Do you agree with the Ring?

[Piggu]

Do you agree with the Ring magazine Championship and rankings? I was just wondering because the Ring is always praising itself and looking down on other rankings.

They say that the alphabet organizations are corrupt, which is true, but a lot of people disagreed with making Vitali Klitshcko the Heavyweight champ.

Did you guys agree that Vitali was the champ, and do you trust the Ring for your rankings?

I also remember them frowning upon Dan Rafael for making ESPN rankings and not supporting the magazine.

[Nautilus]

yes .............

[Southpaw Stinger]

I usually agree with the ring. They are the apparent best out there and I respect their views. I prefer to use my own judgement over that of the boxing bible though.

[Run]

I have never agreed with ring magazine rankings.

I think they are simply an extention of the public's perception of a fighter. They would easily rank Tyson #1 because of his popularity.



Never pay again for live sex! | Hot girls doing naughty stuff for free! | Chat for free!

[flipside]

can you post the rankings not or a link

[psychopath]

Do you agree with the Ring magazine Championship and rankings? I was just wondering because the Ring is always praising itself and looking down on other rankings.

They say that the alphabet organizations are corrupt, which is true, but a lot of people disagreed with making Vitali Klitshcko the Heavyweight champ.

Did you guys agree that Vitali was the champ, and do you trust the Ring for your rankings?

I also remember them frowning upon Dan Rafael for making ESPN rankings and not supporting the magazine.

Well RING have their own criteria in selecting who's going to be in their rankings. Other organizations have their own. And despite questionable issues like what you're bringing in in the case of WLAD, Ring still has the higher credibility than Dan Rafael and the rest of the boxing organization bodies.

The Heavy weight division is in a helter skelter rightnow so I don't see anything wrong in RING declaring Wlad their champ. who do you want to be there anyway? Valuev? Byrd? Breswter? Toney? Rahman?

[j]

i agree with them making vk ring mag's heavyweight champ, no doubt. i do usually have quite a few disagreements in terms of how thier overall rankings are though.

as for dan rafeal - i can't sand this guy much. i have seen his rankings at various times throughout the years, and they are not all bad, but when he's talking in interviews or on the hbo prefight shows he doesn't sound well articulated regarding the sport of boxing.

plus, he looks like a bum!

[psychopath]

i agree with them making vk ring mag's heavyweight champ, no doubt. i do usually have quite a few disagreements in terms of how thier overall rankings are though.

as for dan rafeal - i can't sand this guy much. i have seen his rankings at various times throughout the years, and they are not all bad, but when he's talking in interviews or on the hbo prefight shows he doesn't sound well articulated regarding the sport of boxing.

plus, he looks like a bum!

This guy rated Rafael Marquez higher than MAB before LMAO!

[SquareCircle]

I have never agreed with ring magazine rankings.

I think they are simply an extention of the public's perception of a fighter. They would easily rank Tyson #1 because of his popularity.

tyson was a #15 or #16 all time HW on their all time HW list in 2002. since then, im sure he's #22 or #23 now...

[TheEvilSaint]

i agree with them. because the ring takes one thing into consideration that the sanctioning bodies dont: "to be the man, you have to beat the man". and if you beat the man, you get the ring belt.

ricky hatton beat the man in his division (kostya tszyu).
o'neil bell beat the man (mormeck).
calzaghe, taylor, tarver, baldy, corrales, and pacquiao all beat the best in their division, and the oldest and most important boxing authority (the ring) recognizes them as the champions of their divisions cuz they beat the best guy in their division.