Does John"close fight"Ryder deserve a Canelo superfight more than David"can't get right"Benevidez?

Hagler redeemd himself, but we can only judge a fighter by what they have done, and Ryder has lost multiple times to domestic bums, even been stopped by one. You can claim he was robbed by Fielding but fact is he lost and he clearly wasn't able to dominate that bum enough to clearly beat him, so that proves his level. David has dominated every opponent he ever fought, and stopped all but 2 opponents and many of them have been tough experienced quality fighters like Medina who is a better win than anyone Ryder has beaten bar Jacobs. You keep saying Ryder has a better resume based on what? A close SD vs an inactive 35 year old Jacobs in his first fight at 168? AGAIN you keep focusing on best wins and ignoring all the other fights and performance, and you call me a casual? lol. David has been leagues more impressive over his pro career. That is why everyone is demanding he fights Canelo and nobobdy is mentioning John Ryder in the same universe apart from you, who is still aparently 'unsure' that David is a better fighter. Like I said, I know boxing. i believe Benavidez is the better fighter, but I’ll wait for him to start making weight and beating better opposition than Dirrell because I’ve seen better talents than him fade away, especially ones with his level of discipline.

Ryder got robbed v Fielding, badly too. That’s simply tells me that you only read boxrec and look at numbers and don’t actually watch boxing , so I can’t you seriously. Like a true casual boxrec warrior, you put way too much stock in being undefeated. Marvin Hagler lost 2 fights to fringe contenders before he even was at world title level, was he a bum too? If he was around now and waiting for a title shot, You would be calling him a bum and undeserving because he had 2 losses and a draw to people who were probably domestic level :lol1: you’re a joke Ryder might not be as good as Benavidez, I’d agree, but the best win on the record of Benavidez is still a faded Dirrell, So there is still no proof that he is a top level fighter and I’ll wait for proof as I always do in boxing because I’ve seen better talents than him fall off. That’s because I actually know boxing and you know boxrec I think you’ve been watching boxing about six months I don’t know why you’re so angry, go and get some fresh air , it’s only boxing Hagler redeemd himself, but we can only judge a fighter by what they have done, and Ryder has lost multiple times to domestic bums, even been stopped by one. You can claim he was robbed by Fielding but fact is he lost and he clearly wasn't able to dominate that bum enough to clearly beat him, so that proves his level. David has dominated every opponent he ever fought, and stopped all but 2 opponents and many of them have been tough experienced quality fighters like Medina who is a better win than anyone Ryder has beaten bar Jacobs. You keep saying Ryder has a better resume based on what? A close SD vs an inactive 35 year old Jacobs in his first fight at 168? AGAIN you keep focusing on best wins and ignoring all the other fights and performance, and you call me a casual? lol. David has been leagues more impressive over his pro career. That is why everyone is demanding he fights Canelo and nobobdy is mentioning John Ryder in the same universe apart from you, who is still aparently 'unsure' that David is a better fighter.

Benavidez is the more intriguing and exciting match up. But John Ryder possibly on merit, should get the Canelo Alvarez fight. I don't think Ryder will want to be Alvarez's best mate, but I would imagine him to be all respectable in the build up. This is at times not what I want in a Alvarez opponent, it is a form of psychological submission to Alvarez's greatness. Benavidez is another fighter weight draining himself to be the big man, listen guys? Of late I have been insisting that the same day weigh in rule needs to be re-introduced. I honestly do not have the interest in the lower weight divisions, as I do for the Heavyweight division. Because I don't know what type of competition, we are witnessing. I do not know anymore. Josh Taylor & Teofimo Lopez making excuses about making the weight, Benavidez well what is he? A heavyweight? The weight draining cult needs to be stopped. I have only entered into this thread, for the sake of making a post. I am not really that bothered about the subject. Tyson Fury vs Dillian Whyte is boxing at its best, pure competition, with the participation of two fighters uninhibited. In fact, Benavidez should be fighting at 175 or Cruiser weight. If he continues to keep weight draining himself, it will all back fire. It is in his best interest to be honest with himself, and fight at a more natural weight.

