A shot Byrd is about on that level also, we already know Povetkin wins...:lol:

[Amsterdam]

I am pleasantly surprised to see Calderon on the top 10 P4P rankings.

Yes, I included him, he deserves it.

[China_hand_Joe]

Ok, then, why ask for an extension at the last minute? If you look at the thread, that was about the same point that you'd have figured Hopkins was a shoe-in for his spot, so why did it not offend you then, but then it did offend you enough later to inhibit you from voting?


I had begin my ranking on Wdnesday afternoon, but when using the other lists to assist me I noticed the apocalyptical Hopkins disaster. That is when I lost all hope.

I edited a particular post (the one branding Amsterdam an Americanised bastard). It did say at one point say "I'm pulling out" and possible "I should have anticipated my irrational response to the Hopkins situation" but the manner in which I communicated this was inappropiate. Thus the post was edited.

[sues2nd]

Well, Pov won every round against Donald, Krasniqi AND T. Ibrag are realistically about on the same level.

A shot Byrd is about on that level also, we already know Povetkin wins...:lol:


Listen, I agree that AP is gonna be a great fighter. But lets not rush the kid. He aint in the top ten yet....because he hasnt earned it yet. Nothing else really to it.

-edit-

read it wrong...my bad

[Zakman]

Indeed, I actually think he's pretty solid as a 2nd tier type guy, but I just know that Zakman has picked against him twice and generally can't stand his presence in the division, but that he rated the guy top 10...

Thompson sure does look shitty doing his work, but he's really pretty decent overall, durable.

It's true I picked against Thompson, and don't think he's really much more talented than, say, Ray Austin - but results are results, and he was included in my top ten - at #7, I might add!:D

Povetkin, imo, has not fought anyone to justify a top ten ranking. If he beats Byrd - which I think he will - then it's a different matter. Which is exactly why I desribed it as "premature." Next month, I think, it will be entirely justifed.

[Amsterdam]

It's true I picked against Thompson, and don't think he's really much more talented than, say, Ray Austin - but results are results, and he was included in my top ten - at #7, I might add!:D

Povetkin, imo, has not fought anyone to justify a top ten ranking. If he beats Byrd - which I think he will - then it's a different matter. Which is exactly why I desribed it as "premature." Next month, I think, it will be entirely justifed.

His chin's better than Austin, which GREATLY helps on this level Zak...:yep

[sues2nd]

His chin's better than Austin, which GREATLY helps on this level Zak...:yep

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[Zakman]

His chin's better than Austin, which GREATLY helps on this level Zak...:yep

No argument there - on EITHER point!!!:lol:

[China_hand_Joe]

How is the high regard in which Hopkins is held an "Americanized" media perspective?? I regularly read the British boxing mag, Boxing Monthly, and they seem to rate him quite highly too!

If Hopkins loses, then he'll deserve to be dropped. But right now, it's hard to argue for his exclusion from the top ten - and the ratings reflect this balanced and justified understanding.

The British media is also heavily americanised. Everyone knows this. There are a few differing views (those on Kostya Tszyu for example to benifit Hatton), but largely they are identical. It doesn't help when you have fools like Wayne Mcwhatever his name is writing articles for the British media. He is the strongest example of Americanisation in teh world today. He believe Toney would unify HW, even after losing to Peter the first time.

[Amsterdam]

But hey guys, CHJ is just feeling sour that Kessler was not ranked top 10 and that Hopkins is still irrationally ranked there.

It's a trait of extreme leftists to be eccentric and belligerant...

He even called me an 'Americanised bastard' for putting Hopkins at number 10.

I think the wait for Calzaghe-Kessler is making him go a little nuts also, we have to be a forgiving posting populace, CHJ's comical genius and perspective has entertained us time after time, as well as bringing new views into our logic.

I am sure he will be back to the CHJ that we all know and love as soon as November 3rd is over...

[China_hand_Joe]

Wright at 170 was totally ineffective and looked awful, both guys just looked like past it fighters, not the types that defeat young and hungry typed if you know what I mean.

So fair enough, it's on paper, but this is where CHJ is trying to get at and he's pretty much on target... Hopkins won't be defeating any young, talented LHW's, he has to fight guys that he can fight at a lowered workrate and conservative pace to win, that alone means he's not very good H2H.


But you and every other yank ignore this obvious logic and go with America's favorite way of ranking fighters, basing it on victories over names who are famous in America.

[sues2nd]

But you and every other yank ignore this obvious logic and go with America's favorite way of ranking fighters, basing it on victories over names who are famous in America.

:patsch

Amsterdam....I hope you are right....and if you are, I cant wait for Nov.4th.

[China_hand_Joe]

I think the wait for Calzaghe-Kessler is making him go a little nuts also, we have to be a forgiving posting populace, CHJ's comical genius and perspective has entertained us time after time, as well as bringing new views into our logic.



It is all irrelevant now in the face of the "Hopkins crisis". I will not be posting on any other subject until he is exposed and people look back and see the massive, unforgivable errors of their ways.

[Amsterdam]

But you and every other yank ignore this obvious logic and go with America's favorite way of ranking fighters, basing it on victories over names who are famous in America.

I ranked him at #10, that's much lower than what most did, he will most likely be out next month.

P4P at this time is just difficult to rank.

I ranked Mijares, Dawson and Calderon over him. How is this an Americanised view? He almost got dropped completely, but I am adhering to my own criteria of 50/50 with resume and 'H2H/how the bout was won'.

[Amsterdam]

:patsch

Amsterdam....I hope you are right....and if you are, I cant wait for Nov.4th.

He's going berserk on me also and I'm one of his biggest allies... don't mind it...

CHJ with Hopkins = Amsterdam with Taylor.:rofl

I shredded all of you Taylor apologising freaks immensely, if you will remember.:rofl

[China_hand_Joe]

I ranked him at #10, that's much lower than what most did, he will most likely be out next month.

P4P at this time is just difficult to rank.

I ranked Mijares, Dawson and Calderon over him. How is this an Americanised view? He almost got dropped completely, but I am adhering to my own criteria of 50/50 with resume and 'H2H/how the bout was won'.

Did you just get lazy then or your views compromised? "Oh I'll just throw Hopkins in at number 10, he seems popular, maybe I'll get away with Dawson and Mjares then?"

[Amsterdam]

Did you just get lazy then or your views compromised? "Oh I'll just throw Hopkins in at number 10, maybe I'll get away with Dawson and Mjares then?"

You have me figured out...:lol:

I'm hyping up Mijares like a mad man.

But again, his current status WILL be exposed and he will not be a top 10 there after. Please relax mate.

[sues2nd]

He's going berserk on me also and I'm one of his biggest allies... don't mind it...

CHJ with Hopkins = Amsterdam with Taylor.:rofl

I shredded all of you Taylor apologising freaks immensely, if you will remember.:rofl

:lol: :lol: :lol:

[China_hand_Joe]

CHJ with Hopkins = Amsterdam with Taylor.:rofl


It is nothing alike. Your Taylor hatred went too far, my Hopkins realism is flawless.

[Amsterdam]

:lol: :lol: :lol:

But see how I am now mate? I rarely even mention Taylor.

Once the job was taken care of, it's of no concern anymore. November 3rd will set CHJ's mind free of this issue just like September 29th had me JUMPING UP AND DOWN IN JOY!!!!:lol:

When Taylor was sparked, I jumped up and screaming YESSSSSS!.

:lol:

My girlfriend says 'you're crazy about this boxing stuff'.:yep

[China_hand_Joe]

But again, his current status WILL be exposed and he will not be a top 10 there after. Please relax mate.

Change your list then mate, it will demonstrate your superior insight into the sport, your ability not to be blinded.

[Amsterdam]

It is nothing alike. Your Taylor hatred went too far, my Hopkins realism is flawless.

My Taylor hatred was just flawless realism, only in comical hatred form, it amazed me that some didn't even get the comedic value of all of that stuff.

[Amsterdam]

Change your list then mate, it will demonstrate your superior insight into the sport, your ability not to be blinded.

Next month, he won't even be in there after some more results. I may include Juan Diaz in the top 10 place or another.

