The list is garbage. I would do:
1. Gonzalez
2. Kovalev
3. Wlad
4. Manny
5. Cotto
6. GGG
7. Rigo
8. Ward
9. Canelo
10. Bradley?
Gonzalez hasn't got better wins or the type of dominance that Wladimir and Kovalev have over better opponents, this hype train for this guy is absurd.
People want to jump on the Ring Magazine crap they print.
Gonzalez hasn't got better wins or the type of dominance that Wladimir and Kovalev have over better opponents, this hype train for this guy is absurd.
People want to jump on the Ring Magazine crap they print.
Truly it should be Klit and Kovalev, then from there you can put their name in a hat and just grab cause it really does not matter after those two. Just looked at Ward's resume and man he went on a great run from 2009 until 2013.
Truly it should be Klit and Kovalev, then from there you can put their name in a hat and just grab cause it really does not matter after those two. Just looked at Ward's resume and man he went on a great run from 2009 until 2013.
If Ward stayed active I'd likely have him at 1/2 it'd have between him and Wladimir, I'd have liked to seen him fight DeGale or Jack this year that would bring him back for me but I can't just toss someone up in at top 5 when his last good fight was like 3/4 years ago.
I can accept Gonzalez in top 10 and even top 5 but there is no way in hell does he belong at the number 1 spot.
If Ward stayed active I'd likely have him at 1/2 it'd have between him and Wladimir, I'd have liked to seen him fight DeGale or Jack this year that would bring him back for me but I can't just toss someone up in at top 5 when his last good fight was like 3/4 years ago.
I can accept Gonzalez in top 10 and even top 5 but there is no way in hell does he belong at the number 1 spot.
Roman just fought a guy with almost 30 losses. That says it all right there.
I'll say it every time, Golovkin ranking above Kovalev is absolutely absurd.
For beating a 50 year old and tagging on another loss to Pascal? He won fighter of the year for that. Why rematch that fight anyway? He still has to actually prove that he is better than Stevenson. I say it is not absurd but splitting hairs.
For beating a 50 year old and tagging on another loss to Pascal? He won fighter of the year for that. Why rematch that fight anyway? He still has to actually prove that he is better than Stevenson. I say it is not absurd but splitting hairs.
I like Golovkin a lot, but to suggest his resume is better than Kovalev is silly. Hopkins and Pascal are better than anyone GGG has fought. He's also undefeated, exciting and destroys his opposition. Definitely deserves to be over GGG.
Gonzalez hasn't got better wins or the type of dominance that Wladimir and Kovalev have over better opponents, this hype train for this guy is absurd.
People want to jump on the Ring Magazine crap they print.
Gonzalez has been very dominant in his division. I think most people put him #1 P4P because one of the definitions of P4P is "if everyone weighted the same". Gonzalez is a little guy who's an excellent boxer. Pound for Pound, he may be the best in the world.
I like Golovkin a lot, but to suggest his resume is better than Kovalev is silly. Hopkins and Pascal are better than anyone GGG has fought. He's also undefeated, exciting and destroys his opposition. Definitely deserves to be over GGG.
Gonzalez has been very dominant in his division. I think most people put him #1 P4P because one of the definitions of P4P is "if everyone weighted the same". Gonzalez is a little guy who's an excellent boxer. Pound for Pound, he may be the best in the world.
I didn't suggest it was better did I, I said it's splitting hairs. Looking at Hopkins record, the only elite opponent he's been able to beat in some time was Pascal whereas Stevenson KTFO Chad Dawson in one round so again, how can you be sure that he is best in his own division?
"He's also undefeated, exciting and destroys his opposition. Definitely deserves to be over GGG." Haha yeah he (too) is that.
Comment