at one point, Broner was #6 p4p according to RING...
Collapse
-
-
Broner wasn't getting extended by Gavin Rees to 11 rounds; relative levels are about the same, but that's enough to mess your point up.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 fact that you are trying to sell Geale and Murray as serious fights is even more laughable; top 5 during a **** era in middleweight boxing is the nonsense that you're thumping your chest about, lolComment
-
RING are a bunch of fools, there P4P lists hardly ever make any sense. GGG is number 4 P4P right now with Geale being his best win who got destroyed by a Junior middle weight who weighed in less then 154. Those idiots make there P4P list based on only hype. Pathetic.Last edited by Lords; 06-27-2015, 04:24 PM.Comment
-
I've never been able to take p4p lists too seriously. You currently have Ring ranking Terrance Crawford as the 8th best boxer on the planet. But then they have him listed as the 6th best 140 lber in the division.Comment
-
While P4P lists shouldn't be taken too seriously, that argument doesn't really hold up. Fighters should work their way up the divisional rankings. If a supremely talented fighter moves up and fights a 6-10 guy then he should be ranked accordingly in the division, regardless of how good he is P4P.Comment
-
Comment
Comment