I think nothing of him H2H, but the point is that P4P right now is not yet sorted out, so I needed a space filler that wouldn't be absurd to the overall 'criteria' that I utilise.

[China_hand_Joe]

My Taylor hatred was just flawless realism, only in comical hatred form, it amazed me that some didn't even get the comedic value of all of that stuff.

I don't even hate fucking Hopkins. Just the way the whole world is moronic enough to rank him so highly.

The same people who will rate Calzaghe too highly if he beats Kessler.

[China_hand_Joe]

I think nothing of him H2H, but the point is that P4P right now is not yet sorted out, so I needed a space filler that wouldn't be absurd to the overall 'criteria' that I utilise.

There are no excuses. Guzman would have been an easy pick above Hopkins. Moved up in weight, dismantled a non-shot titlist.

[Amsterdam]

I don't even hate fucking Hopkins. Just the way the whole world is moronic enough to rank him so highly.

The same people who will rate Calzaghe too highly if he beats Kessler.

Where will he deserve to be ranked if he blows Kessler away? You don't think that dominating Kessler would deserve a top 3 ranking?:think

[China_hand_Joe]

No, Calzaghe is old, past prime. He was P4P number one from 2000/2001ish until 2006. Not top 3 now.

I won't continue ranking Calzaghe highly when he should be just to suit by agenda of pushing forward the idea Calzaghe is the best fighter of the last decade.

[Amsterdam]

There are no excuses. Guzman would have been an easy pick above Hopkins. Moved up in weight, dismantled a non-shot titlist.

Ah, right, Guzman will definitley be in there next month.

[Kegsy]

Great effort guys with all the votes.
Would really like to get involved at a later stage.

[China_hand_Joe]

Ah, right, Guzman will definitley be in there next month.

All we know is Guzman is top 20. We also know he is above Hopkins.

[radianttwilight]

Why was Calzaghe P4P number one from 2001-2006?

I just don't get it.

He's good, yeah...but what exactly are you using to define P4P status? "Domination" (in quotes for a reason) of a neglected division is NOT the way to P4P status, especially when he fought 2 or 3 legit contenders in 20+ title defences.

As far as H2H/skills critera go, are you forgetting that Floyd Mayweather, Jr. was blitzing from 130 to 147 during this time, and didn't lose once? He won belts in four divisions (two traditional), was undefeated, and beat VASTLY better competition than Calzaghe, and in dominating fashion.

Add in the fact that he fought VERY few "tomato cans" during this time, as opposed to Calzaghe who fought tomato cans for the entire duration between Eubanks and Lacy, and you have someone who makes Joe Calzaghe's skills dwarf in comparison.

If you consider stomping tomato cans for 20+ title defences P4P #1, then I'm suprised you don't have RJJ as your #1 GOAT. He was better at crushing cans than Calzaghe, flashier in doing so, and wasn't a slapper :good

Calzaghe is good, but there's NO WAY he could've earned P4P status when he fought two/three contenders in 10 years. Defending a shitty belt is no excuse...Andrew Golota has fought for more TITLES than Calzaghe has fought contenders, and he hasn't won a belt once!

[China_hand_Joe]

Why was Calzaghe P4P number one from 2001-2006?

I just don't get it.

He's good, yeah...but what exactly are you using to define P4P status? "Domination" (in quotes for a reason) of a neglected division is NOT the way to P4P status, especially when he fought 2 or 3 legit contenders in 20+ title defences.

As far as H2H/skills critera go, are you forgetting that Floyd Mayweather, Jr. was blitzing from 130 to 147 during this time, and didn't lose once? He won belts in four divisions (two traditional), was undefeated, and beat VASTLY better competition than Calzaghe, and in dominating fashion.

Add in the fact that he fought VERY few "tomato cans" during this time, as opposed to Calzaghe who fought tomato cans for the entire duration between Eubanks and Lacy, and you have someone who makes Joe Calzaghe's skills dwarf in comparison.

If you consider stomping tomato cans for 20+ title defences P4P #1, then I'm suprised you don't have RJJ as your #1 GOAT. He was better at crushing cans than Calzaghe, flashier in doing so, and wasn't a slapper :good

Calzaghe is good, but there's NO WAY he could've earned P4P status when he fought two/three contenders in 10 years. Defending a shitty belt is no excuse...Andrew Golota has fought for more TITLES than Calzaghe has fought contenders, and he hasn't won a belt once!

P4P by it's definition is a ranking of the best fighters in the world, it is unimportant who they have faced. A list based on resumes would be "a list of the best resumes" not a P4P list. P4P should just be about the best. WHilst wins against good opponents can support this, they are nothing like the be all and end all.

Hopkins. Lost to Taylor, looked bad against Wright. It is clear he isn't one og the very, very best elite fighters now. Therefore it is laughable to put him on a P4P list.

P4P is based on how good a fighter is and that fighters weight. They are the two dimensions. Resume doesn't come into it. Hopkins doesn't come into it.



Jones should be top 5 on everyone all time P4P lists. Greatness and P4P are different however.


Everyone seems to feel the need to make the same mistakes as RING though.

[sues2nd]

P4P by it's definition is a ranking of the best fighters in the world, it is unimportant who they have faced. A list based on resumes would be "a list of the best resumes" not a P4P list. P4P should just be about the best. WHilst wins against good opponents can support this, they are nothing like the be all and end all.

Hopkins. Lost to Taylor, looked bad against Wright. It is clear he isn't one og the very, very best elite fighters now. Therefore it is laughable to put him on a P4P list.

P4P is based on how good a fighter is and that fighters weight. They are the two dimensions. Resume doesn't come into it. Hopkins doesn't come into it.



Jones should be top 5 on everyone all time P4P lists. Greatness and P4P are different however.

So if a guy fights 10 scrubs and utterly dominates them. Im talking all first round KOs. Then he should be #1 p4p?

That is stupid.

Skill isnt shit unless its proven against other skilled fighters. Hense why us crazy americans using resume as part of the barometer.

To not do so is ridiculous.

We will use Hopkins to show this.

Was his win vs Trinidad dominant? A 12 round KO....

Was his win vs Powell dominant? A 1st round KO (within 30 secs)....

Going by your standards, Hopkins was ranked higher p4p by beating Powell, then Trinidad.

It doesnt make any sense. Skill is always more evident vs lesser foes.

[radianttwilight]

P4P by it's definition is a ranking of the best fighters in the world, it is unimportant who they have faced. A list based on resumes would be "a list of the best resumes" not a P4P list. P4P should just be about the best. WHilst wins against good opponents can support this, they are nothing like the be all and end all.

Hopkins. Lost to Taylor, looked bad against Wright. It is clear he isn't one og the very, very best elite fighters now. Therefore it is laughable to put him on a P4P list.

P4P is based on how good a fighter is and that fighters weight. They are the two dimensions. Resume doesn't come into it. Hopkins doesn't come into it.



Jones should be top 5 on everyone all time P4P lists. Greatness and P4P are different however.


Everyone seems to feel the need to make the same mistakes as RING though.

You're not making any sense here. How do we define how "good" a fighter is if we don't use who they have beaten/how they were beaten? Voodoo?

We can't. Not objectively - anyone can watch the film of Calzaghe bitchslapping Lacy and claim he's a god, but the truth is Lacy was not only overhyped, but he was tailor-made for Calzaghe.

I understand your point, and I agree that Hopkins is highly overrated on these forums, at least his current-self H2H (I feel he's underrated as an ATG, though) but we have to have SOME kind of method to judge a boxer's skill. If pounding bums is good enough for you, then clearly comeback-era George Foreman is next to godliness, because he KO'd alot more of them than Calzaghe has.

If you define "skill" as "pummelling lesser opponents in showy fashion" then that's your perogative. The rest of us know the difference between cans and champions, though, and we know that a close victory, hell even a close LOSS, to a skilled fighter is infinitely more important in defining a fighter's skill level than kicking the shit out of local garbagemen.

There is NO WAY to include Calzaghe, no matter what era, in a P4P list, unless you use longevity of reign and total resume. You are opposed to using these methods, though, so I question how you rank him so highly? P4P #1 over a period of five years?