What the hell are you talking about? Benavidez has had more fights than Ryder and is undefeated. You speak of Benavidez having a padded record when everyone on Ryders resume apart from Callum Smith, Jacobs and BJS are domestic bums. Benavidez has a better resume overall and is undefeated. Age is irrelevant its the number of fights that matter. Ryder lost to Rocky Fielding and we are actually having this debate? Stop embarrassing yourself. Ryder is a bum compared to benavidez. He has lost to multiple domestic bums, are you trolling? Ryder got robbed v Fielding, badly too. That’s simply tells me that you only read boxrec and look at numbers and don’t actually watch boxing , so I can’t you seriously. Like a true casual boxrec warrior, you put way too much stock in being undefeated. Marvin Hagler lost 2 fights to fringe contenders before he even was at world title level, was he a bum too? If he was around now and waiting for a title shot, You would be calling him a bum and undeserving because he had 2 losses and a draw to people who were probably domestic level :lol1: you’re a joke Ryder might not be as good as Benavidez, I’d agree, but the best win on the record of Benavidez is still a faded Dirrell, So there is still no proof that he is a top level fighter and I’ll wait for proof as I always do in boxing because I’ve seen better talents than him fall off. That’s because I actually know boxing and you know boxrec I think you’ve been watching boxing about six months I don’t know why you’re so angry, go and get some fresh air , it’s only boxing

The eye test doesn’t always work though, I go by proven wins. Like I’ve said, I’ve seen more talented fighters than Benavidez not end up what was happening expected of them. Beating a faded Dirrell isn’t a great measuring stick, it’s a decent start. Ryder’s only loss in his first 20 fights was to Billy Joe Saunders when they were both coming up, no shame in that. How do you know Benavidez won’t have 5 losses or so by the time he’s up there at Ryder’s age? We don’t know, he likely will If he keeps being ill disciplined. Ryder has some losses but so do many fighters, Pacquiao got flattened by some nobodies in his career. Marvin Hagler lost to 2 fringe contenders on the way up. Some fighters take losses, some like Benavidez manage to pad the record without taking a loss. The proof will come when it’s time to face consistently good fighters and we have no idea how Benavidez will do. Only casual fans care so much about losses, anybody that knows boxing history know that even some of the greatest fighters have losses to guys not considered on their level overall. Do I think Benavidez beats Ryder? Yes, in my opinion. but the question was who is more deserving of the fight. My answer was it depends on the criteria and what constitutes as deserving, if we’re talking about who has a better resume as of today, then for me there’s not a lot in it. If we’re talking about based on ability, who I think has the level of talent to give Canelo a better fight, then I’d pick Benavidez because we don’t know his ceiling. We know Ryder’s and it’s not going to compete with Canelo. What the hell are you talking about? Benavidez has had more fights than Ryder and is undefeated. You speak of Benavidez having a padded record when everyone on Ryders resume apart from Callum Smith, Jacobs and BJS are domestic bums. Benavidez has a better resume overall and is undefeated. Age is irrelevant its the number of fights that matter. Ryder lost to Rocky Fielding and we are actually having this debate? Stop embarrassing yourself. Ryder is a bum compared to benavidez. He has lost to multiple domestic bums, are you trolling?

