Top 10 160-175lbs

That was very funny. Its quite amazing that someone could post something like that and actually believe they were being reasonable, let alone right. I suppose he's probably 12. Gee where r u from again and who do you think can beat JC, AA, etc..???? Exactly.

Perhaps he would. It is definately close between those two. I would have Taylor higher, I just need to see how he responds after those losses. i mean the way he pursued chad and the way tarver cautiously boxed 12 rounds against woods. its been long time since taylor fought in february, too long i think for fighter as good as him.

good list I think Taylor is a little low, I would put him @ 4 and slide everyone else down 1. and i think if tarver fought johnson today he would lose. Perhaps he would. It is definately close between those two. I would have Taylor higher, I just need to see how he responds after those losses.

1. Joe Calzaghe - pretty obvious why 2. Kelly Pavlik - not sure he belongs this high but has fought the best opposition 3. Chad Dawson - very good wins over Johnson and Adamek of late and I think will emerge as the best at 175 over the next 2 years 4. Arthur Abraham - still a fair bit unknown about AA I think but def looks the goods 5. Bernard Hopkins - pretty much on the way out but deserves to be in there I think 6. Mikkel Kessler - definately deserves to be higher based on skills but I can't until he beats somebody who isn't either a bum, overprotected Euro or B-class journeyman 7. Antonio Tarver - I think he will get beat by Chad but is still definately in the top 10 at this weight range at the moment 8. Jermain Taylor - large amount of uncertainty in relation to how he will come back from the Pavlik losses - still a top fighter IMO though 9. Glen Johnson - lost a very close fight to Dawson and can still hang with all the top guys at 175 for sure 10. Insert next level fighter here - Bute, Froch, Diaconu, Mundine, Sturm, Erdei. good list I think Taylor is a little low, I would put him @ 4 and slide everyone else down 1. and i think if tarver fought johnson today he would lose.

I think dawson is a little too high, But it's not bad . Perhaps. I just can't see who any of the ppl below him have beaten that should put them above him. Hopkins, Tarver and Johnson are the obvious exceptions however I think they are too past their prime to be rated higher than him. As I said in my initial ratings I think Kessler may be higher, possibly even number 2, but I can't put him that high until he gets a win that is better than Mundine.