[sues2nd]

You're not making any sense here. How do we define how "good" a fighter is if we don't use who they have beaten/how they were beaten? Voodoo?

We can't. Not objectively - anyone can watch the film of Calzaghe bitchslapping Lacy and claim he's a god, but the truth is Lacy was not only overhyped, but he was tailor-made for Calzaghe.

I understand your point, and I agree that Hopkins is highly overrated on these forums, at least his current-self H2H (I feel he's underrated as an ATG, though) but we have to have SOME kind of method to judge a boxer's skill. If pounding bums is good enough for you, then clearly comeback-era George Foreman is next to godliness, because he KO'd alot more of them than Calzaghe has.

If you define "skill" as "pummelling lesser opponents in showy fashion" then that's your perogative. The rest of us know the difference between cans and champions, though, and we know that a close victory, hell even a close LOSS, to a skilled fighter is infinitely more important in defining a fighter's skill level than kicking the shit out of local garbagemen.

There is NO WAY to include Calzaghe, no matter what era, in a P4P list, unless you use longevity of reign and total resume. You are opposed to using these methods, though, so I question how you rank him so highly? P4P #1 over a period of five years?

:good Damn good post newbie.

One thing tho....Calzaghe's competition is far underrated. He doesnt have a great resume by all means....but he does have a very good one.

[Amsterdam]

This is why you don't vote CHJ into this committee, I knew it was a mistake.

Can it!:twisted:

He's entitled to his opinion and if he had made a list, it would have been very good. Hopefully he participates next month.

[kg0208]

Can it!:twisted:

He's entitled to his opinion and if he had made a list, it would have been very good. Hopefully he participates next month.

He is entitled to his opinion, as is Sweet Pea right?

He can have an opinion.....was given an opportunity to make his opinion count. He chose not to. Instead, he ridicules from the sideline. That isn't cool.

And you know what.....there is nothing wrong with being Americanized. I am American. I am suppose to be Americanized. We are all from different places, and basically placing a value on a person's background and where they grew up is wrong from jump. How is being Americanized any more wrong then being British, Mexican, etc?

This crap needs to cease....seriously.

[sues2nd]

He is entitled to his opinion, as is Sweet Pea right?

He can have an opinion.....was given an opportunity to make his opinion count. He chose not to. Instead, he ridicules from the sideline. That isn't cool.

And you know what.....there is nothing wrong with being Americanized. I am American. I am suppose to be Americanized. We are all from different places, and basically placing a value on a person's background and where they grew up is wrong from jump. How is being Americanized any more wrong then being British, Mexican, etc?

This crap needs to cease....seriously.

:happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy
:happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy
:happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy
:happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy :happy

Oh yeah....and...

:thumbsup

[Guru_Too_You]

Yes and Hopkins is the man at LHW now, it doesn't make these things so. They are just the americanised media perspective.

There should only be 12 months or so to wait until Hopkins is 'exposed' at least. Unless he somehow manages to find another opponent he can hand pick.

He'd love for Trinidad to miraclously beat Jones for example. Then he could be moved to P4P number two perhaps after beating him again.

This is why I was devastated when you were voted onto the committee. Who the hell do you think you are to make Lampley wait for an extension, ultimately not submit your rankings and then rip the final outcomes? Now youre on here spitting your rubbish once again, clearly stemming from your Hopkins vs Calzaghe bias. Tarver wasnt the man at LHW? I assume that Roy Jones Jr. wasnt either then? So who is the man? Erdei? And as far as Hopkins P4P rankings, deal with it. The man has fought more pound for pound fighters than anyone in the top 10 and just successfully jumped two divisions and beat the CONSENSUS man at LHW. Not to mention both of his bouts with Taylor were decided by contested, razor thin margins.

Just shut up already. You had the chance to submit your rankings, and you didnt.

To everyone else, I am very proud of how this turned out. The rankings look good. The one question I have is that for some of the people that elected not to vote for any champions, was this done intentionally or by mistake? Lampley, perhaps a public poll should be done because I am SHOCKED to find that only 66% of the voters voted Pavlik in as champion. That pretty much CANT be debated. I think that if everyone was asked whether they left out champions intentionally, we may find that fighters like Calderon and Vazquez may be voted in as champions.

Good Work ESB!

[Lampley]

The one question I have is that for some of the people that elected not to vote for any champions, was this done intentionally or by mistake? Lampley, perhaps a public poll should be done because I am SHOCKED to find that only 66% of the voters voted Pavlik in as champion. That pretty much CANT be debated. I think that if everyone was asked whether they left out champions intentionally, we may find that fighters like Calderon and Vazquez may be voted in as champions.

Good Work ESB!

The people who didn't vote Pavlik as champion didn't vote anyone as champion. The plan was to actually vote on the initial champions just one time, but if 4/5 of the voters think they'd like to do it again, then by all means let it rip.

I think some people just didn't like the idea of "handing" someone a belt, although that surprised me a little.

If you or some other voter wants to start a thread, taking input from other ESB posters or whatever, then start it up! This is one I think I shouldn't start -- it has to be initiated by an actual committee member.

[Amsterdam]

I re-looked at the rankings -

Overall it's on target, I had a few problems that were pretty significant, and to many people's surprise the biggest one is not even the Hopkins ranking, but the O'neil Bell ranking.

I guess it's because not enough people know a lot about the Cruiserweight division and just accept that Bell and Mormeck are the elite because they held the belts respectively, but honestly they are two of the weakest in the top 10 IMO, they have fought NONE of the newer blood that has come up the rankings and Mormeck especially defeated a crop of poor fighters, which includes an 'ancient' Virgil Hill that gave him competitive bouts.

As soon as Bell fights another top 10 with stamina, he's going to get destroyed, as Mormeck in two bouts was literally owning him every minute of the rounds before he gassed, sadly, Mormeck doesn't have great punching power like the others involved.

And I never have forgotten Bell nearly losing to Kelvin Davis and getting one of the worst gifts ever over an average fighter in Dale Brown, he's simply just not a very good fighter, certainly not even top 5 material H2H.

I hope this gets cleared up, that one bugs me because Bell and Mormeck essentially held the division hostage in their inactivity. Luckily, Mormeck has the balls to take on Haye, where he will be KOed properly.

[Lampley]

I re-looked at the rankings -

Overall it's on target, I had a few problems that were pretty significant, and to many people's surprise the biggest one is not even the Hopkins ranking, but the O'neil Bell ranking.

I guess it's because not enough people know a lot about the Cruiserweight division and just accept that Bell and Mormeck are the elite because they held the belts respectively, but honestly they are two of the weakest in the top 10 IMO, they have fought NONE of the newer blood that has come up the rankings and Mormeck especially defeated a crop of poor fighters, which includes an 'ancient' Virgil Hill that gave him competitive bouts.

As soon as Bell fights another top 10 with stamina, he's going to get destroyed, as Mormeck in two bouts was literally owning him every minute of the rounds before he gassed, sadly, Mormeck doesn't have great punching power like the others involved.

And I never have forgotten Bell nearly losing to Kelvin Davis and getting one of the worst gifts ever over an average fighter in Dale Brown, he's simply just not a very good fighter, certainly not even top 5 material H2H.

I hope this gets cleared up, that one bugs me because Bell and Mormeck essentially held the division hostage in their inactivity. Luckily, Mormeck has the balls to take on Haye, where he will be KOed properly.

The inactivity bothers me most. Same deal with Hopkins, De La Hoya, et al. Matchmaking also looms as an ongoing concern at cruiser.

[Amsterdam]

The inactivity bothers me most. Same deal with Hopkins, De La Hoya, et al. Matchmaking also looms as an ongoing concern at cruiser.

I really dislike inactivity and 'in circle fighting' and then for the fans to just automatically accept that the in circle's are the best.

I'd pick 6-7 guys over Mormeck and Bell both and would be confident enough to bet.

I really hope it gets sorted out.

Some common opponents for Bell and Ding and Ling man for example :

Bell - Gift over Dale Brown, TKO 11 over Davis(fucking war).

Ding - TKO 2 over Dale Brown, TKO 3 over Davis.

