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

[MulaKO]

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.)


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

[deathofaclown]

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.

[Oracle01]

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?

[deathofaclown]

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 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

[PRINCEKOOL]

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.

[Oracle01]

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 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.

[deathofaclown]

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.