Why can't i compare the two situations? Eubank was done right after the second Watson fight, and what shows us is the fact that he fought to a draw with Ray Close, a fighter that came in as the opponent and was not ranked in any major organizations. I hope that's not your sign of an ''elite'' fighter that's a lot better than Tarver or Johnson. Last year Johnson was IBF light heavyweight champion and many people thought that he beat Dawson including Bernard Hopkins. He will also be challenging for the WBC title most likely by the end of this year so we can get a clearer view. Actually Hopkins and Reid gave Calzaghe his hardest fights, and many British fans that i have talked to felt that he lost both of these fights. Reid certainly was never an elite fighter, and no where near the caliber of a Johnson or Tarver. Funny how you say that you are not a fan of double standards, when this is a clear example of one right here. Nice job. Adamek actually dropped Dawson and was THE champion that won his title in the ring against another champion in Paul Briggs, who was a top 4 light heavyweight at the time. I'm not sure if you know what a paper champion is. A paper champion is a fighter that wins his title vacant against a lesser opponent or wins it against a fighter that won it vacant. Kessler is a paper champion. Dawson fought an unbeaten champion, that was a top 5 light heavyweight and that is now a top 10 cruiser weight who stopped last years cruiser weight champion. I hate repeating myself, but i have been having too since you are bringing up the same points and completely ignoring all of my questions, so don't expect doing it. I seen this post earlier today but decided to not respond, because you are ignoring everything that i say. On your point against Dawson/Tarver. As i have stated earlier in this thread, he is taking the fight for recognition because Tarver is rated at number 2 at light heavyweight and he is IBF/IBO champion so he will either take Tarver's place at #2 or become #1, plus he will have two more titles. This fight is for legacy. I didn't say anything was wrong with Joe fighting Eubank, i brought the point up because you are accusing Dawson of fighting old fighters and accusing him of being a paper champion, when both Calzaghe and Kessler has a lesser record then he did when they only had 23 fights. Another thing that you fail to acknowledge is the fact that Dawson is fighting the top level fighters consistently, while Joe didn't take any big risks after he won the title and defended it far less competition. Dawson has fought Harding, Adamek, Johnson and soon to be Tarver, within 2 years and that's impressive. Yes he is proven and yes his record is better than Kessler, who fought bums before the Calzaghe fight and he is still fighting bums. I like him a lot and i don't discredit Joe's win over him at all because it was certainly a great one, but lets be serious. Once he hit his stride he didn't come to the states to fights. What significance is there in fighting a few bums( confidence builders) earlier in your career? What high profiles fights did Eubank fight when he was champion or at the time he was highly regarded? None. He doesn't have a Toney or his resume, a Jones on his resume, a Hopkins on his resume ect. Eubank drew with Close? Lets just pretend Johnson doesnt have a double figured loss column with such elites as Syd Vanderpool and Joseph Kiawunuka in there. Anyone can pick apart at a record. Eubank fought a draw with Benn too after Watson. If we're gonna call people like an old Eric Harding and Clinton Woods "tough opposition", then you can throw Sugar Boy Malinga and Rocchigiani in there who Eubank beat. He was then competitve with and winning in two fights at Crusierweight. But he was "shot" according to you. Yet Roy Jones gets knocked out cold TWICE in two fights and is not shot. Yeah.......that makes sense. So now "many thought Johnson beat Dawson". I thought that everyone who watched the fight scored for Dawson. :lol1: What double standard are you talking about mate? Calzaghe is on record as saying his hardest fight was Eubank......even now. I was actually meaning at the time. Eubank gave him his hardest fight up until that point.......but was apparently shot? Reid was actually a very good fighter. He's closer to Tarver and Johnson than they are to Eubank. Adamek was not THE champion -how do u think he got the belt? THE champion is the linear champion. And while we're at it, Kessler knocked out two champions before he fought THE champion. Regarding Dawson. I actually wasnt criticising him for fighting older fighters. Fighting Johnson and Tarver back-to-back is a great. I was pointing out how little criticism gets served to him when hes much younger than Joe but fighting much older guys. I, personally, dont agree with the criticism of either guy. Its just a double standard. Oh and as for Joe not fighting good competition. Its much harder for an unknown Welsh fighter to get a big fight than a Yank who's constantly on American tv and is pretty well known to the US audience. Calzaghe did fight good level opponents - he fought numerous former or current champs - something you keep harping on about regarding Dawson's opponets. He fought guys that should've been champs but were robbed in Germany by Ottke. And his division wasnt as strong as Dawsons. Kessler's fought "bums" now. You're really losing it. Mundine, Andrade, Lucas, Siaca and Beyer are hardly bums and as good as Chad's level up until when he steps in with Tarver who.......lets face it.......isnt Calzaghe. Thats not the point. You said Eubank was unwilling to come to the States. How can that be possible when he grew up there and fought there? How can it be possible that he wasnt willing when he fought in much more hostile environments. I think if you wanna ask who was "unwilling" - you look at some of the names you listed as potential opponents. Nigel Benn - who Eubank stopped - went over to the States and knocked out high profile Yanks. Knocked out The G-Man over here and still couldnt secure the likes of Jones. Now........are you gonna tell me that it was cos he was "unwilling"? I think Im answering your questions a little too well. Which is why you've often resorted to underhanded tactics such as suggesting i "watch fights instead of read forums" and "get my own opinion, calling world level fighters "bums". Now now I think its obvious who is getting flustered.

