The winner of Ward-Dawson is no worse than #3 p4p?

[JBell11]

Look... On paper Kessler was great Abraham was great... Truth be told they were overrated. I get it that the media and some fans had them as favorites. They weren't mine. Dirrell and ward were mine... And I had dirrell winning it had it for not been thesucker punch. To the other dude... They were overrated. It's clear to that any boxer who boxed and had movement against Kessler and Abraham would've won. Just my opinion. Don't get emotional


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[JBell11]

What you hate the argument you are only as good as your opposition.? Please debate?


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[JBell11]

Apologies for the bad typing the Mobil app doesn't help...


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[kiaba360]

Dawson has the more notable names on his resume, but having 3 rematches goes to show how shallow the talent pool is/was at LHW. Does Dawson get a P4P boost if he wins? Of course. How high a boost he gets will depend on the individual making the P4P list.

[jayjames616]

Look... On paper Kessler was great Abraham was great... Truth be told they were overrated. I get it that the media and some fans had them as favorites. They weren't mine. Dirrell and ward were mine... And I had dirrell winning it had it for not been thesucker punch. To the other dude... They were overrated. It's clear to that any boxer who boxed and had movement against Kessler and Abraham would've won. Just my opinion. Don't get emotional


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

I always thought ward and dirrell were the best also but just because Kessler and Abraham lost to Ward don't mean they aren't good or overrated. Maybe Ward was underrated going into the tournament.

[Johnwoo8686]

What you hate the argument you are only as good as your opposition.? Please debate?


Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

People hate that argument because it's all subjective. Ward has faced the best 168 has to offer, PERIOD. You want to downgrade him simply because he's better than the guys he's been facing? The guy has practically dominated the best guys in one of toughest divisions of the sport and for that he should be regarded as a top 5 p4p fighter regardless if you think his competition was tough enough. Because it doesn't get much tougher than 168.

[Bushbaby]

Maybe on paper Kessler was, or better yet to the untrained eye he was. I said way back before the Super 6 started that Kessler was overrated. I mean I give the guy props for his limited accomplishments, He was decent. A good solid win over Froch. Lopsided loss to Calzaghe.. Never really impressed me. Before the Tourney I had Ward winning it undefeated. Just my opinion on seeing him come up the ranks on Showtime. Forget the level of opposition he fought before the super 6, It's the Way he made it look when he won. I knew he would be a star.

So even though he won a gold medal, hasn't lost since he was 12, and leading up to the Super 6 DOMINATED everybody he fought, him being a rookie he was still considered an underdog? He went through Kessler like I knew he would, beat his substitutes just as easily, dominated Abraham in an easy fight, and Dominated Froch in an easy fight that I thought the scorecards were crooked.

Idk, Either way Dawson is a way more credible win than Kessler or Froch. Even at 168.. If Ward does it impressively, I could put him at an easy number 2. just my opinion

You're preaching to the choir bro.

[Check]

I'd say so. I actually have Pac way down on the p4p rankings.

My rankings would be

1. Floyd
2. JMM
3. The winner of Ward/Dawson
4. Martinez
5. Pac

I don't see how anyone can have Pac in the top 2 spots. Time to stop living in the past and look at who he has beat and how he has beat them. It has been a very long time since I said wow, that guy is the best or the second best fighter in the world.

[JBell11]

@johnwoo I agree. if he beat the best as you put it then he shouldn't have had no problem to meet Chad at 175 if he is the best at 168. He's done at 168. He should really challenge himself. Don't use the argument that Chad called him out at 168 only. As far as I'm concerned ward had three options according to the post interview. He took the most convenient option. But I digress... Ward hasn't faced a talented boxer with skill to match at least recently. I believe you are only as good as your last fight... It goes for both Dawson and ward... In this case Dawson has faced better technical fighter than ward. Thoughts?



Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

[bojangles1987]

Yeah I hate that argument. People use the same argument for Mayweather. The entire idea of you not deserving credit for a win simply because you're better than a guy is ******. What better way can you prove you're better than somebody than by beating them?

You can only beat the best competition available, and Ward's certainly done that. I'm with you two, judging him by whether he fought opponents better than him is ******. Considering he's fought everyone available and is undefeated, maybe he's just better than everyone? Shouldn't he a lot of credit for that?