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

[Robbie Barrett]

Golovkin's never won a world title?

Nope, he was given one.

[fvanesbeck]

Nope, he was given one.

Because he won the interim title beforehand or whatever. He's still made 14 defences of it by KO consecutively. Do you honestly believe there's more merit to doing what Broner did? Picking the weakest champion in different weight classes and using the tag "3 weight world champ" as a marketing ploy....He's a paper 3 weight world champ if ever there was one.

[Robbie Barrett]

Because he won the interim title beforehand or whatever. He's still made 14 defences of it by KO consecutively. Do you honestly believe there's more merit to doing what Broner did? Picking the weakest champion in different weight classes and using the tag "3 weight world champ" as a marketing ploy....He's a paper 3 weight world champ if ever there was one.

He doesn't have 14 defences, when he was given the WBA regular, Sturm was promoted to Super Champ. Is Jacobs the WBA champ because he holds the WBA regular title like Golovkin did?

[fvanesbeck]

He doesn't have 14 defences, when he was given the WBA regular, Sturm was promoted to Super Champ. Is Jacobs the WBA champ because he holds the WBA regular title like Golovkin did?

Sturm ducked him for a long period of time while he was regular champion though. Regardless, do you think there's more merit to Broner cherry picking his way to being a 3 weight world champion? And have you noticed how he no longer looks even remotely elite without a significant size advantage over his opponent? I don't see how you can give Broner more credit than Golovkin tbh...

[The Big Dunn]

Sturm ducked him for a long period of time while he was regular champion though. Regardless, do you think there's more merit to Broner cherry picking his way to being a 3 weight world champion? And have you noticed how he no longer looks even remotely elite without a significant size advantage over his opponent? I don't see how you can give Broner more credit than Golovkin tbh...

Just a couple of questions even though I agree Broner didn't deserve the ranking:

Do you hold every multi division title winner to the same standard you do Broner?

DO you criticize them for "cherry picking" titles if they do not beat the best in the division?

Shouldn't Broner get more credit for winning titles in the ring than GGG gets for be given his title outside of it?

[fvanesbeck]

Do you hold every multi division title winner to the same standard you do Broner?

No, I hold them to a higher standard than I do Broner. Usually a 3 division champion will have beaten at least one world class fighter in the process of winning his titles. Broner won a split decision over Paulie Malignaggi and stopped Antonio DeMarco. Hardly the resume of an elite fighter.

DO you criticize them for "cherry picking" titles if they do not beat the best in the division?

I don't have as much of a problem with someone moving up in weight and fighting someone who's not the best in the division because they may be fighting above their natural weight class. But Broner did that from the beginning. He was fighting guys he would've beaten without a size advantage and blowing up to 150+ after the weigh in.

Shouldn't Broner get more credit for winning titles in the ring than GGG gets for be given his title outside of it?

Normally I would agree with you but I think this is a special circumstance. On the one hand you have one of the most avoided and feared fighters in boxing and it's not his fault if a lot of elite fighters don't want to get into a ring with him. On the other hand you have probably the least decorated 3 division world champion in history who's management is as responsible for his success as he is.

[toshmurph]

That's that Chuck Giampa logic for you!

[CANELOLUJAH]

Ducklovkin is a coward and his Ring ranking symbolizes how far the Ring has fallen under Oscar De La *****'s reign.

why are you fools always so insecure.

[Divine Hammer]

That was just a terrible p4p list all in all. Broner at 6, Alvarez was in there at 8 or 9, Robert Guerrero was 10th, it was hideous.

all propaganda obviously. those guys were with gbp/haymon. also canelo vs guerrero were floyd opponents so they had to make them look greater than they actually were. guerrero had two mediocre wins at welterweight (and hadn't done anything spectacular before then to justify top ten p4p), and canelo only had one decent/good win against trout.

[The Big Dunn]

No, I hold them to a higher standard than I do Broner. Usually a 3 division champion will have beaten at least one world class fighter in the process of winning his titles. Broner won a split decision over Paulie Malignaggi and stopped Antonio DeMarco. Hardly the resume of an elite fighter.




I don't have as much of a problem with someone moving up in weight and fighting someone who's not the best in the division because they may be fighting above their natural weight class. But Broner did that from the beginning. He was fighting guys he would've beaten without a size advantage and blowing up to 150+ after the weigh in.



Normally I would agree with you but I think this is a special circumstance. On the one hand you have one of the most avoided and feared fighters in boxing and it's not his fault if a lot of elite fighters don't want to get into a ring with him. On the other hand you have probably the least decorated 3 division world champion in history who's management is as responsible for his success as he is.

I think if you criticize Broner for winning those fights, you should do the same for every multi division champ that didn't beat the best in the division to get his belts. Frankly, after Floyd beating Genaro, Castillo, Mosley/Manny and Odh/Cotto /Canelo, you'd be hard pressed to find any other multi division champ that beat the best for the titles as they moved up.

Broner made the weight as required. You can't complain. ODH and Nonito made a career of doing this. he didn't cheat or violate any rules.

I think you are being much too critical of Broner in this regard.

As for avoided, keep in mind Broner has called Manny out, he didn't get the fight, same as GGG calling out Canelo and Cotto. Even if you think Manny wins, you can't give GGG credit and then criticize Broner.

Respectfully, you are giving more credit to a man that actually won championship fights than you are a man that was given a belt. Is that really fair?

So we agree Broner didn't deserve the ranking, but he has moved up in weight and won fights, same as other multi division champs. It is incredibly unfair and biased to only single him out.