Usurping P4P no.1...

[IMDAZED]

The Gatti win isn't serious, the man was shot by then. Mayweather wouldn't have been no. 1 if Hopkins had not lost. It's different to Mosley or Hopkins gaining that spot or as someone mentioned previously, guys like Chavez or Whitaker in the late 80s, early 90s although I haven't looked that up much.

Which magazines had Tito number one over Jones in the mid to late 90s? And above Oscar, Mosley and Hopkins after that?

Possibly. But either way you can't discount the Gatti win. It was eye-opening, even if a Mayweather win was expected. He looked like the best fighter in the world.

And International Boxing Digest comes to mind, there may have been more. This was during his run from Vargas up to Hopkins.

[soul_survivor]

Possibly. But either way you can't discount the Gatti win. It was eye-opening, even if a Mayweather win was expected. He looked like the best fighter in the world.

And International Boxing Digest comes to mind, there may have been more. This was during his run from Vargas up to Hopkins.

I'm not saying Tito couldn't have been number one, he was certainly up for debate BUT was he a consensus number one? Or ring mag no .1? Which really counted back then.

But I guess you could add Tito, Hopkins, Mosley to that short list.

And yeah, May looked spectacular against a shot b level slugger. It wouldn't have gotten him to no. 1 if Hopkins hadn't retired. The Mitch and Judah wins were better. Either way, it wasn't the reason he supplanted Hopkins, which is what I'm getting at.

Just looking back at it, especially over the last 15 years, where May and Pac have so clearly dominated the list (either at 1 or top 5), there aren't many guys that have gone to the top spot...I dunno how to say it, organically maybe. It's been due to retirements and/or losses.

Whoever is p4p no.1 right now, imo Kovalev, is purely there because May and Pac retired and Wlad lost to Fury.

[IMDAZED]

I'm not saying Tito couldn't have been number one, he was certainly up for debate BUT was he a consensus number one? Or ring mag no .1? Which really counted back then.

But I guess you could add Tito, Hopkins, Mosley to that short list.

And yeah, May looked spectacular against a shot b level slugger. It wouldn't have gotten him to no. 1 if Hopkins hadn't retired. The Mitch and Judah wins were better. Either way, it wasn't the reason he supplanted Hopkins, which is what I'm getting at.

Just looking back at it, especially over the last 15 years, where May and Pac have so clearly dominated the list (either at 1 or top 5), there aren't many guys that have gone to the top spot...I dunno how to say it, organically maybe. It's been due to retirements and/or losses.

Whoever is p4p no.1 right now, imo Kovalev, is purely there because May and Pac retired and Wlad lost to Fury.

No but there was no consensus IMO. Yes, Ring and KO had Shane #1 but most fans were split as well as most writers. ESPN p4p compiler had Tito #1. As for the Mayweather debate I'm not going to bother. Believe what you wish.

[soul_survivor]

No but there was no consensus IMO. Yes, Ring and KO had Shane #1 but most fans were split as well as most writers. ESPN p4p compiler had Tito #1. As for the Mayweather debate I'm not going to bother. Believe what you wish.

It's not really a question of belief, it's a question of fact and until recently, especially following the GBP take over, The Ring was the go to for boxing rankings. That has slightly eroded now, especially with the inputs of major networks in getting their men onto p4p rankings and various websites all with their own lists. It's diluted the rankings, which really wasn't a major issue up until the mid 00s.

That's why I've stuck with the Ring rankings for that time period. But with or without Tito, it's still a pretty short list (in modern times).

In terms of Mayweather, again, no point in digging up that whole issue but the reality is, Hopkins doesn't lose, he doesn't lose his ranking that particular year. Its a really simple fact.

[IMDAZED]

It's not really a question of belief, it's a question of fact and until recently, especially following the GBP take over, The Ring was the go to for boxing rankings. That has slightly eroded now, especially with the inputs of major networks in getting their men onto p4p rankings and various websites all with their own lists. It's diluted the rankings, which really wasn't a major issue up until the mid 00s.

That's why I've stuck with the Ring rankings for that time period. But with or without Tito, it's still a pretty short list (in modern times).

In terms of Mayweather, again, no point in digging up that whole issue but the reality is, Hopkins doesn't lose, he doesn't lose his ranking that particular year. Its a really simple fact.

Yes, it's a short list.