Originally posted by The Ninth Layer
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
When was the last time 2 undefeated Ring Champions fought to unify a division?
Collapse
-
-
Originally posted by techliam View PostThing is though, it doesn't matter what promoter a fighter has. He's either ranked higher, or he's not. You don't award belts just because fights are clouded with politics. You don't award the belt at all till the fight gets made...
Using your logic, Pac would be rated way higher than Bradley at the time.
EDIT: I see Ninth Layer is practically arguing everything I am.
Bit of my own contribution - the RING effectively allows for rank 4 and rank 5 to fight for a RING belt. Their policy also allows them to ignore any fighter they want from their ratings, like Peterson (even though I hate this guy for his PED use) and Huck. If that sounds legitimate to you, then gl.
Comment
-
fellas i am not gonna argue your own personal ranking systems..going by what we have gone by for years..Ring magazine the Bible of boxing rankings and wanna know when was the last time we got this to happen??2 undefeated Ring champs for 2 different divisions at the same time unifying a division?
Comment
-
Originally posted by Own3d View PostWrong. #1 or #2 has to be involved in the fight. So #2 vs #5 is the lowest ranking fight that can have it up for grabs.
Comment
-
Yall are in here arguing about the rankings now,thats why we go by 1 official ranking system or else there would be no official ranking system
Comment
-
Originally posted by SoggyLungs View Postwell bradley sure as hell doesn't belong as #2 at ww like you said....he got a gift against pac (everyone saw this including ring magazine), and he got his big head knocked around for 12 roudns by a guy ranked #10 at jr ww by ring....doesn't really scream #2 ww....
Comment
-
Originally posted by MANIAC310 View Posthes going to say he was with TOP RANK... they're always an excuse for Floyd not fighting someone.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Own3d View PostWrong. #1 or #2 has to be involved in the fight. So #2 vs #5 is the lowest ranking fight that can have it up for grabs.
Whatever that means or who determines that i dont know. Also not sure how that makes #3,4,5 any more credible
Comment
-
Originally posted by Money Team. View PostYall are in here arguing about the rankings now,thats why we go by 1 official ranking system or else there would be no official ranking system
Since the 2012 ratings policy, and before then, the acquisition of RING magazine by Golden Boy, the belts they hand out are no longer prestigious automatically, and thus you really have to weed out the specifics of the fight to see if its paper or not - just another sanctioning body belt now.
To see it, Khan vs Garcia would not have been for the RING belt before the new policy. The RING belt would be vacant for Matthyse/Garcia. Lineage and RING have been split too much....
Comment
-
Originally posted by The Ninth Layer View PostOkay. But the discussion is about Guerrero. Would you really rank Robert Guerrero higher than any two of Manny Pacquaio, Juan Manuel Marquez and Tim Bradley just because he beat Andre Berto?
Hell,we will see who is ranked where once Bradley fights Marquez...we all know the outcome of Mayweather/Marquez-no need to see a rematch while JMM is getting older and slower.
Comment
Comment