Ring Magazine Working On SuperMiddle Rankings As We Speak

[Shadows]

this is my top 10

1. Lucian Bute
2. Arthur Abraham
3. Andre Ward
4. Carl Froch
5. Mikkel Kessler
6. Sakio Bika
7. Andre Dirrell
8. Librado Andrade
9. Robert Stieglitz
10. Allan Green

I think this is a pretty solid list, but mine would look a little different.

Well Explain me this why is Mayweather ranked as a top 10 WW when he didnt beat one?

Why is Dawson #1 when he never beat Hopkins?

Why is Pacquiao ranked #1 at WW when he didnt beat Mosley


And so and so.


T

All these lists are subjective homie. No need to get upset Ch@mp.

[Hater]

Doesnt matter they didnt eat the #1, and FLoyd is ranked at WW without even fighting a top 10 WW.

Who didn't they eat???

[Ch@mpBox@PR]

This guy doesn’t understand the difference between divisional ranking and P4P ranking. P4P is based on resume and wins. In divisional ranking if you beat someone you leapfrog them

Again why is Pacquiao and Dawson #1 and Floyd ranked at WW then?

Why is Roman Gonzalez ranked # at Minum weight if he didnt beat teh #1 guy.

Why is Valero ranked #1 at LW

and so and so

[Ch@mpBox@PR]

I think this is a pretty solid list, but mine would look a little different.



All these lists are subjective homie. No need to get upset Ch@mp.

Im not upset Im just tryin to make sense out of teh ring rankings!!!

[JohnCIV6]

Abraham is too low, and where the hell is Dirrell if Froch is at 4?

[Shadows]

Im not upset Im just tryin to make sense out of teh ring rankings!!!

I think they probably looked at the quality of wins.

[Ch@mpBox@PR]

I think they probably looked at the quality of wins.

And what I just said?

You need to look at overall ody of work and recent wins. Not ecause you eat some guy you get his spot!!!!

[starjammer]

Well Explain me this why is Mayweather ranked as a top 10 WW when he didnt beat one?

Why is Dawson #1 when he never beat Hopkins?

Why is Pacquiao ranked #1 at WW when he didnt beat Mosley


And so and so.


T

That is a good question, and all I can offer is what Hater said. That somehow a long layoff allows a fighter to leapfrog you.

But that might not be enough, and it is a grey area that Pacquiao has usurped Mosley based on recent performance, as has Dawson over Hopkins.
The difference between rankings and performance charts seems to becoming cross-wired.

Mayweather's entry is inexplicable, considering he has fought none of the other 9 sharing the board with him.

As you have pointed out it is clear The Ring don't always make the best judgements and the rankings arn't making the best of sense when they should be . Maybe the ring rankings are not intended to be proper divisional rankings at all and just based on performance as you said.

I had hoped it was the opposite. Anyway in this case I agree with Ward taking Kessler's place.

[Ch@mpBox@PR]

That is a good question, and all I can offer is what Hater said. That somehow a long layoff allows a fighter to leapfrog you.

But that might not be enough, and it is a grey area that Pacquiao has usurped Mosley based on recent performance, as has Dawson over Hopkins.
The difference between rankings and performance charts seems to becoming cross-wired.

Mayweather's entry is inexplicable, considering he has fought none of the other 9 sharing the board with him.

As you have pointed out it is clear The Ring don't always make the best judgements and the rankings arn't making the best of sense when they should be . Maybe the ring rankings are not intended to be proper divisional rankings at all and just based on performance as you said.

I had hoped it was the opposite. Anyway in this case I agree with Ward taking Kessler's place.

Well this is a great post My man, although I dont agree with Ward being #1

[Shadows]

And what I just said?

You need to look at overall ody of work and recent wins. Not ecause you eat some guy you get his spot!!!!

I know that's what you said, but perhaps I should've worded mine differently.

Maybe they look at how they won their fights. In that case, you could make an argument that Ward should be number one.