BoxRec

Posted: **20 Jan 2020, 11:43**

Lennox wrote: ↑20 Jan 2020, 11:13
Onetimeonly wrote: ↑20 Jan 2020, 07:44
that's hysterical.
makes perfect sense to me from their point of view.

Posted: **20 Jan 2020, 12:17**

It's all a bit Meh.
I have no idea how they come up with these lists. But as silly as some of them look, the WBC one just seems like a shallow marketing exercise to me.

Even the Ring magazine are trying really hard to push the American heavyweight scene. How are they not going to have Pulev top 10, but they have Kownacki and Hunter in there?

I prefer Boxrec or PBO

Posted: **20 Jan 2020, 12:44**

Why would pulev rate over hunter? Because he beat chisora several years ago?

Posted: **20 Jan 2020, 13:12**

Pulev may have a boring style, but there a certain dull inevitability/consistency to him

Whyte the number 4 openly ducked Pulev.

Also I don't think getting a draw with a 40 year old Povetkin should elevate Hunter into the top 10, or at least not above Pulev.

Posted: **20 Jan 2020, 13:19**

Finkel wrote: ↑20 Jan 2020, 13:12 Pulev may have a boring style, but there a certain dull inevitability/consistency to him

Whyte the number 4 openly ducked Pulev.

Also I don't think getting a draw with a 40 year old Povetkin should elevate Hunter into the top 10, or at least not above Pulev.

So, nothing? White ducked pulev so hunters consistently better opposition means nothing? Really? Lol

Posted: **20 Jan 2020, 13:28**

What consistency are you referring to?
You dismiss Chisora and yet Hunter has beaten nobody of note. For all we know he caught Povetkin slipping...
lol

Posted: **20 Jan 2020, 13:50**

Finkel wrote: ↑20 Jan 2020, 13:28 What consistency are you referring to?
You dismiss Chisora and yet Hunter has beaten nobody of note. For all we know he caught Povetkin slipping...
lol

I'm not dismissing chisora, but it was years ago. Pulev hasn't done anything for your criticism to ring valid. How many years does that win secure him an inarguable top 10 spot? Ftr, I really don t care what the order is, the wbc is the only one with 15 guys that all fit top 15. None of the others are close.

Posted: **20 Jan 2020, 15:09**

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑19 Jan 2020, 18:37 I was actually surprised that all 15 were acceptable. Tom Schwartz ranked above wallin and fury made me lol.

He takes a loss like a humble Champion. That's what those rankings are looking for. Wallin puts up too much of a fight on the way to losing, and Tyson Fury isn't humble enough to lose

Posted: **20 Jan 2020, 22:10**

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑20 Jan 2020, 13:50
Finkel wrote: ↑20 Jan 2020, 13:28 What consistency are you referring to?
You dismiss Chisora and yet Hunter has beaten nobody of note. For all we know he caught Povetkin slipping...
lol
I'm not dismissing chisora, but it was years ago. Pulev hasn't done anything for your criticism to ring valid. How many years does that win secure him an inarguable top 10 spot? Ftr, I really don t care what the order is, the wbc is the only one with 15 guys that all fit top 15. None of the others are close.

You say that but Ortiz is still top 5 with the Ring...
Ortiz beat Jennings in 2015
Pulev beat Chisora in 2016

*actually I like the Hammer win better than Jennings, but I doubt that is particular memorable given the manner of it.

And as we have established, Whyte openly ducked Pulev for a fair shot at the IBF mandatory position. Pulev was more than willing...

So I think he deserves to be ranked top 10

Fair enough on the WBC.
For me personally, the WBC rankings are meaningless if there is no way to force a title shot. See Whyte situation. I'm in agreement with greggreggreg on that.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 04:07**

Finkel wrote: ↑20 Jan 2020, 22:10
Onetimeonly wrote: ↑20 Jan 2020, 13:50

I'm not dismissing chisora, but it was years ago. Pulev hasn't done anything for your criticism to ring valid. How many years does that win secure him an inarguable top 10 spot? Ftr, I really don t care what the order is, the wbc is the only one with 15 guys that all fit top 15. None of the others are close.
You say that but Ortiz is still top 5 with the Ring...
Ortiz beat Jennings in 2015
Pulev beat Chisora in 2016

*actually I like the Hammer win better than Jennings, but I doubt that is particular memorable given the manner of it.

