You would probably be as sure as I am if you watched old fights as frequently as I do.
There is always flexibility in a list like this, and my lists are always open to changing as I gather more information. I try to analyze the fights and fighter objectively and as such, any new "evidence" I see can change how I rate things.
That is one reason I exclude records as a basis for rating. They introduce bias into the equation. It is simply enough to watch the fight and determine how good the opposition was.
A shot legend looks the same as a contender that never made it to the top. But if you rate on record, that shot legend can skew your rating horribly.
I also think Taylor was done after that right hand, but only because he was in there with well... Pavlik
There is always flexibility in a list like this, and my lists are always open to changing as I gather more information. I try to analyze the fights and fighter objectively and as such, any new "evidence" I see can change how I rate things.
That is one reason I exclude records as a basis for rating. They introduce bias into the equation. It is simply enough to watch the fight and determine how good the opposition was.
A shot legend looks the same as a contender that never made it to the top. But if you rate on record, that shot legend can skew your rating horribly.
I also think Taylor was done after that right hand, but only because he was in there with well... Pavlik
Just something to keep in mind. You and I are talking about who should be the 5. That's tough. I'm suprised you're so sure, I'm not.

Comment