Big difference in my opinion, and Ding is an agknowledged pretty limited guy with chin and huge punching power.:blood

[kg0208]

I re-looked at the rankings -

Overall it's on target, I had a few problems that were pretty significant, and to many people's surprise the biggest one is not even the Hopkins ranking, but the O'neil Bell ranking.

I guess it's because not enough people know a lot about the Cruiserweight division and just accept that Bell and Mormeck are the elite because they held the belts respectively, but honestly they are two of the weakest in the top 10 IMO, they have fought NONE of the newer blood that has come up the rankings and Mormeck especially defeated a crop of poor fighters, which includes an 'ancient' Virgil Hill that gave him competitive bouts.

As soon as Bell fights another top 10 with stamina, he's going to get destroyed, as Mormeck in two bouts was literally owning him every minute of the rounds before he gassed, sadly, Mormeck doesn't have great punching power like the others involved.

And I never have forgotten Bell nearly losing to Kelvin Davis and getting one of the worst gifts ever over an average fighter in Dale Brown, he's simply just not a very good fighter, certainly not even top 5 material H2H.

I hope this gets cleared up, that one bugs me because Bell and Mormeck essentially held the division hostage in their inactivity. Luckily, Mormeck has the balls to take on Haye, where he will be KOed properly.

It isn't glaring. His resume is fine. He wins. If you would like to drop him based on his talent level, then I can see your argument. But you should in no way shape or form drop fighters based on the assumption that they will lose when they step up.

[Amsterdam]

It isn't glaring. His resume is fine. He wins. If you would like to drop him based on his talent level, then I can see your argument. But you should in no way shape or form drop fighters based on the assumption that they will lose when they step up.

'Resume' from my criteria doesn't just include the win itself, but the manner of the win.

Bell's victory over Mormeck is not so dissimiliar from Brewster's win over Wlad, Mormeck was owning him and gassed. This is very different than a pressure fighter wearing someone down in a contested battle, or just wearing him down period through consistent work, because all Brewster did was get unloaded upon and then jumped on Wlad when Wlad had nothing left in the tank...

Mormeck unloaded on Bell in the first and gassed in six, then Bell finally finished him in the 10th. The second bout was fraudulent in the sense that Mormeck had ref help, had the rounds end 40 seconds early when Bell was coming on and so on. I just don't find the inactivity of these two seemingly average competitors, which has held the championship belts hostage, to be correct and I think since Bell doesn't even have a championship belt anymore, he should be ranked accordingly because his resume is not very impressive, neither is Mormeck's for that matter, because Bell should have never been in line for his title in the first place, yet he gassed out and got KTFO by an average O'Neil Bell due to his intangible issue's.

The sad part again, is that Cowboy Dale Brown was robbed and I mean ROBBED, not just an unfair decision and that Bell would not have even been in place to fight Mormeck, it would have been Brown again.

The cross point is that common opponents for both were easily disposed of by a limited, but solid Darnell Wilson, guys that these two struggled with greatly.

So Mormeck HAS to be #1, I just wish Bell's run was taken into more consideration. I ranked Haye over him for example, Haye is clearly a much better fighter.

[PH|LLA]

I don't think Karmazin will ever fight at 154 again

[China_hand_Joe]

We can't. Not objectively - anyone can watch the film of Calzaghe bitchslapping Lacy and claim he's a god, but the truth is Lacy was not only overhyped, but he was tailor-made for Calzaghe.


You can judge fighters like Calzaghe and Roy Jones against shit opposition. You use your intuition and little educated guesswork and rate them incredibly highly.

This certainly makes more sense than ranking Hopkins who looked poor last time out (with a huge size and stylistic advantage noless). Hopkins has also lost 2 fights recently, you decide to ignore this fact. He lost to Taylor who was recently exposed as a very average champion, you ignore this too. It should surely reflect poorly on Hopkins. You ignore all logic.

This is what I should hear from everyone (with one exception):
"Given the available evidence it is absolutely fucking clear Hopkins should not be ranked anywhere near so highly. Thankyou for clearly pointing this out for us, I'll correct my mistake and remove Hopkins from my P4P list all together."

But no, instead, everyone starts defending Tarver.

[kg0208]

'Resume' from my criteria doesn't just include the win itself, but the manner of the win.

Bell's victory over Mormeck is not so dissimiliar from Brewster's win over Wlad, Mormeck was owning him and gassed. This is very different than a pressure fighter wearing someone down in a contested battle, or just wearing him down period through consistent work, because all Brewster did was get unloaded upon and then jumped on Wlad when Wlad had nothing left in the tank...

Mormeck unloaded on Bell in the first and gassed in six, then Bell finally finished him in the 10th. The second bout was fraudulent in the sense that Mormeck had ref help, had the rounds end 40 seconds early when Bell was coming on and so on. I just don't find the inactivity of these two seemingly average competitors, which has held the championship belts hostage, to be correct and I think since Bell doesn't even have a championship belt anymore, he should be ranked accordingly because his resume is not very impressive, neither is Mormeck's for that matter, because Bell should have never been in line for his title in the first place, yet he gassed out and got KTFO by an average O'Neil Bell due to his intangible issue's.

The sad part again, is that Cowboy Dale Brown was robbed and I mean ROBBED, not just an unfair decision and that Bell would not have even been in place to fight Mormeck, it would have been Brown again.

The cross point is that common opponents for both were easily disposed of by a limited, but solid Darnell Wilson, guys that these two struggled with greatly.

So Mormeck HAS to be #1, I just wish Bell's run was taken into more consideration. I ranked Haye over him for example, Haye is clearly a much better fighter.

You can judge how he won, but it doesn't matter as much as the fact that HE WON. You cannot lose sight of that. Winning ugly over champions is better than winning brilliantly over lesser competition in my book. If the fighter who is winning brilliantly is that good, he will prove it later on against good competition as well.

[sues2nd]

Bumpity Bump Bump!!!

[China_hand_Joe]

You can judge how he won, but it doesn't matter as much as the fact that HE WON. You cannot lose sight of that. Winning ugly over champions is better than winning brilliantly over lesser competition in my book. If the fighter who is winning brilliantly is that good, he will prove it later on against good competition as well.

It depends on how bad the opponononent and how brilliant the performance, you then weight it appropiately using your judgement.

Calzaghe's perfect display (one of the most breathtaking ever) against world champion Lacy (very good opponent) is therefore better than the entirity of Hopkins resume.

[McGrain]

Calzaghe's perfect display (one of the most breathtaking ever) against world champion Lacy (very good opponent) is therefore better than the entirity of Hopkins resume.


How would you say this win compares to, say, Robinsons win over Gavlin?

[China_hand_Joe]

Much better, I reckon.

Are you going to ask me to justify this?

[McGrain]

Much better, I reckon.

Are you going to ask me to justify this?

Noooooooooo, every one knows that is not possible - but your way of trying to do it would be long winded and bad reading. So defintiley not.

[kg0208]

It depends on how bad the opponononent and how brilliant the performance, you then weight it appropiately using your judgement.

Calzaghe's perfect display (one of the most breathtaking ever) against world champion Lacy (very good opponent) is therefore better than the entirity of Hopkins resume.

No it's not.....because what Hopkins did to unbeaten Glen Johnson was just as brilliant a display.

[PH|LLA]

If Hatton loses to Mayweather, who is the Light Welterweight Champion? Is it still Hatton?

[PH|LLA]

No it's not.....because what Hopkins did to unbeaten Glen Johnson was just as brilliant a display.
And Johnson was better at that time than Lacy was against Calzaghe

also, Hopkins' Domination of Tarver was better than Calzaghe's domination of Lacy, and Tarver was the champion 2 divisions above Hopkins' career weight

[kg0208]

If Hatton loses to Mayweather, who is the Light Welterweight Champion? Is it still Hatton?

Fair question. That is up to Hatton. He could just as easily vacate the 147 title and go back down to 140. I think if he beats PBF he stays at 147 for the money.

[Axe]

I too disagree with CHJ (and Amsterdam) regarding Hopkins. Jumping two weight classes and beating the top dog (though not champion) at that class was most impressive. A win over Winky at 170 was a good, though unspectacular, result. Hopkins deserves his ranking, imo.