And as we have established, Whyte openly ducked Pulev for a fair shot at the IBF mandatory position. Pulev was more than willing...

So I think he deserves to be ranked top 10

Fair enough on the WBC.
For me personally, the WBC rankings are meaningless if there is no way to force a title shot. See Whyte situation. I'm in agreement with greggreggreg on that.

Ortiz has twice competed with wilder, pulev has done absolutely nothing. The ducking point is raw comedy. I'd lose that. All rankings are meaningless to me. If somebody didn't start this thread no way I'd ever look at them.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 05:52**

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 04:07
Finkel wrote: ↑20 Jan 2020, 22:10

You say that but Ortiz is still top 5 with the Ring...
Ortiz beat Jennings in 2015
Pulev beat Chisora in 2016

*actually I like the Hammer win better than Jennings, but I doubt that is particular memorable given the manner of it.

And as we have established, Whyte openly ducked Pulev for a fair shot at the IBF mandatory position. Pulev was more than willing...

So I think he deserves to be ranked top 10

Fair enough on the WBC.
For me personally, the WBC rankings are meaningless if there is no way to force a title shot. See Whyte situation. I'm in agreement with greggreggreg on that.
Ortiz has twice competed with wilder, pulev has done absolutely nothing. The ducking point is raw comedy. I'd lose that. All rankings are meaningless to me. If somebody didn't start this thread no way I'd ever look at them.

As the person who started the thread I'd like it make it clear I also have no respect for them. I only use them to work out what people's next move could be, e.g. targeting weak but higher ranked contenders to force a mandatory position for a certain belt or who might be mandatory next etc.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 06:12**

joshj909 wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 05:52
Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 04:07

Ortiz has twice competed with wilder, pulev has done absolutely nothing. The ducking point is raw comedy. I'd lose that. All rankings are meaningless to me. If somebody didn't start this thread no way I'd ever look at them.
As the person who started the thread I'd like it make it clear I also have no respect for them. I only use them to work out what people's next move could be, e.g. targeting weak but higher ranked contenders to force a mandatory position for a certain belt or who might be mandatory next etc.

I don't fault you, these are the rankings that matter. The wbo is infinitely more relevant than boxrec or the ring. My old ass just doesn't care as much as I used to. I didn't even watch munguia/O'Sullivan. Even 15 years ago I'd have watched every prelim.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 06:33**

Finkel wrote: ↑20 Jan 2020, 22:10And as we have established, Whyte openly ducked Pulev for a fair shot at the IBF mandatory position. Pulev was more than willing...

Are you new to the sport of boxing?

Dillian Whyte rejected the opportunity to compete in the IBF final eliminator, against Kubrat Pulev, because he was only receiving a 25% purse split to compete on the Bulgarian’s home turf, which equated to a paltry $375K. The Bulgarian was being paid three times more than the Brit’s sum.

Kubrat Pulev ended up facing Hughie Fury in the IBF’s final eliminator, whereas Dillian Whyte fought Joseph Parker instead.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 07:42**

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 06:33
Finkel wrote: ↑20 Jan 2020, 22:10And as we have established, Whyte openly ducked Pulev for a fair shot at the IBF mandatory position. Pulev was more than willing...
Are you new to the sport of boxing?

Dillian Whyte rejected the opportunity to compete in the IBF final eliminator, against Kubrat Pulev, because he was only receiving a 25% purse split to compete on the Bulgarian’s home turf, which equated to a paltry $375K. The Bulgarian was being paid three times more than the Brit’s sum.

Kubrat Pulev ended up facing Hughie Fury in the IBF’s final eliminator, whereas Dillian Whyte fought Joseph Parker instead.

