Is Canelo a top 50 - p4p fighter?

[the secret]

Canelo is an ordinary fighter with a padded record, 15 fights from 2007 to 2008. He does not belong in the ring with Floyd. GBP are cashing out with Canelo.

[the secret]

Guerrero is a better boxer than Canelo from what I have seen. And I watched a lot of fights of both of them. Maybe Canelo will become a better boxer than Guerrero in the future though.
I saw Guerrero school world class opponents. And of course Canelo would be heavily favored to beat Guerrero because he is way bigger. Guerrero fought at 130 pounds only 4 years ago, now he fights at welterweight, so of course a big 154 pounder will be favored to beat him.

Guerrero would put a whooping on Canelo, Guerrero looked average against Floyd because.... it's Floyd!

[Bermuda]

Dude I agree with almost all your choices, but Estrada is fine. He just beat Viloria, who was p4p top 15. And before that he gave Roman Gonzalez all he could handle, it could have gone either way

exactly....beating viloria who was unified wba super and wbo flyweight champ (first unified flyweight champ in decades) and ranked #1 at flyweight >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> beating wba regular champ trout

[DudeN561]

Hall Of Fame, you must really dislike Canelo. The majority of people have responded that he is Top 50 but for the most part no one is putting him in the top 10 or 15. I agree that his resume at this point in his career is a bit light. You do have to take into account that he is only 22 years old. I personally would rank him about 25 at the highest, that would be a generous ranking. I wouldn't be upset with a 30-50 ranking.

[lefthook2daliva]

Not right now but in a couple or 3 months Ring magazine will have a top 100 boxers of all time feature. PBF will be top 10 and Canelo will enter the list around #25.

[Rip Chudd]

[shenmue]

Canelo only really as Trout and shot to **** Mosely on his resume but is unlucky because he was supposed to fight P Williams but he had that tragic accident, supposed to fight Kirkland but Kirkland pulled out, then was supposed to fight Ortiz but Ortiz lost to Lopez.

Then he was supposed to fight Coto but Cotto lost to trout.

[HeroBando]

well Golovkin beat a lot of light middleweights so that is true, but: he beat Proksa very impressively and that one win means as much as Broner's win over DeMarco. So - that is to me more than Canelo's highly controversial "win" over Trout.

I don't think that much of Proksa though, it's not really much better than Canelo's Ring #4 Rhodes. I'm not sure Proksa beats Rosado, for example. He needs to go down to 154, very small MW. Not GGG's fault, he was the only guy to accept the fight after Pirog dropped out.

[HeroBando]

No lols for Estrada, man

[The Surgeon]

all I needed to read from your comment was "And be Real Canelo CLEARLY won that fight and most people know it."
I went back to a certain thread here and more than half of the people had Trout winning. So that proves you do not care about the truth. It was a close fight and most people scored it for Trout, that is the truth. And you saying Sturm is a bum and Sylvester is a bum and Geale is a bum just proves to me that you are one of those guys who think everybody outside of america is a bum. You think I am gonna worry about your opinion? I have seen Mundine box and he is not a bum, actually I watched Mundine box many years ago and I have watched Sturm many years ago. Did I say Daniel Geale is a top 15 p4p fighter? No. I just said he is in the top 50 and Canelo is not at this point. And if you disagree with me for the reasons you mentioned then I know what you are all about.

Yeah u found a thread were a lil more people were thick enough to think Trout won than not... on boxing scene....and half the people dont even vote, yeah thats proof.
Am i supposed to be impressed that many years ago u saw these guys fight? You should know better then, they are world class but nothing to get excited about. I dont care if u worry about my opinion or not just know when u post a ****** thread like this people will call u on it.