at one point, Broner was #6 p4p according to RING...

[Scipio2009]

How ridiculous is that. His best wins were Demarco and Gavin Rees. And a borderline robbery vs Ponce De Leon. The p4p rating lack credibility. Alvarez was on there before he did **** too

Golovkin is ranked #4 on many people's p4p list on here, and he's yet to have two fights of comparable caliber on his resume. Not sure where your shock is coming from.

[daggum]

Golovkin is ranked #4 on many people's p4p list on here, and he's yet to have two fights of comparable caliber on his resume. Not sure where your shock is coming from.

yes because gavin rees is better than murray or geale. why even post if you are going to say ridiculous garbage? those guys that ggg fought were in the top 5. most people had murray beating the lineal champ. geale had 2 belts a year before losing to ggg. rees was never in the top 10 and dimarco's resume was worse than both.

[The Big Dunn]

what about demarco? he beat him before rees. wasn't he the #1 fighter in the division?

[ИATAS]

what about demarco? he beat him before rees. wasn't he the #1 fighter in the division?

He was #1 in the division but 135 was TERRIBLE easily one of the worst divisions in all of boxing. Personally I've never thought much of DeMarco, he's mediocre at best.

[The Big Dunn]

He was #1 in the division but 135 was TERRIBLE easily one of the worst divisions in all of boxing. Personally I've never thought much of DeMarco, he's mediocre at best.

Fine, but he was the best of the division and Broner beat him.

Broner deserves any and every criticism for his unprofessional behavior. I thought his p4p ranking was bogus but that doesn't mean what he did in the ring should be diminished.

[Beercules]

[bojangles1987]

Fine, but he was the best of the division and Broner beat him.

Broner deserves any and every criticism for his unprofessional behavior. I thought his p4p ranking was bogus but that doesn't mean what he did in the ring should be diminished.

He wasn't the best of the division, he just happened to beat the right opponents to get the #1 ranking. Abril, Vazquez, and Burns were all better. Burns didn't want to fight Broner, but that doesn't make Demarco the best.

[The Big Dunn]

He wasn't the best of the division, he just happened to beat the right opponents to get the #1 ranking. Abril, Vazquez, and Burns were all better. Burns didn't want to fight Broner, but that doesn't make Demarco the best.

DeMarco was rated #1 because of who he beat. Other guys you opine were better by your own admission didn't have those wins.

I get what you are saying but it just seems incredibly unfair.

[bojangles1987]

DeMarco was rated #1 because of who he beat. Other guys you opine were better by your own admission didn't have those wins.

I get what you are saying but it just seems incredibly unfair.

Abril smacked Rios around and should have been the clear #1, but got robbed. Any talk about legit #1 fighters dies the second the best fighter is beat but gets a gift.

[The Big Dunn]

Abril smacked Rios around and should have been the clear #1, but got robbed. Any talk about legit #1 fighters dies the second the best fighter is beat but gets a gift.

Fair point. But that rios fight doesn't erase the losses to Prescott and lundy.

Abril was up there, but DeMarco was rated #1. We can't just forget that because its Broner.