You know alot about boxing yet you are just focusing on wins and ignoring losses. You cannot just focus on wins and ignore losses on a record. The only good win Ryder has is vs a faded Jacobs at 168, and to be fair he did beat Callum smith. The rest of his resume is full of domestic level bums. Benavidez has beaten stopped Dirrell and beaten a bunch of tough solid pros that do not exist on Ryders record. Angulu, Medina, Love, Ellis, Davis, Garvil are all better than the rest of ryders record past smith and jacobs. Everyone is calling for David to fight Canelo because he has PROVED to be that good of a fighter. The only thing he has not proven is his ceiling but to deny is pro career has surpassed Ryder is comical. If you have watched them both fight, and still think David has not proven to be on a totally different level than John Ryder you are legit blind. The physical attributes, the boxing ability, the way he dominates and stops basically anyone he has fought, should make it clear he is far superior. You just seem to be fixeted on Davids 1 best win and not the totality of his work. Ryder would not last 6 rounds vs Benavidez. The eye test doesn’t always work though, I go by proven wins. Like I’ve said, I’ve seen more talented fighters than Benavidez not end up what was happening expected of them. Beating a faded Dirrell isn’t a great measuring stick, it’s a decent start. Ryder’s only loss in his first 20 fights was to Billy Joe Saunders when they were both coming up, no shame in that. How do you know Benavidez won’t have 5 losses or so by the time he’s up there at Ryder’s age? We don’t know, he likely will If he keeps being ill disciplined. Ryder has some losses but so do many fighters, Pacquiao got flattened by some nobodies in his career. Marvin Hagler lost to 2 fringe contenders on the way up. Some fighters take losses, some like Benavidez manage to pad the record without taking a loss. The proof will come when it’s time to face consistently good fighters and we have no idea how Benavidez will do. Only casual fans care so much about losses, anybody that knows boxing history know that even some of the greatest fighters have losses to guys not considered on their level overall. Do I think Benavidez beats Ryder? Yes, in my opinion. but the question was who is more deserving of the fight. My answer was it depends on the criteria and what constitutes as deserving, if we’re talking about who has a better resume as of today, then for me there’s not a lot in it. If we’re talking about based on ability, who I think has the level of talent to give Canelo a better fight, then I’d pick Benavidez because we don’t know his ceiling. We know Ryder’s and it’s not going to compete with Canelo.

Just wondering what arguments anyone wants to make for each? I'd argue that Ryder is far more proven,but Benevidez has a more threatening mojo.(I just don't see how DB has anywhere near experience required,but Ryder can be tricky because hes shorter & can fight inside.) {"alt":"Click image for larger version Name:\twh-hppened-to-cn-t-get-right-in-life-rhjr-G2-SQw4s-3.jpg Views:\t1 Size:\t19.6 KB ID:\t31337127","data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"31337127","data-size":"full","title":"wh-hppened-to-cn-t-get-right-in-life-rhjr-G2-SQw4s-3.jpg"} Not one or the other is deserving of the fight Let me ask you , who’s the easier fight ? Once you figure that out , you will have answered your own question Simple non toxic and self efficient

People are calling for the Benavidez fight because he’s likely a very good fighter. As I’ve said, I think he will definitely go on to have a much better career than John Ryder and is a better fighter, if he stays disciplined. I’d choose Canelo v Benavidez every day over the Ryder fight because I think Ryder has hit his ceiling, Benavidez hasn’t. Ryder’s ceiling is nowhere near good to beat Canelo. Benavidez has only beaten Dirrell, so we don’t truly know how good he can be YET. But as of today, there’s no wins on the record of Benavidez that I’d consider superior to any on Ryder’s really. It’s not difficult to understand. It doesn’t mean I think Ryder is an equal talent of his, it doesn’t mean I think Ryder should fight Canelo. I’m simply saying Benavidez is young and has not yet PROVEN in the ring he’s much superior to Ryder because he’s only beaten Dirrell and this point. Do I think he will go on to prove it? Yes but Boxing is all about proving it in the ring. I’ve seen more gifted fighters than Benavidez go on to have a very underwhelming careers or a similar career to Ryder. Whether that’s through lack of discipline or other things and we’ve seen Benavidez lacks that. I know a lot about boxing and I know enough to reserve judgement on a young fighter who shows a lack of discipline before hailing them as some top fighter, no matter how much talent they appear to have against their limited opposition. You know alot about boxing yet you are just focusing on wins and ignoring losses. You cannot just focus on wins and ignore losses on a record. The only good win Ryder has is vs a faded Jacobs at 168, and to be fair he did beat Callum smith. The rest of his resume is full of domestic level bums. Benavidez has beaten stopped Dirrell and beaten a bunch of tough solid pros that do not exist on Ryders record. Angulu, Medina, Love, Ellis, Davis, Garvil are all better than the rest of ryders record past smith and jacobs. Everyone is calling for David to fight Canelo because he has PROVED to be that good of a fighter. The only thing he has not proven is his ceiling but to deny is pro career has surpassed Ryder is comical. I’m simply saying Benavidez is young and has not yet PROVEN in the ring he’s much superior to Ryder because he’s only beaten Dirrell and this point. Do I think he will go on to prove it? If you have watched them both fight, and still think David has not proven to be on a totally different level than John Ryder you are legit blind. The physical attributes, the boxing ability, the way he dominates and stops basically anyone he has fought, should make it clear he is far superior. You just seem to be fixeted on Davids 1 best win and not the totality of his work. Ryder would not last 6 rounds vs Benavidez.

