has there ever been a p4p #1 who fights unranked contenders the whole time?

[crold1]

I don't believe any objective ratings (Ring, ESPN, Boxing Monthly) had Mitchell top ten at Welter in 2005. It was widely considered a weak tune up.

Sanctioning org ratings have influence but are, as a measure of merit, without respectability.

[IronDanHamza]

Mitchell was a worthy opponent right? No push over.

Merely for a tune up as it's your first fight at the weight. It was ok in my eyes.

Obviously does absolutely nothing for his legacy, though.

[IronDanHamza]

I don't believe any objective ratings (Ring, ESPN, Boxing Monthly) had Mitchell top ten at Welter in 2005. It was widely considered a weak tune up.

Sanctioning org ratings have influence but are, as a measure of merit, without respectability.

They didn't.

I remember clearly.

[J Dubb II 330]

he was actually ranked but its a matter of opinion if you think he should had been ranked or not. but like I said it don't matter it was Floyds first Welter bout

[jrosales13]

I don't believe any objective ratings (Ring, ESPN, Boxing Monthly) had Mitchell top ten at Welter in 2005. It was widely considered a weak tune up.

Sanctioning org ratings have influence but are, as a measure of merit, without respectability.

Exactly.

Mitchell was not a top 10 WW at the time. Just like Marg wasn't a top 10 JMW or Richard Frazier wasn't a top 10 LHW at the time Roy fought him. They were not rank opponents. Didn't stop for sanctioning bodies in ranking them.

Why would anybody bring up sanctioning body as a credible source is beyond me.

Did boxingscene have a ranking system in late 2005?

[jrosales13]

They didn't.

I remember clearly.

I don't understand how a fighter being un-ranked is a matter of opinion and not fact.

[IronDanHamza]

I don't understand how a fighter being un-ranked is a matter of opinion and not fact.

Neither do I.

It's really not a matter of opinion. Mitchell wasn't ranked in the top 10 by ANY credible ranking. Certinaly not The Ring Magazine.

He may have been by the bull**** sactionaing bodies. But who takes any notice of those? No one, because they're dumb.

But yeah, Mitchell wasn't ranked. I think that's clear considering it was his 2nd fight at Welter coming off a tuneup of his own.

[Rick Grimes]

Did you consider Marg a rank JMW?

Or better yet Frazier a ranked LHW?

http://boxrec.com/media/index.php/Th..._Ratings:_2005

And, should it also be noted that those organizations ranking don't rank other title holders. So is not really a whole divisional ranking now is it?

Doesn't matter what i think, he was ranked in the top 10 by the 3 major organisations. Even if they did rank other champs he would be in the top 10 in all 3 still.

[Rockin']

i simply don't understand arum and pac's catchweight demands

that's how important just 2 lbs can be, I see no problem with catch weight fights, as a matter of fact it's done in club shows to huge shows. It's just that one isn't fighting for a title in those such bouts, Pacquiao most certainly is.

If he is the Welterweight titlist then by all means should the challenger be allowed to weigh in anything below 147lbs, damn straight! .............Rockin'

[crold1]

Exactly.

Mitchell was not a top 10 WW at the time. Just like Marg wasn't a top 10 JMW or Richard Frazier wasn't a top 10 LHW at the time Roy fought him. They were not rank opponents. Didn't stop for sanctioning bodies in ranking them.

Why would anybody bring up sanctioning body as a credible source is beyond me.

Did boxingscene have a ranking system in late 2005?

Not that I'm aware. The ratings I do I started a couple years ago. Ratings are harder than most realize...very easy to miss minor results etc. I wanted mine to keep track of title defense records. I hope they do a good job of that.