i still think williams would give him a good fight.
was exciting sat night mind, real slugfest.
Who next for Matt Skelton?
A lot of it, believe it or not, has to do with weight more than form. Most fighters will try and tell you they are, for example, a true welterweight, when their last three fights have come at 11 stone. You need to give them a couple of fights at the higher weight, but after the third, that's it. They're ranked at light-middle.paulyb wrote:Can someone tell me how the rankings are actually worked out - rankings in general that is?
Then comes the recent results, form, the record, the history, what you know yourself. Usually one man does the rankings for a publication (Bob Mee does BN), or a website, and only a couple more for the big governing bodies I would say. Boxrec does it by computer. I'm not sure how and it certainly seems a good idea to take away the human element.
Because, at the end of the day, it's all conjecture. Some guys are easy to push up the rankings and some aren't. Activity always leads to higher rankings. Matt Skelton has jumped to number three in the EBU rankings because he's been so busy over the last 18 months. When one guy is sitting around doing nothing and another staying busy, you naturally favour the active fighter. Dean Phillips returned from over five years inactivity and found himself ranked at number 48 by Boxing News. He stopped Gary Hibbert in his second comeback fight and was in the top 10.
Ideally, activity combined with good results should always inspire such movement. But we only have to look at the rankings of the leading governing bodies on fightnews.com to see how that isn't always the case. Inevitably, those better-connected fighters seem to flourish.
So tahts who was responsible for this bizarre heavyweight top 5;bennie wrote: Usually one man does the rankings for a publication (Bob Mee does BN)
1. Vitali Klitschko
2. Chris Byrd
3. John Ruiz
4. Hasim Rahman
5. Lamon Brewster
Nothing wrong with the first two, but Ruiz at 3, bit to high for my liking. But even worse than that Hasim fornicating Rahman at number 4!! You're having a giraffe aren't you?
Hasim Rahman at four is a joke, but Ruiz at 3 isn't.Kevo wrote:So tahts who was responsible for this bizarre heavyweight top 5;bennie wrote: Usually one man does the rankings for a publication (Bob Mee does BN)
1. Vitali Klitschko
2. Chris Byrd
3. John Ruiz
4. Hasim Rahman
5. Lamon Brewster
Nothing wrong with the first two, but Ruiz at 3, bit to high for my liking. But even worse than that Hasim fornicating Rahman at number 4!! You're having a giraffe aren't you?
Ruiz has beaten Holyfield (ranked 2 at the time), Oquendo (top ten at the time, essentially beat Byrd), Rahman (top ten at the time), Kirk Johnson (top ten at the time). That form against good opposition is as good as anyone in the ten.
Infact, given Byrd's two recent performance (both he should have lost) - Ruiz (like it not) should be ranked at two.
Good point. I stand correctedstujones wrote:Hasim Rahman at four is a joke, but Ruiz at 3 isn't.Kevo wrote:So tahts who was responsible for this bizarre heavyweight top 5;bennie wrote: Usually one man does the rankings for a publication (Bob Mee does BN)
1. Vitali Klitschko
2. Chris Byrd
3. John Ruiz
4. Hasim Rahman
5. Lamon Brewster
Nothing wrong with the first two, but Ruiz at 3, bit to high for my liking. But even worse than that Hasim fornicating Rahman at number 4!! You're having a giraffe aren't you?
Ruiz has beaten Holyfield (ranked 2 at the time), Oquendo (top ten at the time, essentially beat Byrd), Rahman (top ten at the time), Kirk Johnson (top ten at the time). That form against good opposition is as good as anyone in the ten.
Infact, given Byrd's two recent performance (both he should have lost) - Ruiz (like it not) should be ranked at two.
-
jamesmcdonnell
- Heavyweight
- Posts: 45229
- Joined: 12 Nov 2003, 06:11