Hatton should remain champ at 140 if he losses, unless he is gone for one year and continues to fight at 147 after the Mayweather bout.

I believe the O'neil Bell situation does require some attention. If I could re-do one divison, it would probably be Cruiserweight. Bell has been terribly inactive and was thoroughly beaten by Mormeck. He should drop next month, imo.

Lasty, this "americanised media" crap should really be cut out (I'm talking to you CHJ :deal). European fighters today are receiving more media attention over here than 10 years ago, when good or even great fighters, like Maske and Michalczewski respectfully, were only briefly shown on TV before really big matchups, and never at all otherwise. Calzaghe has had the benefit of HBO airing a crappy defence of his in the UK, something they would never have done 10 years ago. Of course matchups in the USA will receive more attention though; that is where the networks are based afterall.

[China_hand_Joe]

No it's not.....because what Hopkins did to unbeaten Glen Johnson was just as brilliant a display.

That was quite impressive. I was more impressed by Hopkins when he lost to Jones however and also Calzaghe against Lacy. Hopkins was superb, nigh on perfect boxing. But the speed and everything were all very human. Calzaghe boxed perfectly and also displayed super-human physical attributes.

Calzaghe is better mate.

[kg0208]

That was quite impressive. I was more impressed by Hopkins when he lost to Jones however and also Calzaghe against Lacy. Hopkins was superb, nigh on perfect boxing. But the speed and everything were all very human. Calzaghe boxed perfectly and also displayed super-human physical attributes.

Calzaghe is better mate.
Hearns was far more super human than Hagler or even Leonard. How did that turn out?

Intangibles matter.

[China_hand_Joe]

I too disagree with CHJ (and Amsterdam) regarding Hopkins. Jumping two weight classes and beating the top dog (though not champion) at that class was most impressive. A win over Winky at 170 was a good, though unspectacular, result. Hopkins deserves his ranking, imo.

Hatton should remain champ at 140 if he losses, unless he is gone for one year and continues to fight at 147 after the Mayweather bout.

I believe the O'neil Bell situation does require some attention. If I could re-do one divison, it would probably be Cruiserweight. Bell has been terribly inactive and was thoroughly beaten by Mormeck. He should drop next month, imo.

Lasty, this "americanised media" crap should really be cut out (I'm talking to you CHJ :deal). European fighters today are receiving more media attention over here than 10 years ago, when good or even great fighters, like Maske and Michalczewski respectfully, were only briefly shown on TV before really big matchups, and never at all otherwise. Calzaghe has had the benefit of HBO airing a crappy defence of his in the UK, something they would never have done 10 years ago. Of course matchups in the USA will receive more attention though; that is where the networks are based afterall.

Though Kessler will beat Calzaghe, I hope Joe lands a lucky punch on the Dane to set up a fight with Hopkins. Then Hopkins ends up embarrassed and you all have to admit you have a problem. You are all embarrassingly Americanised.

Even with Hopkins brutalised, the delusion that goes hand in hand with being Americanised, will leave most of you in a state of denial. Most of you are beyond help, but if I can just cure one of you it will all be worthwhile.

[McGrain]

Intangibles matter.

Often more than any other single thing.

[China_hand_Joe]

Hearns was far more super human than Hagler or even Leonard. How did that turn out?

Intangibles matter.

Calzaghe has intagibles, they are why he has a record of 500-5 or whatever.

[McGrain]

Though Kessler will beat Calzaghe, I hope Joe lands a lucky punch on the Dane to set up a fight with Hopkins. Then Hopkins ends up embarrassed and you all have to admit you have a problem. You are all embarrassingly Americanised.

Even with Hopkins brutalised, the delusion that goes hand in hand with being Americanised, will leave most of you in a state of denial. Most of you are beyond help, but if I can just cure one of you it will all be worthwhile.


When Hopkins gets beaten he will indeed drop down most people's rankings.

You will indeed try to steal some of the credit (from whoever actually beats him).

[kg0208]

Though Kessler will beat Calzaghe, I hope Joe lands a lucky punch on the Dane to set up a fight with Hopkins. Then Hopkins ends up embarrassed and you all have to admit you have a problem. You are all embarrassingly Americanised.

Even with Hopkins brutalised, the delusion that goes hand in hand with being Americanised, will leave most of you in a state of denial. Most of you are beyond help, but if I can just cure one of you it will all be worthwhile.

Beating Hopkins now means very little.

Either way, "Americanized" even if it were true, is no worse that being "Euronized".

[McGrain]

Calzaghe has intagibles, they are why he has a record of 500-5 or whatever.

:lol:

What intangibles does he "have"?

[kg0208]

Calzaghe has intagibles, they are why he has a record of 500-5 or whatever.

How would you know....if he is super human, when has he ever had to display intangibles?

[McGrain]

Beating Hopkins now means very little.


Why do you say that?

[kg0208]

Why do you say that?

Because Hopkins is no where near the fighter he was in his prime.

Compare the fighter who beat Glen Johnson to the fighter who just beat Wright. They are night and day.

We all know Hopkins is not prime. If anything, people are impressed because he is winning NOT in his prime. But a good LHW will beat him, and I think he knows this. Many experts have said that.....

[McGrain]

Because Hopkins is no where near the fighter he was in his prime...


I agree with this and a lot of the other things you said. But while it would be very difficult for Hopkins to beat a really good fighter, it would also be tough tough for any fighter to beat him. You would need plenty in the to get him in my opinion, he's a very good scalp.

[kg0208]

I agree with this and a lot of the other things you said. But while it would be very difficult for Hopkins to beat a really good fighter, it would also be tough tough for any fighter to beat him. You would need plenty in the to get him in my opinion, he's a very good scalp.

I haven't thought Hopkins was that great for a while. I am not like Amsterdam thinking he is horrible. But I can't see him beating any of the other champions (even Woods) at this point.

I honestly think Dawson would beat him like Jones did. In that fashion.

[Lampley]

I haven't thought Hopkins was that great for a while. I am not like Amsterdam thinking he is horrible. But I can't see him beating any of the other champions (even Woods) at this point.

I honestly think Dawson would beat him like Jones did. In that fashion.

At this point, I think Dawson/Hopkins would be less competitive than Hopkins/Jones. It's difficult for me to imagine how Bernard could trouble Chad. Maybe land a few sneaky right hands, but he isn't going to end the fight that way.

I'll still give the first person to hurt or widely outpoint Hopkins a lot of credit, as based on savvy I still rate Bernard a top 15 PfP. And that's pretty damn good. Factoring out his immense resume, I don't think he's a top 10 fighter at this moment, but he's still a tricky matchup.

But the guys fighting at the top 10 level -- such as Calzaghe and Dawson -- take him now.

I'd still give him a fair shot at the uninspiring beltholders at 175, with the exception of Dawson.

[stuistylee]

great work guys...getting worried bout this thousand post thing...i dont post 2 much but live on this site mayb u could come up with a second eligibility criteria like 8 months and 800 posts because im sure im not the only 1 on here with decent knowledge that doesnt post every time their fighter gets called a pussy or a dodger or hes gnna get exposed or so an so wlda monstered him blah blah...cause you gotta b voted 4 anyways...if not im looking at like 20 months...otherwise ill just get in arguments with CHJ about joe n ill b there in no time...lol...ta

[kg0208]

great work guys...getting worried bout this thousand post thing...i dont post 2 much but live on this site mayb u could come up with a second eligibility criteria like 8 months and 800 posts because im sure im not the only 1 on here with decent knowledge that doesnt post every time their fighter gets called a pussy or a dodger or hes gnna get exposed or so an so wlda monstered him blah blah...cause you gotta b voted 4 anyways...if not im looking at like 20 months...otherwise ill just get in arguments with CHJ about joe n ill b there in no time...lol...ta

Well, we could look at a poster's join date. I only speak for myself, but the problem with that option IMO is that I look at a persons posting history and check for what I believe is credibility in those posts before I vote on a poster.

