How is it based on subjectivity? How about pro accomplishments? I thought that was the primary fuel for traditional boxing rankings?Cobwebcat wrote: This is our fundamental disagreement ...who deserves to be ranked higher and who is better should never be two different questions. The better fighter always deserves to be ranked higher that, I would argue, is the whole point of a ranking. If not it becomes an arbitrary list of names based on subjectivity.
We won’t agree on this point I think!
We all know that the typical gold medalist in the beginning of his pro career is way, way better than the opponents he is boxing... but we can't rank him far beyond them because you can't justify it based on results.
If you go with WHR.. after the next big upset, the rankings get laughed at. However, it is not my site...