Not buying the Ryder hype.

Deserve has little to do with title shots any more. Ryder is the more proven of the two, but he's an unknown and will never get a shot at the big prize/payday with Canelo. Benavidez has made a slightly bigger name for himself with trash talking and social media. He's also undefeated which helps to give him an edge over Ryder with 5 losses and 2 of those losses were to fighters that Canelo has already beaten.

Ok cool, so world titles don't matter and 5 losses including vs Rocky Fielding don't matter vs undefeated 25 wins with 22 ko, lets just ignore everything hey? Lets ignore how one fighter dominates every opponent while the other doesn't and loses 5 times. Apparently the reason so many top fighters are calling for Benavidez to fight Canelo vs none for Ryder, is because David's pro career not been anymore impressive than Ryders? You total clown show. btw Dirrell was 33-1 undefeated for 5 years when David stopped him, and a 2 time wc. That is better than beating a 35 year old Jacobs in a controversial decision who has done nothing in the division. You are wrong on every level. GG. People are calling for the Benavidez fight because he’s likely a very good fighter. As I’ve said, I think he will definitely go on to have a much better career than John Ryder and is a better fighter, if he stays disciplined. I’d choose Canelo v Benavidez every day over the Ryder fight because I think Ryder has hit his ceiling, Benavidez hasn’t. Ryder’s ceiling is nowhere near good to beat Canelo. Benavidez has only beaten Dirrell, so we don’t truly know how good he can be YET. But as of today, there’s no wins on the record of Benavidez that I’d consider superior to any on Ryder’s really. It’s not difficult to understand. It doesn’t mean I think Ryder is an equal talent of his, it doesn’t mean I think Ryder should fight Canelo. I’m simply saying Benavidez is young and has not yet PROVEN in the ring he’s much superior to Ryder because he’s only beaten Dirrell and this point. Do I think he will go on to prove it? Yes but Boxing is all about proving it in the ring. I’ve seen more gifted fighters than Benavidez go on to have a very underwhelming careers or a similar career to Ryder. Whether that’s through lack of discipline or other things and we’ve seen Benavidez lacks that. I know a lot about boxing and I know enough to reserve judgement on a young fighter who shows a lack of discipline before hailing them as some top fighter, no matter how much talent they appear to have against their limited opposition.

John represents the easy UK money, that is where Canelo will go if he has to pick between these two. Ryder will get hyped up like a real threat if this fight ever gets made.

Oh yeah, Dirrell the super champ that beat Yildirim in a vacant fight by technical decision. I told you I don’t care about the titles. I don’t dismiss Canelo’s VICTORIES because he beat mostly solid fighters and consistently beats solid fighters for the most part. That’s what I rate. The belts are just a bonus. Benavidez doesn’t do that, even if he had 10 belts, his best win is still a faded Dirrell, which is no better than anything Ryder has on his record at this time of talking. Like I said, he’ll go on to have the better career, but as of today, his best wins are not superior. You’re putting too much emphasis on a padded record and a couple of easy titles that he couldn’t even keep. Belts mean nothing when you can win 2 titles and your best win is Dirrell. You sound like a casual fan blinded by a belt and a padded record. Ok, So has Ricky Burns the 3 weight world champion had an equal career to Erik Morales? He has less defeats and won world titles in the same amount of divisions. Going by your logic, he has had an equal career if that’s the main criteria. So if you say that Ricky Burns has an equal career to Morales, then I’ll say Benavidez has had a better career than John Ryder :lol1: that’s totally based on your logic but you know it’s not right because you base it on what they did and who they beat. So as of today, Benavidez hasn’t beaten better fighters than Ryder. Ok cool, so world titles don't matter and 5 losses including vs Rocky Fielding don't matter vs undefeated 25 wins with 22 ko, lets just ignore everything hey? Lets ignore how one fighter dominates every opponent while the other doesn't and loses 5 times. Apparently the reason so many top fighters are calling for Benavidez to fight Canelo vs none for Ryder, is because David's pro career not been anymore impressive than Ryders? You total clown show. btw Dirrell was 33-1 undefeated for 5 years when David stopped him, and a 2 time wc. That is better than beating a 35 year old Jacobs in a controversial decision who has done nothing in the division. You are wrong on every level. GG.