[Lampley]

great work guys...getting worried bout this thousand post thing...i dont post 2 much but live on this site mayb u could come up with a second eligibility criteria like 8 months and 800 posts because im sure im not the only 1 on here with decent knowledge that doesnt post every time their fighter gets called a pussy or a dodger or hes gnna get exposed or so an so wlda monstered him blah blah...cause you gotta b voted 4 anyways...if not im looking at like 20 months...otherwise ill just get in arguments with CHJ about joe n ill b there in no time...lol...ta

I appreciate what you are saying, but my concern about that is you could have a regular poster start an alias, not post with it very frequently, then try to work his way onto the committee. The 1,000 posts helps with the alias thing.

But start posting more regularly on a variety of topics, and we'll all be blown away by your knowledge! :happy

[PH|LLA]

Fair question. That is up to Hatton. He could just as easily vacate the 147 title and go back down to 140. I think if he beats PBF he stays at 147 for the money.
i asked loses not beats

PS. Hopkins is still numero uno at lightheavy until beaten even if he is not the best according to you; he is king of the division (or as close to king as it gets) and therefore a great scalp. In his two last fights he beat Winky pretty easily and demolished Tarver.

[kg0208]

i asked loses not beats

PS. Hopkins is still numero uno at lightheavy until beaten even if he is not the best according to you; he is king of the division (or as close to king as it gets) and therefore a great scalp. In his two last fights he beat Winky pretty easily and demolished Tarver.
He isn't the best according to me, and since we are discussing our own individual rankings I can certainly judge how I please. He is old, has a low workrate, beat Wright when 2 weight classes above his current natural weight (and Wright looked bad at that weight) and Tarver was quite honestly weight drained IMO and while I applaud the win, it was a year and a 1/2 ago and Hopkins didn't look as good in his Wright fight.

So no, I don't think he is a great scalp at all. A good one maybe, but he is 43 yrs old and hasn't looked good in 2 years.

As to your original question, I misread it. Hatton moving up doesn't vacate his title according to the rules unless he actually stays at that weight , just like PBF moving up didn't vacate his by moving up. So IMO he is still champion.

[PH|LLA]

He isn't the best according to me, and since we are discussing our own individual rankings I can certainly judge how I please. He is old, has a low workrates, beat Wright when 2 weight classes above his current natural weight (and Wright looked bad at that weight) and Tarver was quite honestly weight drained IMO.

So no, I don't think he is a great scalp at all. A good one maybe, but he is 43 yrs old and hasn't looked good in 2 years.
Weight drained or not I'm surprised you don't think he looked good against Tarver.

Anyways you're entitled to your opinion.

My question remains if Hatton loses at 147 does he keep his light-welterweight champion status?

[kg0208]

Weight drained or not I'm surprised you don't think he looked good against Tarver.

Anyways you're entitled to your opinion.

My question remains if Hatton loses at 147 does he keep his light-welterweight champion status?
I edited to answer the question in the last post. Unless Hatton is staying at 147, he is still the 140 champion and just moving up for a mega fight.

Hopkins looked better than Tarver, but that wasn't taking much that night. Both work rates were painfully low and neither looked great to me. I am wrong to say Hopkins didn't look good. Just not like the best LHW in the world.

[Maxime]

Why oh why is Allan Green rated higher then Alejandro Berrio?!?!?!?!

Green's best wins:
Jaidon Codrington
Emmett Linton
Jerson Ravelo

Berrio's best wins:
Syd Vanderpool
Yusaf Mack
Robert Stieglitz

Berrio > Green

[sues2nd]

Why oh why is Allan Green rated higher then Alejandro Berrio?!?!?!?!

Green's best wins:
Jaidon Codrington
Emmett Linton
Jerson Ravelo

Berrio's best wins:
Syd Vanderpool
Yusaf Mack
Robert Stieglitz

Berrio > Green

Green 1 loss by decision while severely ill (and I mean SEVERELY!). While Berrio has 4 losses (soon to be 5 :hey ), including one to the immortal Jairo Jesus Siris (career record 17-13-1).

Wins can tell you alot about a fighter...as can losses.

There are more reasons, but that is just one of em.

[Maxime]

Green 1 loss by decision while severely ill (and I mean SEVERELY!). While Berrio has 4 losses (soon to be 5 :hey ), including one to the immortal Jairo Jesus Siris (career record 17-13-1).

Wins can tell you alot about a fighter...as can losses.

There are more reasons, but that is just one of em.

I usualy don't give loses much attention unless they are recent. Who cares if Berrio lost to a bum 10 years ago? Manny Pacquiao was knocked out by the great Rustico Torrecampo (14-8-5). No one gives a shit.

[Axe]

Though Kessler will beat Calzaghe, I hope Joe lands a lucky punch on the Dane to set up a fight with Hopkins. Then Hopkins ends up embarrassed and you all have to admit you have a problem. You are all embarrassingly Americanised.

Even with Hopkins brutalised, the delusion that goes hand in hand with being Americanised, will leave most of you in a state of denial. Most of you are beyond help, but if I can just cure one of you it will all be worthwhile.

Your attempts to maximize the credit Calzaghe will receive should he beat Kessler in Britain are sadly transparent.

When considering P4P ratings you have to keep recent accomplishments in mind, and Hopkins still has enough of those for him to outrank Joe at this stage. :deal

[China_hand_Joe]

:lol:

What intangibles does he "have"?

Everything Hopkins has in at least equal, timing, chin etc... in addition to this he has two souls.

[China_hand_Joe]

Your attempts to maximize the credit Calzaghe will receive should he beat Kessler in Britain are sadly transparent.

When considering P4P ratings you have to keep recent accomplishments in mind, and Hopkins still has enough of those for him to outrank Joe at this stage. :deal

Kessler is the favorite, I believe Calzaghe will appear old.

You also have to take into account how Hopkins is basically disabled compared to someone like Calzaghe at the current time, which is relevant to the the current rankings.

[China_hand_Joe]

But the guys fighting at the top 10 level -- such as Calzaghe and Dawson -- take him now.

So kick him out your pound for pound lists. It is obvious he will lose as soon as he come up against a very good fighter. Leaving him in there is silly mate, there is no need to wait, to be wrong for several months leading up to his inevitable failure.

It is like standing in the the middle of a road and saying "I'll move, but only after the bus has hit me."

[Amsterdam]

Kessler is the favorite, I believe Calzaghe will appear old.

You also have to take into account how Hopkins is basically disabled compared to someone like Calzaghe at the current time, which is relevant to the the current rankings.

Calzaghe will beat Kessler, badly I might add. Even old Deram thinks it may end up a legitimate win for Calzaghe.

[SugarShane_24]

Can I volunteer to occationally give a few bits of information about the lower weight classes? I need not be a member of the commitee. It looks a bit loose as there are only 5 fighter there while other division has 10 and a champion.

[China_hand_Joe]

Calzaghe will beat Kessler, badly I might add. Even old Deram thinks it may end up a legitimate win for Calzaghe.

Foolishness.

I have a 100% prediction record (always will have) and I am predicting Kessler wins this one.

[Stinky gloves]

I usualy don't give loses much attention unless they are recent. Who cares if Berrio lost to a bum 10 years ago? Manny Pacquiao was knocked out by the great Rustico Torrecampo (14-8-5). No one gives a shit.

But Stieglitz and Mack aren't Morales and Barrera ... or are they?

[Amsterdam]

Foolishness.

I have a 100% prediction record (always will have) and I am predicting Kessler wins this one.

Yes and Calzaghe will become the GOAT because he beat your prediction record mate, we know the drill.:yep

Now here is the real question CHJ, is your 100% prediction record worth sacrificing for the Calzaghe cause? I don't think so, because that's a very impressive merit that few others have.

I think we just need to come to terms on this and support our guy with logic, which the conclusion there after studying both combatants clearly shows that even a 75% Calzaghe is enough to win against Mikkel Kessler, he was 75% of his peak vs. Lacy, he hasn't looked like he's declined since in speed and fitness.

[Lampley]

So kick him out your pound for pound lists. It is obvious he will lose as soon as he come up against a very good fighter. Leaving him in there is silly mate, there is no need to wait, to be wrong for several months leading up to his inevitable failure.

It is like standing in the the middle of a road and saying "I'll move, but only after the bus has hit me."
I don't have Hopkins in my personal PfP list. And I'm not a voter, so it really doesn't matter what I think with respect to these rankings.