1. Joe Calzaghe - pretty obvious why 2. Kelly Pavlik - not sure he belongs this high but has fought the best opposition 3. Chad Dawson - very good wins over Johnson and Adamek of late and I think will emerge as the best at 175 over the next 2 years 4. Arthur Abraham - still a fair bit unknown about AA I think but def looks the goods 5. Bernard Hopkins - pretty much on the way out but deserves to be in there I think 6. Mikkel Kessler - definately deserves to be higher based on skills but I can't until he beats somebody who isn't either a bum, overprotected Euro or B-class journeyman 7. Antonio Tarver - I think he will get beat by Chad but is still definately in the top 10 at this weight range at the moment 8. Jermain Taylor - large amount of uncertainty in relation to how he will come back from the Pavlik losses - still a top fighter IMO though 9. Glen Johnson - lost a very close fight to Dawson and can still hang with all the top guys at 175 for sure 10. Insert next level fighter here - Bute, Froch, Diaconu, Mundine, Sturm, Erdei. I think dawson is a little too high, But it's not bad .

1. Joe Calzaghe - pretty obvious why 2. Kelly Pavlik - not sure he belongs this high but has fought the best opposition 3. Chad Dawson - very good wins over Johnson and Adamek of late and I think will emerge as the best at 175 over the next 2 years 4. Arthur Abraham - still a fair bit unknown about AA I think but def looks the goods 5. Bernard Hopkins - pretty much on the way out but deserves to be in there I think 6. Mikkel Kessler - definately deserves to be higher based on skills but I can't until he beats somebody who isn't either a bum, overprotected Euro or B-class journeyman 7. Antonio Tarver - I think he will get beat by Chad but is still definately in the top 10 at this weight range at the moment 8. Jermain Taylor - large amount of uncertainty in relation to how he will come back from the Pavlik losses - still a top fighter IMO though 9. Glen Johnson - lost a very close fight to Dawson and can still hang with all the top guys at 175 for sure 10. Insert next level fighter here - Bute, Froch, Diaconu, Mundine, Sturm, Erdei.

Glen Johnson hasnt even fought post-Dawson. So how can you ask who Eubank beat post-Calzaghe? When you cant even compare the two situations. Your initial point was that even though Johnson regularly loses to average fighters, that he was still competitive at the top level because he held his own against Dawson. That was your argument for Johnson being in his prime at 40. Why can't i compare the two situations? Eubank was done right after the second Watson fight, and what shows us is the fact that he fought to a draw with Ray Close, a fighter that came in as the opponent and was not ranked in any major organizations. I hope that's not your sign of an ''elite'' fighter that's a lot better than Tarver or Johnson. Last year Johnson was IBF light heavyweight champion and many people thought that he beat Dawson including Bernard Hopkins. He will also be challenging for the WBC title most likely by the end of this year so we can get a clearer view. Yet Eubank is "shot" cos he gave Joe his hardest fight , loses narrowly to a Cruiserweight whilst knocking him down and then loses on a eye injury whilst winning against said Cruiserweight. I would argue that both Eubank and Johnson were past their best but still tough enough to compete with younger guys like Joe and Chad. Although comparing Johnson to Eubank would be rather silly as Eubank is quite supremely better. Actually Hopkins and Reid gave Calzaghe his hardest fights, and many British fans that i have talked to felt that he lost both of these fights. Reid certainly was never an elite fighter, and no where near the caliber of a Johnson or Tarver. Funny how you say that you are not a fan of double standards, when this is a clear example of one right here. Nice job. 23 fights? Is that the magic number? A past his prime Eubank is bigger test than Adamek. Dawson is fighting Tarver who got beat by Old Man Hopkins......so how can Joe be taking easier fights? Dawson is taking some good fights and good for him. I have no issue with him. The issue I had was that you rate him over Kessler cos Kessler is an unproven paper champ. When thats exactly what Dawson is. Adamek actually dropped Dawson and was THE champion that won his title in the ring against another champion in Paul Briggs, who was a top 4 light heavyweight at the time. I'm not sure if you know what a paper champion is. A paper champion is a fighter that wins his title vacant against a lesser opponent or wins it against a fighter that won it vacant. Kessler is a paper champion. Dawson fought an unbeaten champion, that was a top 5 light heavyweight and that is now a top 10 cruiser weight who stopped last years cruiser weight champion. I hate repeating myself, but i have been having too since you are bringing up the same points and completely ignoring all of my questions, so don't expect doing it. I seen this post earlier today but decided to not respond, because you are ignoring everything that i say. On your point against Dawson/Tarver. As i have stated earlier in this thread, he is taking the fight for recognition because Tarver is rated at number 2 at light heavyweight and he is IBF/IBO champion so he will either take Tarver's place at #2 or become #1, plus he will have two more titles. This fight is for legacy. I didn't say anything was wrong with Joe fighting Eubank, i brought the point up because you are accusing Dawson of fighting old fighters and accusing him of being a paper champion, when both Calzaghe and Kessler has a lesser record then he did when they only had 23 fights. Another thing that you fail to acknowledge is the fact that Dawson is fighting the top level fighters consistently, while Joe didn't take any big risks after he won the title and defended it far less competition. Dawson has fought Harding, Adamek, Johnson and soon to be Tarver, within 2 years and that's impressive. Yes he is proven and yes his record is better than Kessler, who fought bums before the Calzaghe fight and he is still fighting bums. I like him a lot and i don't discredit Joe's win over him at all because it was certainly a great one, but lets be serious. You clearly have a raging boner for Dawson and you claim anyone who watched it would score for him. I'll leave it to others to decide whos being impartial. You said Eubank wasnt willing to come to America. How can that be the case when he fought there? When he fought in other fighters home towns in front of hostile crowds? Its quite a laughable claim to suggest he was unwilling to go anywhere. You clearly dont know Eubank. Once he hit his stride he didn't come to the states to fights. What significance is there in fighting a few bums( confidence builders) earlier in your career? What high profiles fights did Eubank fight when he was champion or at the time he was highly regarded? None. He doesn't have a Toney or his resume, a Jones on his resume, a Hopkins on his resume ect.

