Resumes are given too much credit here.

[CaneloMaidana]

Its too early to say whether Donaire is a HOF and one of the best fighters. He has always lost whenever he stepped up. Talking about former champions, Kassim Ouma , Geale, Rubio all are former champions including Lemieux now.

And you just proved my point as to why Resumes shouldnt be the sole criteria of judging a fighter's capability as you seem to give Murray no credit at all. A straight forward hater like you would just see a L on record and degrade that boxer into some bum without ever knowing or analyzing the real fight.

And even then, Rigo and GGG does not have that massive of a difference in their resume that one is top 3 and the other is not even in top 10.
Your hypocrisy again, is hilarious.
Unlike you, I consider both Rigo and GGG p4p as they have stood out since their amateur days because I don't hate someone for no reason.

Donaire always lost when he stepped up? Montiel, Vetyeka and Vic are better than anyone coward golovkin fought.

[IllegalDeath]

Donaire always lost when he stepped up? Montiel, Vetyeka and Vic are better than anyone coward golovkin fought.

Its funny how a fan of the most overrated fighter of this generations who cheats his way out of close fights to get victories is calling others cowards who actually fight and win against fighters their own size. p4p my aunt is a better fighter than the fraud i.e Canelo. And that is a fact, my aunt used to spar.

[CaneloMaidana]

Its funny how a fan of the most overrated fighter of this generations who cheats his way out of close fights to get victories is calling others cowards who actually fight and win against fighters their own size. p4p my aunt is a better fighter than the fraud i.e Canelo. And that is a fact, my aunt used to spar.

Not a Canelo fan moron. I disavowed him long time ago.

[ruedboy]

It gets difficult, but as I say it's the only fair way as otherwise it's just a guessing game. Especially if the fighter you want to rank above others has no standout wins.

Not exactly a "guessing game" more a matter of opinion. Even with resumes there are alot of variables involved like age, at what point in a fighters career did he beat a certain opponent, was it at that fighters best weight? So even boxers with wins over the same opponent could have faced a totally different fighter.
Unfortunately rating boxers is mostly about opinions and thats why you see these never ending arguments here. lol

[sicko]

If we eliminate Resume what should we go by? Knockout Ratio?

This is a "Boxing For Dummies" mentality, sounds like some Lampley would suggest on The Fight Game which nobody watches

[80sboxingrules]

i agree who has tyson ever beat? all he did was beat on bums

[SunSpace]

I think it's somewhat the other way around; the eye test is given too much credit. For example, everyone thought Verdejo was going to be the next Tito, and now we have seen how his career has stalled due to bad performances against better competition (his competition wasn't even supposed to be any good, but the opponent had a better record than what was officially attributed). But, Verdejo looks great when he's knocking out low-level fighters and thus the hype.

Whether it's fair to judge it the same way or not, the same is happening with GGG. He could very well be as good as many think he is, but we won't ever know for sure until he fights the best. I'm not saying that's his fault, but it's the truth.

Cotto beat Geale, who has an argument for best win on GGG's resume, and that was just a tune-up. He even beat Geale better than GGG did. Moreover, Cotto has the best resume in boxing. But who's higher on the pound-for-pound list?

Any fighter can be hyped up all the way to Kimbo Slice level, but it doesn't mean anything until it's proven.

[b00g13man]

once again. "Resumes don't count".

[mick1303]

I think it's somewhat the other way around; the eye test is given too much credit. For example, everyone thought Verdejo was going to be the next Tito, and now we have seen how his career has stalled due to bad performances against better competition (his competition wasn't even supposed to be any good, but the opponent had a better record than what was officially attributed). But, Verdejo looks great when he's knocking out low-level fighters and thus the hype.

Whether it's fair to judge it the same way or not, the same is happening with GGG. He could very well be as good as many think he is, but we won't ever know for sure until he fights the best. I'm not saying that's his fault, but it's the truth.

Cotto beat Geale, who has an argument for best win on GGG's resume, and that was just a tune-up. He even beat Geale better than GGG did. Moreover, Cotto has the best resume in boxing. But who's higher on the pound-for-pound list?

Any fighter can be hyped up all the way to Kimbo Slice level, but it doesn't mean anything until it's proven.

As it was already stated, "A beat B" does not tell the whole story. In this case the variable "at which weight" makes a lot of difference. Not to mention that GGG faced Geale who was never KOd, while Cotto faced Geale, who already had KO loss. Confidence is a big factor.

[SunSpace]

As it was already stated, "A beat B" does not tell the whole story. In this case the variable "at which weight" makes a lot of difference. Not to mention that GGG faced Geale who was never KOd, while Cotto faced Geale, who already had KO loss. Confidence is a big factor.

I'll buy the first reason, but not the second. Weight could've had an effect on that fight, but it affected both. Cotto was a much, much smaller man, whereas Geale rehydrated to 172 pounds, at least. The difference on fight-night was clear, just like when Cotto fought a possibly 180+ version of Canelo.

So, it goes both ways. Yes, Geale could've been weakened, but the weight was there for a reason. Cotto was extremely undersized. If Geale couldn't have made it, then he shouldn't have accepted. And, despite the possibility of weakening, I don't feel credit can be taken away due to the huge size advantage Geale benefitted from. It evens out.

Cotto was put through that versus Pacquiao, by the way, and that wasn't even a big size differential. It was just there to weaken Cotto. Personally, for all the criticism Cotto received, none of it made sense to me. The boxing business is a sick game, where you can have Amir Khan's facing Canelo's. If you end up being in a position to protect yourself, especially after being abused in the past (Margarito, Pacquiao), it's your responsibility to do so. All in all, the catch-weight seemed fair to me.

As to your second reason, it looked like Geale was intending to impose his larger body on Cotto. I don't see how the way he was knocked out presented anything to suggest a lack of confidence. He was knocked out in exactly the same way as versus GGG: He took big shots, and then he quit.