I have no problem with Whyte taking a pay day over sporting glory. But it is what it is.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 07:50**

It has nothing to do with rankings. Whyte is way more accomplished than pulev in their careers.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 07:55**

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 07:50 It has nothing to do with rankings. Whyte is way more accomplished than pulev in their careers.

Sorry, what do you mean?
I mean yeah I acknowledge Whyte has a better resume now. But what point are you making?

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 08:07**

Finkel wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 07:55
Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 07:50 It has nothing to do with rankings. Whyte is way more accomplished than pulev in their careers.
Sorry, what do you mean?
I mean yeah I acknowledge Whyte has a better resume now. But what point are you making?

Whether you think whyte ducked pulev or not is irrelevant to ranking the fighters. You keep throwing it out there like it means something and it's stupid as fornicate.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 08:15**

Finkel wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 07:42
Enlightened-One wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 06:33
Are you new to the sport of boxing?

Dillian Whyte rejected the opportunity to compete in the IBF final eliminator, against Kubrat Pulev, because he was only receiving a 25% purse split to compete on the Bulgarian’s home turf, which equated to a paltry $375K. The Bulgarian was being paid three times more than the Brit’s sum.

Kubrat Pulev ended up facing Hughie Fury in the IBF’s final eliminator, whereas Dillian Whyte fought Joseph Parker instead.
I have no problem with Whyte taking a pay day over sporting glory. But it is what it is.

Dillian Whyte’s outing against Oscar Rivas was the fourth PPV event that he’s headlined.

He consistently commands seven-digit paydays.

Kubrat Pulev was rated below Joseph Parker, by both The RING and ESPN, when Dillian Whyte refused to participate in the IBF’s farcical final eliminator. And the Bulgarian continues to be rated behind the Kiwi today.

What’s the likelihood of any highly-paid marquee name A-side fighter being willing to adhere to the IBF’s title contender rules, and agree to only accept a 25% purse split, with the B-side being paid 75%?

Do you honestly believe that Gennady Golovkin would be willing to accept only 25% of the purse pot, with Kamil Szeremeta receiving the remaining 75%? The answer is rather obvious.

Simply put: Dillian Whyte didn’t “duck” Kubrat Pulev!

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 08:23**

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 08:07
Finkel wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 07:55

Sorry, what do you mean?
I mean yeah I acknowledge Whyte has a better resume now. But what point are you making?
Whether you think whyte ducked pulev or not is irrelevant to ranking the fighters. You keep throwing it out there like it means something and it's stupid as fornicate.

Oh I see. You didn't have a point

Whyte ducking Pulev because he preferred a pay day to having a career derailed in Bulgaria is relevant because it shows Pulev is a dangerous top 10 heavyweight. Pulev already demonstrated that by making easy work of a guy Whyte went life or death with twice.

If you are only going off resume, as a way of excluding Pulev, then you would have to exclude Ortiz as well.

Jeez it's pretty simple logic

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 08:28**

Enlightened-One wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 08:15
Finkel wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 07:42

I have no problem with Whyte taking a pay day over sporting glory. But it is what it is.
Dillian Whyte’s outing against Oscar Rivas was the fourth PPV event that he’s headlined.

He consistently commands seven-digit paydays.

Kubrat Pulev was rated below Joseph Parker, by both The RING and ESPN, when Dillian Whyte refused to participate in the IBF’s farcical final eliminator. And the Bulgarian continues to be rated behind the Kiwi today.

What’s the likelihood of any highly-paid marquee name A-side fighter being willing to adhere to the IBF’s title contender rules, and agree to only accept a 25% purse split, with the B-side being paid 75%?

Do you honestly believe that Gennady Golovkin would be willing to accept only 25% of the purse pot, with Kamil Szeremeta receiving the remaining 75%? The answer is rather obvious.

Simply put: Dillian Whyte didn’t “duck” Kubrat Pulev!

That's all very interesting, but when Dillian Whyte was supposed to fight Pulev he still had yet to fight either Parker or Rivas.

He had gone life and death with Chisora twice, who Pulev made easy work of.

