Will the officials in Oakland be fair to Kessler?

[Shadows]

This is interesting:

http://www.iboboxing.com/rankings/168.html

The IBO uses an OBJECTIVE computerized system to rank boxers, perhaps better than BoxRec. Look at the last statistic on the right hand side "vs. top 50".

It shows Kessler is 14-1 against boxers ranked in the top 50, while Ward is 3-0. In other words, Ward has fought only three decent opponents, while Kessler has fought 15.

It also shows Arthur Abraham has fought a lot of decent, top 50 opponents.

The stats for light heavyweight are interesting too, shows Roy Jones has fought 40 "top 50" opponents, while Dawson has faced only 9 so far.

http://www.iboboxing.com/rankings/175.html

Here's heavyweight:

http://www.iboboxing.com/rankings/heavy.html

168:
1. Froch
2. Abraham
3. Kessler

[The Hammer]

]Kessler sucks[/B]. If he beats ward I'll be the first to give him FULL credit. He just doesnt impress me at all and got alot of hype from Calzaghe sack chasers trying to make his resume look better than it is. Like I said Full credit if he wins, I just don't see it happening, I got 30k on Ward.

Have you ever noticed idiotic, racist Euro-haters usually have ZERO karma power?

[BattlingNelson]

No guarantees. Given the venue, Kessler knows what he's gotta do. If he don't do it he can only blame himself. Just like Dirrell.

I blame a lot of Dirells underperformance on inexperience. I would think that he could (and should) have done more to TAKE the title away from the champion.

Kessler cannot blame inexperience that's for sure.

[BattlingNelson]

168:
1. Froch
2. Abraham
3. Kessler

As long as your algorithm factors time as a parameter Kessler obviously drops in the rankings given his less than stellar opposition the last couple of years.

[JMM_135_#1]

miranda, taylor he just seems to have a different intent no matter who the opposition abraham seems to want to ko people in his title matches kessler seems more willing to box final rds (ex. andrade, calzaghe, mundine)

.....

[The Hammer]

168:
1. Froch
2. Abraham
3. Kessler

Based on what they've DONE, not how good they are. Kessler's inactivity has been taken into account by the computer, he hasn't done much in two years, while Froch had wins over THREE top 10 super middlesweights (at the time) in LESS THAN ONE YEAR.

It also takes Abraham's wins at 160 over several top ten opponents (at the time, Marquez, Miranda, Taylor) into consideration.

[Shadows]

As long as your algorithm factors time as a parameter Kessler obviously drops in the rankings given his less than stellar opposition the last couple of years.

That's true, but that's also the reason why I'm not a big fan of "computerized" or "calculated" rankings.

I just don't like them most of the time.

[TheUptownKid]

Well, Kessler way not have knocked out a lot of elite competition (if by elite, you mean Cotto level fighters), but he has stopped top super middleweights. Frankly, Kessler has never really faced someone of that level.

I think the same could be said for Abraham. He's knocked out a lot of top middleweights, and Taylor had fallen from elite status IMO.

and i can say that my bias is that ive only seen 3 kessler fights where ive seen 5-6 ward fights and in each kessler fight match went to dec. If I'm wrong its bc mk doesnt get shown stateside so often. I think he is good and according to experience and records he should win but in the ring we will see

[The Hammer]

That's true, but that's also the reason why I'm not a big fan of "computerized" or "calculated" rankings.

I just don't like them most of the time.

I PREFER computerized rankings, since they have as little bias and opinion as possible.

[TheUptownKid]

.....

mirandas only losses have been in title fights to elite comp stop hating