Can't get right lol

Oh you stuffed up and embaressed yourself so badly. I tried to help you as well. You literally don't think Benavidez who is a 2 time wc, 25-0 22 ko, has had a more impressive career than John friggin Ryder. LOL. btw David did beat a WC for the WBC title when he stopped Dirrell. Also going by your logic we can dismiss all of Canelo's 168 titles as being worthless right since he did not beat any legit champions and won a Vacant WBC title? Oh yeah, Dirrell the super champ that beat Yildirim in a vacant fight by technical decision. I told you I don’t care about the titles. I don’t dismiss Canelo’s VICTORIES because he beat mostly solid fighters and consistently beats solid fighters for the most part. That’s what I rate. The belts are just a bonus. Benavidez doesn’t do that, even if he had 10 belts, his best win is still a faded Dirrell, which is no better than anything Ryder has on his record at this time of talking. Like I said, he’ll go on to have the better career, but as of today, his best wins are not superior. You’re putting too much emphasis on a padded record and a couple of easy titles that he couldn’t even keep. Belts mean nothing when you can win 2 titles and your best win is Dirrell. You sound like a casual fan blinded by a belt and a padded record. Ok, So has Ricky Burns the 3 weight world champion had an equal career to Erik Morales? He has less defeats and won world titles in the same amount of divisions. Going by your logic, he has had an equal career if that’s the main criteria. So if you say that Ricky Burns has an equal career to Morales, then I’ll say Benavidez has had a better career than John Ryder :lol1: that’s totally based on your logic but you know it’s not right because you base it on what they did and who they beat. So as of today, Benavidez hasn’t beaten better fighters than Ryder.

Just wondering what arguments anyone wants to make for each? I'd argue that Ryder is far more proven,but Benevidez has a more threatening mojo.(I just don't see how DB has anywhere near experience required,but Ryder can be tricky because hes shorter & can fight inside.) {"alt":"Click image for larger version Name:\twh-hppened-to-cn-t-get-right-in-life-rhjr-G2-SQw4s-3.jpg Views:\t1 Size:\t19.6 KB ID:\t31337127","data-align":"none","data-attachmentid":"31337127","data-size":"full","title":"wh-hppened-to-cn-t-get-right-in-life-rhjr-G2-SQw4s-3.jpg"} Well, it seemed he went fought everyone at 168 who had a big name belt. Maybe if Benevidez held onto the belt he would of fought him. Perhaps it’s a good idea for him to go up to 175 and get a belt. Cause that’s where Canelo new collection is at.

Neither i don’t care about titles, especially when they’re not taken off decent champions. Benavidez has won 2 vacant titles, who cares? Come back when he beats a champion. He couldn’t even keep the belts either. Benavidez best win is a faded Dirrell, really no better than anything John Ryder has on his record. Ryder would probably have won a world title too if he got a vacant fight v Angulo :lol1: not to mention he was robbed of belts v Smith. Fine margins. Do I think Benavidez will go on to have a better resume than Ryder? Yes. Do I think Benavidez will have a better career than Ryder? Yes. Do I think as of March 17th 2022 that Benavidez has a better resume than Ryder, no not really. Oh you stuffed up and embaressed yourself so badly. I tried to help you as well. You literally don't think Benavidez who is a 2 time wc, 25-0 22 ko, has had a more impressive career than John friggin Ryder. LOL. btw David did beat a WC for the WBC title when he stopped Dirrell. Also going by your logic we can dismiss all of Canelo's 168 titles as being worthless right since he did not beat any legit champions and won a Vacant WBC title?

