Ratings Ring Wrong at Featherweight

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

Gilroy, California’s IBF Featherweight titlist Robert Guerrero (21-1-1, 15 KO) is a good fighter. Better for his bank account, he’s developed into a reliably exciting one. At only 24, he’s got one of the better upsides at 126 lbs. [details]

[wengz2002]

Featherweight division now starting to be recognize again since Pac, MAB, JMM & Morales left~~~

I say, let the top of the division fight each other...

But, I see in the end, the top fighter will be:
1. Linares (boxer-puncher)
2. Luevano (boxer)
3. Guerrero (puncher)
4. John (boxer)

[shadeyfizzle]

I absolutely cannot stand the Luevanos and Malignaggis of of the boxing world. Yes technique can trump strength if applied correctly but my god all these boys do is dance in the ring. They should be tied to their opponents by a 4 ft rope to keep em from dancing so damn much and actually fight. Luevano did take Jandaeng to skool but if that hook woulda connected to Luevano's head instead of his neck he woulda been out cold before he hit the canvas. I see John and Guerrero being the last 2 contenders once the smoke clears.

[Chase8400]

I have to agree with the article. I was shocked that Chris John was not ranked @ #1 anymore. I strongly think that Asian Boxers dont get enough credit. I'm also not sure why that is either. I believe he should remain #1 as long as he fights good competition , wins and continues to hold any sanctioning bodies title. Just my opinion.

[Scott9945]

I have to agree with the article. I was shocked that Chris John was not ranked @ #1 anymore. I strongly think that Asian Boxers dont get enough credit. I'm also not sure why that is either. I believe he should remain #1 as long as he fights good competition , wins and continues to hold any sanctioning bodies title. Just my opinion.

Except for a dubious win over Marquez, all John has done is beat very soft competition in his home country. Who else has he beaten that is even worth mentioning, Derrick Gainer?

[PRboxingfan]

Except for a dubious win over Marquez, all John has done is beat very soft competition in his home country. Who else has he beaten that is even worth mentioning, Derrick Gainer?

This message is too short so I'm typing some **** here to get it to post.

[JakeNDaBox]

The move is agenda-driven if you ask me. Right now, even with Guerrero as their #1, the chances of filling a magazine title vacancy at FW remain slim-to-none. But if, say Jorge Linares or Steve Luevano, keeps winning and creeping up the rankings, it potentially leads to a 1 vs. 3 matchup, where they can then claim that John's unwillingness to travel to the US would justify a vacant title match without him.

John at #1 eliminates that possibility, perhaps a lesson they learned with Pong the #1 flyweight for however many years (though if they did even half of the research Cliff puts into every article, they'd know that Pong was already a linear champ).

But honestly, the mere discussion lends way too much credibility to the magazine's rankings. Nevertheless, it was a great read and kudos to Cliff for kicking sand in their faces - in a respectable manner, no less - and pretty much posting a checkmate. Curious if Nigel & co. have any response, though I can't see one beyond "you're right." Either that, or we get another Chris Arreola scenario where, a week or two after trying to sneak him into the rankings, they quietly pull him from the top 10, sans explanation.

one question I do have - Cliff, you're on the Ring Ratings Advisory Board. Does the board still exist, and does everyone have an equal vote, or does Nigel's word the final one, which in turn grants him permission to act on a whim?

[Ryn0]

John is the Number 1 featherweight n the world the ring has lost alot of credability with me by doing this as john as well as there rubbish P4P list.

[Gareth Ivanovic]

Cliff's right is a win over Litzau that big of a deal that Guerrero jumps over John. I know he really hasn't fought too many guys of note, but I think only a loss would put him out of that position. Then having Linares at number 7 doesn't even make sense. He might be the best guy in the division, but I guess the only way to find that out is if they start fighting. Once they fight this will be solved.

[crold1]

John at #1 eliminates that possibility, perhaps a lesson they learned with Pong the #1 flyweight for however many years (though if they did even half of the research Cliff puts into every article, they'd know that Pong was already a linear champ).

But honestly, the mere discussion lends way too much credibility to the magazine's rankings. Nevertheless, it was a great read and kudos to Cliff for kicking sand in their faces - in a respectable manner, no less - and pretty much posting a checkmate. Curious if Nigel & co. have any response, though I can't see one beyond "you're right." Either that, or we get another Chris Arreola scenario where, a week or two after trying to sneak him into the rankings, they quietly pull him from the top 10, sans explanation.

one question I do have - Cliff, you're on the Ring Ratings Advisory Board. Does the board still exist, and does everyone have an equal vote, or does Nigel's word the final one, which in turn grants him permission to act on a whim?

Their ratings are given credibility when ESPN uses them and HBO begins to endorse them; that could increase. Putting aside the ownership they have now (which hasn't show effect as yet), they have to be held to a higher standard if they assert that they are one.

As to the other question, the board exists but they don't vote. We were all asked to serve in a volunteer fashion and can chime in at will. It's taken under advisement but their editorial still makes the call.