Ring Magazine losing credibility

[Easy-E]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_Magazine_pound_for_pound

BHop at number 4 and NO JERMAIN TAYLOR.
Why do they have a vendetta against Jermain, he clearly deserves to be top 10. The are making fools of themselves by putting Wonjongkam in there for no reason.

Hopefully someone on Wikipedia messed up, and those arnt the real rankings.

[Easy-E]

I should explain why Bernard at nunmber 4 doesnt make sense.
Tarver was number 9 i believe, so when a person who is unrated on the p4p scale faces the number 9, its illogical that they go any higher then the 8 or 9 spot.
It doesnt make sense.
And...he has lost 2 of his last 3.
To a guy whos not on the list.

[ferocity]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_Ma...ound_for_pound

BHop at number 4 and NO JERMAIN TAYLOR.
Why do they have a vendetta against Jermain, he clearly deserves to be top 10. The are making fools of themselves by putting Wonjongkam in there for no reason.

Hopefully someone on Wikipedia messed up, and those arnt the real rankings.

doesn't wonjongkam have a long streak of defending his world title?

well, don't knock the guy. He, as Hopkins may prove his worth when some of the smaller more known fighters come up and fight him.

[ferocity]

I should explain why Bernard at nunmber 4 doesnt make sense.
Tarver was number 9 i believe, so when a person who is unrated on the p4p scale faces the number 9, its illogical that they go any higher then the 8 or 9 spot.
It doesnt make sense.
And...he has lost 2 of his last 3.
To a guy whos not on the list.

I forgot to add that i aggree with you, except i find it even more ridicules that they have winky #2 and Mayweather #1, taylor after winky will finally get the #1 spot.

[Easy-E]

doesn't wonjongkam have a long streak of defending his world title?

well, don't knock the guy. He, as Hopkins may prove his worth when some of the smaller more known fighters come up and fight him.

He does, but all you need to do is look at his level of opposition to clear that up.
http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=034051

Taylor is the linear champion.
This is foolish.

[borikua]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_Ma...ound_for_pound

BHop at number 4 and NO JERMAIN TAYLOR.
Why do they have a vendetta against Jermain, he clearly deserves to be top 10. The are making fools of themselves by putting Wonjongkam in there for no reason.

Hopefully someone on Wikipedia messed up, and those arnt the real rankings.

Those are the real rankings...

http://www.thering-online.com/ringpages/ratings2.html

[-EX-]

Hey where's strawweight? lol. But Jermaine Taylor does deserve to be on that list.

[Easy-E]

Hahahaha, Taylor was top ten after his first controversial win against B-Hop, and now hes out of the top ten after beating him again.
Wow the Ring can be retarted sometimes.

[ferocity]

He does, but all you need to do is look at his level of opposition to clear that up.
http://www.boxrec.com/boxer_display.php?boxer_id=034051

Taylor is the linear champion.
This is foolish.

i don't think you understand the lighter weights do you?

you can't complain about his competition when you don't know who his competition is.....he's got fighters on his record that have winning records. you can't praise hopkins then knock this guy

[Easy-E]

i don't think you understand the lighter weights do you?

you can't complain about his competition when you don't know who his competition is.....he's got fighters on his record that have winning records. you can't praise hopkins then knock this guy

He hasnt fought one belt holder since 2001.