Comments Thread For: The 2010s in the Rankings: The Top Twenty of the Decade - #5-1

[Shadoww702]

You’re one of the few willing to come back and admit that. Hell I had AJ mopping up Ruiz and I’m not even an AJ fan. Was I ever wrong.

Heck that was at least close! I also took Lemuix over Saunders. Figured no WAY Saunders wins in Canada with Lemuix power sounding hits swaying the judges and crowd even though Saunders way better boxer. Figured probably controversial win at least??? I was soo wrong and it wasn’t even close lol

[crold1]

———

Lastly, Cliff’s argument about Floyd’s win over Canelo was that it wasn’t a UD! That’s just an idiotic statement to make. Canelo barely won two rounds at most.

It wasn’t an argument and If it was you got it backwards a little. It was making the case that the Mayweather score for Canelo was so bad it taints other debatable calls.

It doesn’t take much work to find educated viewers who thought Trout and Lara deserved better than losses to Alvarez and there will be debates about the scoring of both Golovkin fights (particularly the first) for years to come. That his loss to Mayweather wasn’t unanimous only fuels perceptions in such debates.

[Oregonian]

I think the way to look at these threads is just a reminder of some of the accomplishments that we may have forgotten over the course of the decade.. Cliff's been on himself and said as much. He wasn't trying to come up with some comprehensive ranking system to settle once and for all who's ranked where for the 2010s, just taking the results of high level fights and fighters, assigning some consistent, if kinda arbitrary numerical values and seeing what came out. Just for a interest's sake, a bit of food for thought, and certainly nothing to get hung up over any more than you'd get hung up on the Boxrec rankings.

No mathematical method is gonna give you results that are in line with most people's views, but equally no opinion based system is gonna give you a ranking that's free of all kinds of bias... you just gotta accept and understand the limitations of any system and make allowances for it.

——//—-/-

People like you are the reason I am always on this forum.
You uncomplicate things that I don’t want to accept and I appreciate that.
I have never had a rigid stance on anything. If there’s a better way to look at something I am always open to changing my perception so thank you.
I agree with everything you just wrote and it gives me solace.

[Oregonian]

It wasn’t an argument and If it was you got it backwards a little. It was making the case that the Mayweather score for Canelo was so bad it taints other debatable calls.

It doesn’t take much work to find educated viewers who thought Trout and Lara deserved better than losses to Alvarez and there will be debates about the scoring of both Golovkin fights (particularly the first) for years to come. That his loss to Mayweather wasn’t unanimous only fuels perceptions in such debates.

——-

Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that. I was fuming while reading that

[Oregonian]

Good points good points. Cotto was always one of my favorite fighters. Win or lose he gave it his all and was ALWAYS a stand up person and gracious in defeat.

————

I love Cotto. He always gave a good account of himself.
He was always respectful.
You know what’s funny, I even used to ignore his round house dirty tactics in a fight because I just respected him.

When he picked Floyd and almost threw him out of the ring ... even then, I just laughed it off.

Cotto is def one of my favorite boxers.

[crold1]

——-

Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that. I was fuming while reading that

For real: I’m not sure Alvarez won a round

[The D3vil]

Wow, I'd go with the aggregate of Ring's P4P list.

That's a lot better than this BS system.

[Fire4231]

You and I may trade disagreements and slight barbs but we will continue to do so in a respectful and civil way. Threatening someone is a no go.

Absolutely brother, we all just want to enjoy the sport. We may crack jokes on each other And banter but it really never needs to go that far.

[Rigpig]

They should factor in failed drug tests with these ratings

[Thuglife Nelo]

It wasn’t an argument and If it was you got it backwards a little. It was making the case that the Mayweather score for Canelo was so bad it taints other debatable calls.

It doesn’t take much work to find educated viewers who thought Trout and Lara deserved better than losses to Alvarez and there will be debates about the scoring of both Golovkin fights (particularly the first) for years to come. That his loss to Mayweather wasn’t unanimous only fuels perceptions in such debates.

For real: I’m not sure Alvarez won a round

Now the forum members got Rold feeling insecure about his knowledge. now Rold is doubting Moretti’s scoring as well