Glen Johnson hasnt even fought post-Dawson. So how can you ask who Eubank beat post-Calzaghe? When you cant even compare the two situations. Your initial point was that even though Johnson regularly loses to average fighters, that he was still competitive at the top level because he held his own against Dawson. That was your argument for Johnson being in his prime at 40. Why can't i compare the two situations? Eubank was done right after the second Watson fight, and what shows us is the fact that he fought to a draw with Ray Close, a fighter that came in as the opponent and was not ranked in any major organizations. I hope that's not your sign of an ''elite'' fighter that's a lot better than Tarver or Johnson. Last year Johnson was IBF light heavyweight champion and many people thought that he beat Dawson including Bernard Hopkins. He will also be challenging for the WBC title most likely by the end of this year so we can get a clearer view. Yet Eubank is "shot" cos he gave Joe his hardest fight , loses narrowly to a Cruiserweight whilst knocking him down and then loses on a eye injury whilst winning against said Cruiserweight. I would argue that both Eubank and Johnson were past their best but still tough enough to compete with younger guys like Joe and Chad. Although comparing Johnson to Eubank would be rather silly as Eubank is quite supremely better. Actually Hopkins and Reid gave Calzaghe his hardest fights, and many British fans that i have talked to felt that he lost both of these fights. Reid certainly was never an elite fighter, and no where near the caliber of a Johnson or Tarver. Funny how you say that you are not a fan of double standards, when this is a clear example of one right here. Nice job. 23 fights? Is that the magic number? A past his prime Eubank is bigger test than Adamek. Dawson is fighting Tarver who got beat by Old Man Hopkins......so how can Joe be taking easier fights? Dawson is taking some good fights and good for him. I have no issue with him. The issue I had was that you rate him over Kessler cos Kessler is an unproven paper champ. When thats exactly what Dawson is. Adamek actually dropped Dawson and was THE champion that won his title in the ring against another champion in Paul Briggs, who was a top 4 light heavyweight at the time. I'm not sure if you know what a paper champion is. A paper champion is a fighter that wins his title vacant against a lesser opponent or wins it against a fighter that won it vacant. Kessler is a paper champion. Dawson fought an unbeaten champion, that was a top 5 light heavyweight and that is now a top 10 cruiser weight who stopped last years cruiser weight champion. I hate repeating myself, but i have been having too since you are bringing up the same points and completely ignoring all of my questions, so don't expect doing it. I seen this post earlier today but decided to not respond, because you are ignoring everything that i say. On your point against Dawson/Tarver. As i have stated earlier in this thread, he is taking the fight for recognition because Tarver is rated at number 2 at light heavyweight is IBF/IBO champion so he will either take Tarver's place at #2 or become #1. This fight is for legacy. I didn't say anything was wrong with Joe fighting Eubank, i brought the point up because you are accusing Dawson of fighting old fighters and accusing him of being a paper champion, when both Calzaghe and Kessler has a lesser record then he did when they only had 23 fights. Another thing that you fail to acknowledge is the fact that Dawson is fighting the top level fighters consistently, while Joe didn't take any big risks after he won the title and defended it far less competition. Dawson has fought Harding, Adamek, Johnson and soon to be Tarver, within 2 years and that's impressive. Yes he is proven and yes his record is better than Kessler, who fought bums before the Calzaghe fight and he is still fighting bums. I like him a loy and i don't discredit Joe's win over him at all, but lets be serious. You clearly have a raging boner for Dawson and you claim anyone who watched it would score for him. I'll leave it to others to decide whos being impartial. You said Eubank wasnt willing to come to America. How can that be the case when he fought there? When he fought in other fighters home towns in front of hostile crowds? Its quite a laughable claim to suggest he was unwilling to go anywhere. You clearly dont know Eubank. Once he hit his stride he didn't come to the states to fights. What significance is there in fighting a few bums( confidence builders) earlier in your career? What high profiles fights did Eubank fight when he was champion or at the time he was highly regarded? None. He doesn't have a Toney or his resume, a Jones on his resume, a Hopkins on his resume ect.

