Fighter of the year..which holds more merit?

[jas]

It pains me to say it but Kovalev deserves it for unifying 3 of the belts and by beating A legend who IMO can still fight at a high level even after that loss.

Kovalev beat a man 15 years past his prime , Agnew and caparello

That was the worst Hopkins has ever looked in his entire career. Whenever he tries to jump in or dance around ring he's off balance now. His legs are gone.

[Johnny Rubber]

Neither really Larry. Everyone who follows boxing has their own opinion of which fighters ticked all the boxes. Fighter of the year accolades are good for certain aspects of the sport, but it is essentially a promotional tool.

Too many good fights are not being made, which limits the amount of solid candidates anyway.

Alright for the casuals, but won't tell us anything we didn't already know about the respective winners.

[soul_survivor]

Boxing writers aka the sugar ray robinson award....or the ring magazine fighter of the year award?

what holds most merit is who I believe, in my personal opinion, best on what has occurred that year, to be the best fighter on the planet in a 12 month period. Both The Ring and BWAA have vested interests and try and promote certain fighters. The BWAA will give the award to Roman Gonzalez.

The odd occasion that one of the other get it right is becoming more and more rare.

[-Kev-]

Pacquaio is the only fighter this year to beat a PRIME ELITE opponent
He clearly should be fighter of the year

It pains me to say it but Kovalev deserves it for unifying 3 of the belts and by beating A legend who IMO can still fight at a high level even after that loss.

Neither actually deserve it, or will get it. If they do, then it would further show how much of a joke boxing is. You do not win Fighter of the Year with one good win. Hopkins, Agnew, Caparello, that's one good win. Algieri, Bradley, that's one good win.

If boxing wants to get it right, they have to give it to Terrence Crawford.