Oh No, Carl Froch Holds a WIN Over The #1 Light Heavyweight!

[BattlingNelson]

Ring Magazine didnt have a P4P list until the end of 1989, a year after he lsot to Tyson and was retired. so...you cant really say that.

I have an extremely hard time imagining that Dawson would be more highly regarded when Spinks had wins over Dwight Muhammed Qawi, Yanqui Lopez, Eddie Mustaffa Muhammed, and Marvin Johnson(among othr highly ranked guys) under his belt at a time when the LHW division was considered very deep.
and thats without him going to HW.

I'm only stating in p4p terms. No question that Spinks was the greater LHW. He's in the all time top 3 IMO.

Are you sure about the ring not having p4p rankings before that? I could have sworn they had them back in the days of Ray Robinson. I could be wrong though.

[Steak]

So using the nsb mentality you know what that means................
Carl Froch is better than Thomaz Adamek(thru him in ther cuz it was dawsons best win) because Adamek lost to Dawson, Dawson lost to Pascal and Pascal lost to Froch!
Froch>Pascal>Dawson>Adamek.......woooow......amazing!

he has a good point. a subpar 168lber just became the best LHW in the world. its not just the Froch loss, Pascal was struggling against Omar Pittman too.

other indications of a weak division:
168lb flunkie Jorgen Brahmer is highly regarded at LHW
Yusaf Mack, someone who got KOed by Andrade and Berrio at 168lbs, beat Chris Henry at LHW(Henry is just about as good as Diaconu) and this is a Henry that actually probably was better after the Diaconu lost

oh yea, and the same old men from 5 years ago have stayed at the top of the divison, despite getting obviously worse over time.

[Amazinger]

Ring Magazine didnt have a P4P list until the end of 1989, a year after he lsot to Tyson and was retired. so...you cant really say that.

I have an extremely hard time imagining that Dawson would be more highly regarded when Spinks had wins over Dwight Muhammed Qawi, Yanqui Lopez, Eddie Mustaffa Muhammed, and Marvin Johnson(among othr highly ranked guys) under his belt at a time when the LHW division was considered very deep.
and thats without him going to HW.

ANd Mustafa Saad,

I tend to agree with you the 80's were really the decade where the LHW are trully deep and very competitive.After that it went by spurt

[Dave Rado]

I'm talking p4p-wise. I should have made that clear: I doubt Spinks was rated as high in the p4p rankings as Dawson was.

The Ring magazine inaugurated its Pound For Pound Annual Ratings with the 1989 list. Spinks' heyday was in the early 80s. But at his peak I'm sure he'd have been rated in the top 3, if The Ring had had a P4P list back then, which they didn't. And against far more elite competition than today. Today's P4P list only contains 2 potential ATGs in their primes, whereas in Spinks' day there were many more than that.

[Steak]

I'm only stating in p4p terms. No question that Spinks was the greater LHW. He's in the all time top 3 IMO.

Are you sure about the ring not having p4p rankings before that? I could have sworn they had them back in the days of Ray Robinson. I could be wrong though.

The concept of P4P was invented way back when, but they(Ring Magazine) didnt have lists until 1989.

The Ring magazine inaugurated its Pound For Pound Annual Ratings with the 1989 list.

[Dave Rado]

I'm only stating in p4p terms. No question that Spinks was the greater LHW. He's in the all time top 3 IMO.

Are you sure about the ring not having p4p rankings before that? I could have sworn they had them back in the days of Ray Robinson. I could be wrong though.

See here. ....

[da beatdown]

I'm only stating in p4p terms. No question that Spinks was the greater LHW. He's in the all time top 3 IMO.

Are you sure about the ring not having p4p rankings before that? I could have sworn they had them back in the days of Ray Robinson. I could be wrong though.

youre so wrong about a p4p list in the days of SRR...lol

[BattlingNelson]

The concept of P4P was invented way back when, but they(Ring Magazine) didnt have lists until 1989.

Yeah I saw that on boxrec just now. Maybe other trade magazines had p4p rankings? (KO, Boxingnews or others)?

Let's do a rundown of fighters on top in 1984: Holmes, Spinks, Hagler, Hearns, Curry, Pryor. Maybe McCallum, Bramble, Pedroza and Azumah as well.

Pretty strong roster.

[da beatdown]

he has a good point. a subpar 168lber just became the best LHW in the world. its not just the Froch loss, Pascal was struggling against Omar Pittman too.

other indications of a weak division:
168lb flunkie Jorgen Brahmer is highly regarded at LHW
Yusaf Mack, someone who got KOed by Andrade and Berrio at 168lbs, beat Chris Henry at LHW(Henry is just about as good as Diaconu) and this is a Henry that actually probably was better after the Diaconu lost

oh yea, and the same old men from 5 years ago have stayed at the top of the divison, despite getting obviously worse over time.

Im glad u caught my sarcasm..........

[Steak]

Yeah I saw that on boxrec just now. Maybe other trade magazines had p4p rankings? (KO, Boxingnews or others)?

Let's do a rundown of fighters on top in 1984: Holmes, Spinks, Hagler, Hearns, Curry, Pryor. Maybe McCallum, Bramble, Pedroza and Azumah as well.

Pretty strong roster.

Hagler, Spinks and Holmes wouldve been near the top, imo. I dont think Pryor would have been too high, he wasnt nearly as highly regarded as his the early 80s by then. Curry was actualyl really highly regarded at the time too, I think some people even had him #1, but that have been a little later on. Pedroza would have been lower p4p, since he was a smaller guy. McCallum wasnt well known then either I think

I cant see Ring putting Spinks lower than 6 at that point and time.