The name rings a bell. Vallaeboy :lol1: Me and him are still going to war on a daily basis. You should drop in sometime. I probably drop in a minute and see what is going on.

Carrtex, But I don't fool with them anymore. Trane is tight. Vallaeboy is a little bitch. The name rings a bell. Vallaeboy :lol1: Me and him are still going to war on a daily basis. You should drop in sometime.

you guys forgot irish john duddy. one of the greatest fighters of our era.

Yeah......GYGB? Who are you? Carrtex, But I don't fool with them anymore. Trane is tight. Vallaeboy is a little bitch.

keep in mind I only put kessler 2 slots back. I think Kessler made a bad decision by not fighting Miranda. He would have destoyed Miranda similar to AA. Now insted he is fighting a no a name Haussler who doesn't deserve a shot anyhow. Hey aren't you a member of GYG boxing. Your name is familar. Yeah......GYGB? Who are you?

I wouldnt say hes that far ahead of them. If a couple of welterweights could give Taylor trouble, I dont see why those guys wouldnt. Styles make fights but I reckon they'd all give JT a fight. I agree though, a KO over Taylor is the best win on either record keep in mind I only put kessler 2 slots back. I think Kessler made a bad decision by not fighting Miranda. He would have destoyed Miranda similar to AA. Now insted he is fighting a no a name Haussler who doesn't deserve a shot anyhow. Hey aren't you a member of GYG boxing. Your name is familar.

A knockout win over Jermain Taylor will move you up more so then beating Mundine or Beyer, or Andrade. Even though they are credible opponents, JT is head and heels better then all of them. I wouldnt say hes that far ahead of them. If a couple of welterweights could give Taylor trouble, I dont see why those guys wouldnt. Styles make fights but I reckon they'd all give JT a fight. I agree though, a KO over Taylor is the best win on either record

Pavlik has beaten one better guy in Taylor. As far as overall competition, Kessler's is probably better A knockout win over Jermain Taylor will move you up more so then beating Mundine or Beyer, or Andrade. Even though they are credible opponents, JT is head and heels better then all of them.

Why Pavlik has beatin better competition. Kessler best win came against Mundine. Pavlik has beaten one better guy in Taylor. As far as overall competition, Kessler's is probably better

Your is a decent list I'd sway kessler and Pavlik around though Why Pavlik has beatin better competition. Kessler best win came against Mundine.