Lets make this simple. Who has had the more impressive pro career in your opinion. Benavidez or John Ryder? Think very very carefully, there are a lot of people watching. Neither i don’t care about titles, especially when they’re not taken off decent champions. Benavidez has won 2 vacant titles, who cares? Come back when he beats a champion. He couldn’t even keep the belts either. Benavidez best win is a faded Dirrell, really no better than anything John Ryder has on his record. Ryder would probably have won a world title too if he got a vacant fight v Angulo :lol1: not to mention he was robbed of belts v Smith. Fine margins. Do I think Benavidez will go on to have a better resume than Ryder? Yes. Do I think Benavidez will have a better career than Ryder? Yes. Do I think as of March 17th 2022 that Benavidez has a better resume than Ryder, no not really.

You would make total sense if I said Ryder clearly deserves the fight over Benavidez :lol1: show me where i said that. Jesus, you’re stupid. I literally said I’d prefer the Benavidez even though I still think he hasn’t really achieved much more than Ryder, if at all in terms of good wins. Who cares if he held a couple of world titles (that he couldn’t keep). Ricky Burns was a 3 weight world champ but you wouldn’t say he’s more “deserving” of bigger fights than some clearly better fighters that have achieved less in terms of titles. Titles mean nothing these days, they give them out like sweets in vacant fights. “Deserves” it’s such a stupid concept in boxing anyway because you can shift your criteria to suit a whats deserving and what isn’t. I’ll make simple for your simple brain and double digit IQ. I’d prefer the Benevidez fight but in terms of good wins, his record is no better than Ryder’s, It’s that simple. If the criteria for deserving fights is based on good wins, then Benavidez doesn’t deserve it any more than Ryder. If your criteria for deserving the fight is based on the consensus of who’s the better fighter, then sure, I’d say Benavidez. I’m not even sure what you’re arguing about because you’re literally arguing against points that I’ve never even made. Go and get some fresh air :lol1: p.s. Ryder was clearly robbed v Fielding, So that shows that your knowledge doesn’t stretch beyond boxrec :lol1: You are still focusing very narrowly on 'good wins' and totally ignoring the entire pro career acheivements of the two fighters, while totally dismissing the merit of being undefeated and not only a 2 time wc but the youngest ever WC in the division, and pretending its no better than a fighter with 5 losses NEVER been a wc just because he has 1 arguably slightly better name on his record. Comical. And lol at being so bad your in a position to get robbed by Rocky Fielding in the first place. Lets make this simple. Who has had the more impressive pro career in your opinion. Benavidez or John Ryder? Think very very carefully, there are a lot of people watching.

You are so thick you don't even under the point you made in your own post. By stating Ryder has better wins and Benavidez needs better names your basically claimed that Ryder is a more proven fighter, despite David being a TWO TIME WORLD CHAMPION. Thats sort of a big deal. And who cares about 5 losses? lol, thats also a huge deal Ryder lost to ROCKY FIELDING, and you think David needs to prove himself more? Jacobs is past his prime and not proven at 168 so a close win is nothing amazing. Callum Smith was his best win but that does not out weight Davids whole career of impressive dominating performances and being unbeaten. The Benavidez Canelo fight is ALREADY in high demand. The fights that were not in high demand were GGG and Bivol. Nobody was asking for those fights. You would make total sense if I said Ryder clearly deserves the fight over Benavidez :lol1: show me where i said that. Jesus, you’re stupid. I literally said I’d prefer the Benavidez even though I still think he hasn’t really achieved much more than Ryder, if at all in terms of good wins. Who cares if he held a couple of world titles (that he couldn’t keep). Ricky Burns was a 3 weight world champ but you wouldn’t say he’s more “deserving” of bigger fights than some clearly better fighters that have achieved less in terms of titles. Titles mean nothing these days, they give them out like sweets in vacant fights. “Deserves” it’s such a stupid concept in boxing anyway because you can shift your criteria to suit a whats deserving and what isn’t. I’ll make simple for your simple brain and double digit IQ. I’d prefer the Benevidez fight but in terms of good wins, his record is no better than Ryder’s, It’s that simple. If the criteria for deserving fights is based on good wins, then Benavidez doesn’t deserve it any more than Ryder. If your criteria for deserving the fight is based on the consensus of who’s the better fighter, then sure, I’d say Benavidez. I’m not even sure what you’re arguing about because you’re literally arguing against points that I’ve never even made. Go and get some fresh air :lol1: p.s. Ryder was clearly robbed v Fielding, So that shows that your knowledge doesn’t stretch beyond boxrec :lol1: