Gamboa is now #10 P4P by the RING.....

[crold1]

Of all the guys you rank, do you take time to watch all of their fights and follow their careers or do you have to sometimes resort to boxrec like some of us have to do here and there?

Also what do you take into consideration when making your contemporary rankings?

In the divisions, especially small, I have to sometimes go by staright results if I can't find footage on YouTube (or if I just don't have time to watch #9 at Straw). YouTube is a HUGE help. Sometimes, I have to resort. I give it my best crack.

As to what I take into account, at the lower parts of top tens with less depth, I pay attention to the w/l records of opponents and progress. In divisions with more clash, I try to evaluate results and favor clean wins.

[BoxingGenius27]

In the divisions, especially small, I have to sometimes go by staright results if I can't find footage on YouTube (or if I just don't have time to watch #9 at Straw). YouTube is a HUGE help. Sometimes, I have to resort. I give it my best crack.

As to what I take into account, at the lower parts of top tens with less depth, I pay attention to the w/l records of opponents and progress. In divisions with more clash, I try to evaluate results and favor clean wins.

Nice.

Good to know you make your assessments like everyone else. I thought maybe you had some secret calculation you used lol

Do you find it hard not letting your personal feelings get in the way with your rankings like everyone else?

Lastly, who do you find yourself being biased towards as in your favorites?

[crold1]

Nice.

Good to know you make your assessments like everyone else. I thought maybe you had some secret calculation you used lol

Do you find it hard not letting your personal feelings get in the way with your rankings like everyone else?

Lastly, who do you find yourself being biased towards as in your favorites?

Dude, it's 170+ fighters. Most of the divisions aren't that deep. Those that are get special attention. I ain't gotta lie to kick it.

Never think I have a hard time with personal feelings in ratings. Doing divisions I feel my most dispassionate. Fighters either win or lose. Period. There are personal evals that happen (for instance, Broner doesn't have a ton of great wins at 30 but I think he has enough, combined with his talent, to be #2). Every situation is unique and I try to weigh them as fairly as I can.

The exception on feelings would be if I think a decision is really egregious. I moved Campillo over Cloud and Lara over Williams because I so strongly disagreed with the decisions. In fan terms, I would call myself more a fan of Cloud and Lara; what I saw was what I rated in both cases.

My biases are usually to guilty pleasure fighters. My favorite fighter of the 00's, in the ring, was probably Clifford Ettienne. He'd never have got a rating from me. I always looked forward to seeing guys like Ray Oliveira too. Oliveira-Tackie was a personal favorite. I have all-time faves too (Whitaker, Tyson, Carbajal etc.) but when I look at their careers, I have to examine good and bad.

End of the day, I'm a super fan with a great outlet to explore my favorite sport from all sorts of angles. I've done history pieces, interviews, and ringside covers. I mostly blog and opine. My bias is for boxing. The fighters come and go, the ones we love and the ones we don't. As long as two guys get in and give an honest effort, mad respect for both.

[BoxingGenius27]

Dude, it's 170+ fighters. Most of the divisions aren't that deep. Those that are get special attention. I ain't gotta lie to kick it.

Never think I have a hard time with personal feelings in ratings. Doing divisions I feel my most dispassionate. Fighters either win or lose. Period. There are personal evals that happen (for instance, Broner doesn't have a ton of great wins at 30 but I think he has enough, combined with his talent, to be #2). Every situation is unique and I try to weigh them as fairly as I can.

The exception on feelings would be if I think a decision is really egregious. I moved Campillo over Cloud and Lara over Williams because I so strongly disagreed with the decisions. In fan terms, I would call myself more a fan of Cloud and Lara; what I saw was what I rated in both cases.

My biases are usually to guilty pleasure fighters. My favorite fighter of the 00's, in the ring, was probably Clifford Ettienne. He'd never have got a rating from me. I always looked forward to seeing guys like Ray Oliveira too. Oliveira-Tackie was a personal favorite. I have all-time faves too (Whitaker, Tyson, Carbajal etc.) but when I look at their careers, I have to examine good and bad.

End of the day, I'm a super fan with a great outlet to explore my favorite sport from all sorts of angles. I've done history pieces, interviews, and ringside covers. I mostly blog and opine. My bias is for boxing. The fighters come and go, the ones we love and the ones we don't. As long as two guys get in and give an honest effort, mad respect for both.

I can dig it.

Great insight Cliff.

[crold1]

I can dig it.

Great insight Cliff.

No problem. If you ever see something you think is wrong in a top ten, let me know. I've re-eval'd stuff plenty of times on reader input.

[BoxingGenius27]

No problem. If you ever see something you think is wrong in a top ten, let me know. I've re-eval'd stuff plenty of times on reader input.

Roger that, will do.

[sicko]

why was Pongsaklek Wonjongkam in the Top 10 anyway? Based On What? For hiding in Thailand and fighting BUMS? just saying...

[-Kev-]

I had Pac winning narrowly in Marquez III. It wasn't in the ballpark of Williams-Lara. The list explains why I otherwise have him 1. I've switched the two of them back and forth pretty *******ly for the last couple years when they haven't been tied.

But, hey, whatever. Must be bias or some other insidious thing.

Yawn.

Pac lost like 8 rounds, and i'm just being generous. How you had him winning is beyond me, narrowly, widely, whatever. Like I said, any list with Pac as #1 is a **** list. The real P4P #1 fighter right now should be Juan Manuel Marquez, not Pacquiao or Floyd. JMM was in the top 5, he beat Pac who was #1, that moves him to #1.

[-Kev-]

Crold, I call any list with Pac as #1 a crappy list, including yours, but that doesn't mean I think you're a bad writer. You're one of the best writers on Boxingscene I enjoy reading your articles. But i'm sorry, Pac's last 3 wins have been mediocre, and one of them wasn't even a win. And he still stays at #1? Something's terribly wrong with boxing.

[crold1]

why was Pongsaklek Wonjongkam in the Top 10 anyway? Based On What? For hiding in Thailand and fighting BUMS? just saying...

In non-title fights, sure. Otherwise, this statement is uneducated at best. Flat ****** at worst. If you didn't think he was "P4P" so be it. Think it for the right reasons. He beat four current/former/future titleholders since 09. The biggest win was on the road. That's on par with the sort of thing most of the game's tops were doing on less active schedules. Debate the quality of those four, but bums?

Here. Learn a little. http://www.boxingscene.com/measured-...jongkam--50390