Where you and I part is the notion of disagreement. I can respect how someone would rank Hopkins very highly, I just don't place him there myself. You apparently cannot abide that kind of equivocation. And that's fine, if a bit narrow-minded.

[Stinky gloves]

Can you guys write separate page somewhere between MMA and Classic
which will show final versions of the ESB rankings (month by month) ?

[sues2nd]

I usualy don't give loses much attention unless they are recent. Who cares if Berrio lost to a bum 10 years ago? Manny Pacquiao was knocked out by the great Rustico Torrecampo (14-8-5). No one gives a shit.

Understood. Again, wasnt the only thing. Green has lost one fight tho in his career (and again, was VERY sick durig the fight). He is much better than he let on vs Miranda.

[Lampley]

Can I volunteer to occationally give a few bits of information about the lower weight classes? I need not be a member of the commitee. It looks a bit loose as there are only 5 fighter there while other division has 10 and a champion.

By all means, please offer your opinions. Everyone wanted to do a top 5 only for the lower guys, but if we get enough material, perhaps at some point we can list 10.

Regardless, those guys are very tough to rank, so any information you have would be greatly appreciated!

[Axe]

Kessler is the favorite, I believe Calzaghe will appear old.

You also have to take into account how Hopkins is basically disabled compared to someone like Calzaghe at the current time, which is relevant to the the current rankings.

Actually, Joe was the favourite last time I checked.

[McGrain]

Everything Hopkins has in at least equal, timing, chin etc... in addition to this he has two souls.

The souls thing is interesting.

But chin and timing are not intangibles, they are tangibles.

Thanks for playing though.

[China_hand_Joe]

The souls thing is interesting.

But chin and timing are not intangibles, they are tangibles.

Thanks for playing though.

What intangibles does Hopkins' possess, that Calzaghe doesn't?

Hopkins is an innate loser (relative to Calzaghe), Calzaghe is an innate winner.

Calzaghe also has greater work ethics on fight night.

Calzaghe has the X-factor.

[sues2nd]

What intangibles does Hopkins' possess, that Calzaghe doesn't?

Hopkins is an innate loser (relative to Calzaghe), Calzaghe is an innate winner.

Calzaghe also has greater work ethics on fight night.

Calzaghe has the X-factor.

:verysad

[China_hand_Joe]

Hopkins just gives up mate.

[sues2nd]

Hopkins just gives up mate.

:verysad

Your basing this on the Taylor fights alone. During the Wright fight and the Tarver fight, he was the FAR busier man. Both of whom are normally high output fighters as well (Wright much more so than Tarver, but...).

[China_hand_Joe]

Hopkins procrastinates.

Against Taylor "Boxing, oh I'll leave that until later, will just win the second half of the fight

[sues2nd]

Hopkins procrastinates.

Against Taylor "Boxing, oh I'll leave that until later, will just win the second half of the fight

Again...just against Taylor.

Winky in many fights throws in excess of 1000 punches...during his fight with Bernard, he was outworked.

You cant watch two fights (where his gameplan was obviously to sit back, pick his spots and wear down Jermain going into the later rounds) and base an opinion on someones whole career...especially when the two fights since have been in stark contrast to how those original two were.

It doesnt make sense.

[China_hand_Joe]

Punches

Hopkins:
152 of 640, 24%

Wright:
167 of 618, 27%

Jabs

Hopkins: 9 of 91, 10%

Wright: 87 of 290, 30%

Power
Punches

Hopkins:
143 of 549, 26%


Wright:
80 of 328, 24%



20 punches is hardly outworked.

Calzaghe throws more than those two old men combined mate.

[sues2nd]

Punches

Hopkins:
152 of 640, 24%

Wright:
167 of 618, 27%

Jabs

Hopkins: 9 of 91, 10%

Wright: 87 of 290, 30%

Power
Punches

Hopkins:
143 of 549, 26%


Wright:
80 of 328, 24%



20 punches is hardly outworked.

Calzaghe throws more than those two old men combined mate.

And 640 punches is hardly a low output as well.

But, most of Winky's punches, as you saw......were jabs. So in a way, he still was outworked.

And vs Hopkins....Joe would NOT throw as much as he normally does. If he did, he would get countered all night. Joe knows that....you do as well.

[China_hand_Joe]

Winky made Hopkins work harder than usual that is all. He just kept walking into him, an easy target.

Against Calzaghe Hopkins would have to constantly clinch or throw hundreds of punches to keep Joe off him, and tire after 2 rounds and end up knocked out.




Can i discuss Americanisation with you for a moment?

[sues2nd]

Winky made Hopkins work harder than usual that is all. He just kept walking into him, an easy target.

Against Calzaghe Hopkins would have to constantly clinch or throw hundreds of punches to keep Joe off him, and tire after 2 rounds and end up knocked out.




Can i discuss Americanisation with you for a moment?

You seriously just called Winky Wright an easy target.

:patsch

And you know I dont want to hear your bullshit take on Americanization.

[kg0208]

Winky made Hopkins work harder than usual that is all. He just kept walking into him, an easy target.

Against Calzaghe Hopkins would have to constantly clinch or throw hundreds of punches to keep Joe off him, and tire after 2 rounds and end up knocked out.




Can i discuss Americanisation with you for a moment?

Americanization (your account of it) could just as easily be placed on any other nationality. Your for instance, are so against Americans that you overrate others just to downgrade them.

[McGrain]

What intangibles does Hopkins' possess, that Calzaghe doesn't?

Hopkins is an innate loser (relative to Calzaghe), Calzaghe is an innate winner.

Calzaghe also has greater work ethics on fight night.

Calzaghe has the X-factor.


This is an embaressing post.

[Lampley]

This is an embaressing post.

Well put. I believe CHJ is being hyperbolic for effect, but still -- there are kids who read this board.

[China_hand_Joe]

Americanization (your account of it) could just as easily be placed on any other nationality. Your for instance, are so against Americans that you overrate others just to downgrade them.

Of course there is englishisation, australianisation and all the rest. But americanisation is just so much stronger, so much more influential.

[China_hand_Joe]

Hopkins has no intangibles over Calzaghe. All he has at all are less brittle bones.

.

[China_hand_Joe]

Shane Mosely, Miguel Cotto is seen as a 50/50 fight.

This is Americanisation in action.

Although Cotto is somewhat hyped, American Mosley's reputation from the 90s has been maintained and is out of control.

The fact this is percieved as 50/50 is a joke. Cotto will win, then you will all have to concede I am 100% right about Americanisation.

[kg0208]

Of course there is englishisation, australianisation and all the rest. But americanisation is just so much stronger, so much more influential.

Making it more or less wrong how? Influence has nothing to do with wrong or right.

Besides, your arguing the point in the manner you do breeds more resistance than understanding. I think you know this.

[China_hand_Joe]

Arguing with logic alone doesn't work. People still have Hopkins in their P4P listings. The simple logical argument is "Hopkins clearly isn't one of the ten best fighters in the world today." fails. You and I both know this is a correct argument.

Everyone here has a rigid might apart from me. How often do you see people ever back down in their arguments here? It doesn't matter how you argue your points.

[sues2nd]

Shane Mosely, Miguel Cotto is seen as a 50/50 fight.

This is Americanisation in action.

Although Cotto is somewhat hyped, American Mosley's reputation from the 90s has been maintained and is out of control.

The fact this is percieved as 50/50 is a joke. Cotto will win, then you will all have to concede I am 100% right about Americanisation.

You do realize that Cotto hails from PR...which in 1917 because of the Jones-Shfroth Act, all PR citizens are also US citizens? I mean, you were aware of that right?

Esentially, PR is part of the United States. They are allowed to periodically vote to see if they will become the 51st state. Seeing as how right now they are under US soveriegnty (its a Commonwealth).

Your statement was rife with nationalism, uneducated and was false in nature. So I doubt Americanization as you call it exists in this fashion. Nice try tho.

:verysad

PLUS, vs lesser skilled fighters, Cotto has shown he can be hurt early. If you think that Mosely cant do it, then your insane.

And I remember (I believe in this very post...but I dont feel like looking for it), you stated that the British press is Americanized as well. SO THEN, where do we look for this non-Americanization as you refrenced?

