Chad Dawsons resume is better than Kessler

[MANGLER]

at 168 or 175 I'd like to see these guys scrap. Both are good fighters, both have pretty thin resumes. Kessler was hyped up by a lotta Joe C haters as the guy who'd destroy him, and people have never forgiven him for that loss. Now they say Joe's fans only give him props to make Joe look better. Funny how every day on here Kessler's res gets brought up. I think Dawson got a gift against Glen, but he can redeem if he beats Tarver, although I have a feelin he's gonna get KTFO.

[Unstable89]

Kessler gets brought up Kessler and Calzaghe fans only no else even knows this guy

[neils7147933]

I think Dawson's resume is better but I think Kessler wins head-to-head

[hishaam15]

i think dawson would beat kessler
but tarver would beat dawson
and kessler would pressure tarver to a decision

[Ryn0]

Kessler right now has the better resume, if Dawson beats Tarver he'll have the better resume.

Dawson is my favourite young fighter, with Kirkland a close 2nd.

[The Hammer]

Kessler defeats good opponents by KOs (Beyer) or very wide decisions (Andrade) - he wasn't knocked down in those fights like Dawson was with Adamek.

His opponents like Andrade and Mundine were in their prime, not age 40 like Johnson, who Dawson was lucky to get his gift decision over.

Kessler's never had a voluntary title defense as weak as Jesus Ruiz.

Kessler has never vacated his title to duck a prime opponent like Diaconu, and choose to fight a 40 year old instead.

Kessler > Dawson, and will obliterate him if they ever fight.

[Jack.Frost.]

Its a bit silly talking about resumes in this way. There is little value in triumphalism over the fact that of two youngish world champions, neither of whom would yet believe they have reached the pinnacle of their career, one has a 'better resume' than the other, because the reality is that it is meaningless. If one fighter has a more recognisable name than the other, does that make him 'better', or the other one 'unproven'? No, it doesn't, neither has beat a genuinely elite fighter, but both have beaten other champs and ranked fighters in their division, making them appear likely to be the best fighter in those divisions for the forseeable future. As for any difference in quality between the two fighters in the here and now, that would be best answered by a fight between them. The time for comparing resumes is really at the end of fighters career, not at every point in it in a misguided attempt to satisfy one's wish for our favourite to be conclusively the best. If either is, they will prove it in future, as it is they haven't, yet.

[Jack.Frost.]

Kessler gets brought up Kessler and Calzaghe fans only no else even knows this guy

Interested enough in boxing to make 232 posts about it on an internet forum, but not interested enough to realise that what you just said is absurd. Tell me, how does your (or anyones) ignorance about the career of a particular boxer say anything whatsoever about how good or bad that fighter is? Do you feel your lack of knowledge about Kessler is a better indicator of his relative quality that the three world titles he has won, or worse?

[Unstable89]

Interested enough in boxing to make 232 posts about it on an internet forum, but not interested enough to realise that what you just said is absurd. Tell me, how does your (or anyones) ignorance about the career of a particular boxer say anything whatsoever about how good or bad that fighter is? Do you feel your lack of knowledge about Kessler is a better indicator of his relative quality that the three world titles he has won, or worse?

WOW

Mundine won a title
Buster Douglas was ring HW champion
Baldomir was WW ring champion

[Pugilistic™]

Dawson has the better resume, Although i thought the johnson fight was a draw he did get the win and Johnson is better than anyone on Kessler's resume that he beat.