I don't see why Pulev, should give up his split to Whyte to get him in the ring. Pulev was in position.

There was still debate over whether Whyte could be viable as a PPV star in his own right in the run up to the Rivas fight.

He ducked an IBF final eliminator for a pay day against Parker.

It is what it is.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 08:35**

Vacant, Chris Lovejoy, Frank Sanchez, and Demsey McKean are the worst rankings; followed by Trevor Bryan at #1.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 08:50**

@Enlightened_One

It seems heavily implied here that Whyte's team thinks the long time #1 should get the majority of any split when expected to fight a lower ranked opponent in a final eliminator:

“At the moment, it’s 50-50,” Hearn said about the purse split for the Whyte vs. Breazeale fight. “Breazeale for some reason is mandatory, but Dillian is #1, so I’m going to be writing to the WBC. I think he’s [Whyte] going to get the bigger split. He’s been #1 for two years,” Hearn said.

Here's the link:
https://www.boxingnews24.com/2019/02/di ... -for-july/

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 09:33**

Finkel wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 08:50 @Enlightened_One

It seems heavily implied here that Whyte's team thinks the long time #1 should get the majority of any split when expected to fight a lower ranked opponent in a final eliminator:

“At the moment, it’s 50-50,” Hearn said about the purse split for the Whyte vs. Breazeale fight. “Breazeale for some reason is mandatory, but Dillian is #1, so I’m going to be writing to the WBC. I think he’s [Whyte] going to get the bigger split. He’s been #1 for two years,” Hearn said.
Here's the link:
https://www.boxingnews24.com/2019/02/di ... -for-july/

The WBC’s rules (section 2.17) clearly state that “50% to each contender in the case of vacant titles or elimination bouts”, but that this split can be modified to a limit of 60-40%. (under exceptional circumstances).

And considering that Dillian Whyte was clearly the A-side for any potential bout against Dominic Breazeale, it wasn’t unreasonable for Eddie Hearn to apply for an exception for his man to receive the lion’s share of the purse pot.

To be perfectly honest with you, I don’t even know why you’re arguing about this. All you need to do is check the rules and regulations of both the IBF and WBC in order to understand the reason why the certain real-world events transpired.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 12:51**

Finkel wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 08:23
Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 08:07

Whether you think whyte ducked pulev or not is irrelevant to ranking the fighters. You keep throwing it out there like it means something and it's stupid as fornicate.
Oh I see. You didn't have a point

Whyte ducking Pulev because he preferred a pay day to having a career derailed in Bulgaria is relevant because it shows Pulev is a dangerous top 10 heavyweight. Pulev already demonstrated that by making easy work of a guy Whyte went life or death with twice.

If you are only going off resume, as a way of excluding Pulev, then you would have to exclude Ortiz as well.

Jeez it's pretty simple logic

You're definitely simple, I'll give you that. I never said pulev should be excluded. You're an odd one, not a troll or complete moron but the further things go you appear to be both. It doesn't get more to the point than ranking fighters for fights they did not fight is stupid. Carry on.

Posted: **21 Jan 2020, 21:09**

Onetimeonly wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 12:51
Finkel wrote: ↑21 Jan 2020, 08:23

Oh I see. You didn't have a point

Whyte ducking Pulev because he preferred a pay day to having a career derailed in Bulgaria is relevant because it shows Pulev is a dangerous top 10 heavyweight. Pulev already demonstrated that by making easy work of a guy Whyte went life or death with twice.

If you are only going off resume, as a way of excluding Pulev, then you would have to exclude Ortiz as well.

Jeez it's pretty simple logic
You're definitely simple, I'll give you that. I never said pulev should be excluded. You're an odd one, not a troll or complete moron but the further things go you appear to be both. It doesn't get more to the point than ranking fighters for fights they did not fight is stupid. Carry on.

What?! What a complete misrepresentation of our discussion. You make it sound like my objection to Ring rankings hinges on Pulev being avoided by Whyte. It was merely one aspect.
I think you need some self reflection before throwing out the term troll and moron.

BoxRec

All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s

Re: All org. HW top 15s