http://www.fightnews.com/?p=19141#more-19141
He doesn't mind a chat by the look of it. Funny though he doesn't rate many people.
Of course it's subjective and every division is different. It's just that winning a belt - even the IBF - does not in itself automatically make someone top world class, especially when involving vacant IBF titles.Marlin wrote:So how many fighters, in your opinion, in each division are world class? By the sounds of it you are saying only two or three, maybe four... no wonder none of the Title holders ever fight "world class" opponents...
Agreed, but still there is a need for distinctions even within the term "world class". I think for the purposes of simplicity, I'd say a top 10 too, or perhaps even most boxers who are eligible to compete for a legit world title. But still there is a big difference between a Cotto/Pacquaio and a Ndou/Urango. I'd even say there's a difference between a Berto and an Ndou. See what I mean?Marlin wrote:But you're still saying that "world class" only refers to the top few guys in any particular weight class.
I always thought world class simply meant someone who was good enough to compete on the world stage, meaning you're looking at a broader range of fighters. Of course it is still subjective but I was thinking more of a top ten than top 3. Not every fighter can be undefeated and surely the top guys still need to beat credible "world class" opponents to keep their place at the top...
Very diplomatic, and probably a good call, but then ratings are often just as subjective as the argument about what constitutes world class!Asterix wrote:World class is one of those terms that people often disagree on. Rather than using it, I think it's best to say top 5, 10, 20, etc. in his division.
Top 20 comfortably.oliverfennell wrote:Very diplomatic, and probably a good call, but then ratings are often just as subjective as the argument about what constitutes world class!Asterix wrote:World class is one of those terms that people often disagree on. Rather than using it, I think it's best to say top 5, 10, 20, etc. in his division.
Ndou is ranked something like 47 by BoxRec, which I feel is very unfair. He's certainly not top 10, but he's better than top 50 for sure!
Yeah, pitfalls everywhere. I think your last sentence is a good answer though.oliverfennell wrote:Very diplomatic, and probably a good call, but then ratings are often just as subjective as the argument about what constitutes world class!Asterix wrote:World class is one of those terms that people often disagree on. Rather than using it, I think it's best to say top 5, 10, 20, etc. in his division.
Ndou is ranked something like 47 by BoxRec, which I feel is very unfair. He's certainly not top 10, but he's better than top 50 for sure!