The South African Evening Times? The Ethiopian Monitor?

CHJ....your hate of anything American is reaching new heights here. Now it can essentially be two American citizens fighting and there is an American bias going on.

You really should stop this blind bullshit. Seeing as how the bias you spout TOWARD anything US is far worse than ANY AMERICANIZED BIAS I HAVE EVER SEEN!!!

Its getting fucking sad.

:verysad

[McGrain]

there are kids who read this board.

:lol:

CHJ...you cheeky monkey, I don't approve.

[China_hand_Joe]

You do realize that Cotto hails from PR...which in 1917 because of the Jones-Shfroth Act, all PR citizens are also US citizens? I mean, you were aware of that right?

Esentially, PR is part of the United States. They are allowed to periodically vote to see if they will become the 51st state. Seeing as how right now they are under US soveriegnty (its a Commonwealth).

Your statement was rife with nationalism, uneducated and was false in nature. So I doubt Americanization as you call it exists in this fashion. Nice try tho.

:verysad

PLUS, vs lesser skilled fighters, Cotto has shown he can be hurt early. If you think that Mosely cant do it, then your insane.

And I remember (I believe in this very post...but I dont feel like looking for it), you stated that the British press is Americanized as well. SO THEN, where do we look for this non-Americanization as you refrenced?

The South African Evening Times? The Ethiopian Monitor?

CHJ....your hate of anything American is reaching new heights here. Now it can essentially be two American citizens fighting and there is an American bias going on.

You really should stop this blind bullshit. Seeing as how the bias you spout TOWARD anything US is far worse than ANY AMERICANIZED BIAS I HAVE EVER SEEN!!!

Its getting fucking sad.

:verysad

I did say Cotto is somewhat hyped. But he still can't compete for love with that full blooded American Mosley. Remember Mosley was a contender for P4P number one once, despite being 50/50 going against elites his whole life. Insane bias.

I have nothing against America itself, I am just wise enough to appreciate the massive, massive bias Americanisation the anti-european American boxing media causes.

When Cotto comfortablely grinds Mosley down (in what will be a competetive fight for most of the it's duration) will you admit you have been duped by the media? The win won't have been indoubt, except in the papers.

[kg0208]

I did say Cotto is somewhat hyped. But he still can't compete for love with that full blooded American Mosley.

I have nothing against America itself, I am just wise enough to appreciate the massive, massive bias Americanisation the anti-european American boxing media causes.

And you counter by being Euro biased? Neither is productive. They don't counter balance like you say, they just cause extremist arguments, with both stretching the truth to make a point.

[China_hand_Joe]

And you counter by being Euro biased? Neither is productive. They don't counter balance like you say, they just cause extremist arguments, with both stretching the truth to make a point.

Europe are fairly rubbish mate, I am fully aware of that. Calzaghe, Kessler, Hatton - not many other elite fighters really.

I am perfectly balanced in my views, free of bias. I just lay past your view points so am percieved as biased.

I do not care for Europe either, but they don't lie about there ability as much as America, so need knocking down far less.

[kg0208]

Europe are fairly rubbish mate, I am fully aware of that. Calzaghe, Kessler, Hatton - not many other elite fighters really.

I am perfectly balanced in my views, free of bias. I just lay past your view points so am percieved as biased.
You don't really know my view points lol.

You may not be Euro biased, but you are biased against Americans. You're reasoning is often very subjective with little to back it up other than you're word. You often do the same thing in discussion of Calzaghe.

I do not care for Europe either, but they don't lie about there ability as much as America, so need knocking down far less.

This is not true really. They are just as biased and exaggerate just as much as any American or any other country. They just don't have the influence the States currently has to get their views out there as much.

[valdez]

Juan Diaz should be in the P4P..

[China_hand_Joe]

You cannot find one instance of bias against Americans from me in my entire posting history. It is all justified like saying:

"On average Americans are fatter than Europeans." It is not a pro-American statement, but it is not biased and is factual.

[kg0208]

Juan Diaz should be in the P4P..

Not at the time of the ranking he should not be. And it's debatable now in all honesty.

It's not that he is not good enough, it's that the fighters in front of him are very good.

[Amsterdam]

Not at the time of the ranking he should not be. And it's debatable now in all honesty.

It's not that he is not good enough, it's that the fighters in front of him are very good.

Mijares would Lacy him if he were a natural LW. However, that proves he's superior P4P. I heard Mijares gets a unification fight soon, if he impresses and crushes the opponent, who would be a titlist like Montiel or Kirilov, he definitley deserves a top 10 spot, more so than Juan Diaz.

[kg0208]

You cannot find one instance of bias against Americans from me in my entire posting history. It is all justified like saying:

"On average Americans are fatter than Europeans." It is not a pro-American statement, but it is not biased and is factual.

Your constant bashing of the American viewpoint even when it mirrors other countries views of their own athletes is a bias. You are making a conscious choice to bash one point of view over another though they are similar in a consistant manner. That is a bias.

[sues2nd]

Your constant bashing of the American viewpoint even when it mirrors other countries views of their own athletes is a bias. You are making a conscious choice to bash one point of view over another though they are similar in a consistant manner. That is a bias.

Amen kg....Amen.

[China_hand_Joe]

Your constant bashing of the American viewpoint even when it mirrors other countries views of their own athletes is a bias. You are making a conscious choice to bash one point of view over another though they are similar in a consistant manner. That is a bias.

This has already been addressed. American bias is out of control. Therefore my bashing of it is justified. I have however attacked Brits for thinking they have good fighters and for supporting Hatton over the superior Mayweather many times. You however do not seem to frequent the British forums.

[China_hand_Joe]

Amen kg....Amen.

Do you want a bet mate?

Not an avatar bet.

I want an ideology bet with you.

[sues2nd]

Do you want a bet mate?

Not an avatar bet.

I want an idealogy bet with you.

You are so set in your ways I could prove you wrong beyond a shadow of a doubt and youd still hold steadfast to your ridiculously biased opinion.

Its not worth it.

[China_hand_Joe]

If Cotto loses I'll become an Americanised fool.

If Cotto wins you appreciate my enlightenmentness, the clearness I see with and embrace my theories on Americanisation in boxing.

[kg0208]

This has already been addressed. American bias is out of control. Therefore my bashing of it is justified. I have however attacked Brits for thinking they have good fighters and for supporting Hatton over the superior Mayweather many times. You however do not seem to frequent the British forums.
I didn't say you had a bias against American fighters now did I?

I said you bash American viewpoints, our intelligence by constantly assuming we can be brainwashed into wrong beliefs but apparently other places cannnot (such as yourself), and basically insinuating we are inferior in our thought processes in general based on being brainwashed. Media is worldwide....each one has a bias. You only harp on ours.

Saying something is justified doesn't make it so. As I have told you before, the way you go about things only antagonizes, not enlightens. All bias is the same, with different spins. You should be attacking bias in general, not just biases of certain places.

[China_hand_Joe]

I do attack all biases mate. It is just there are more instances of American bias to attack.

It creates an illusion of me being particularly anti-American in the eyes of Americanisationalised persons sypathisers.

[kg0208]

I do attack all biases mate. It is just there are more instances of American bias to attack.

It creates an illusion of me being particularly anti-American in the eyes of Americanisationalised persons sypathisers.
I certainly don't see you attack all biases. Perhaps I will pay closer attention than the norm to see what the truth is myself. All in all it doesn't matter much. You are what you are.

[sues2nd]

I certainly don't see you attack all biases. Perhaps I will pay closer attention than the norm to see what the truth is myself. All in all it doesn't matter much. You are what you are.

Thats because he doesnt. Dont fool yourself.

[Amsterdam]

Mijares would Lacy him if he were a natural LW. However, that proves he's superior P4P. I heard Mijares gets a unification fight soon, if he impresses and crushes the opponent, who would be a titlist like Montiel or Kirilov, he definitley deserves a top 10 spot, more so than Juan Diaz.

You're right, Diaz even gets tagged consistently by the likes of Julio Diaz. Mijares drinks rivers and punches through mountains, there is no comparison.

Anyone 118 and under should just be given a loss by default to Mijares.:yep