not sur,e hence the question markstujones wrote:I would argue that maybe Forrest was still ranked above Spinks given the closeness of Mayorga vs Forrest 2.Autobarn wrote:JMM-Pac 1?
Spinks-Mayorga
Was Morales still classed as a Featherweight at the time of JMM vs MP 1?
Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Jones/Tarver?
am trying to think of ones where there was a definite #1 and an obvious or consensus #2, as in Cal/Kessler, whereas for some like Jones/Tarver there may be a question mark on it?
Hopkins/Taylor must be one.
Tszyu/Judah.
Hatton/Paulie (only after the L was Paulie questioned)
am trying to think of ones where there was a definite #1 and an obvious or consensus #2, as in Cal/Kessler, whereas for some like Jones/Tarver there may be a question mark on it?
Hopkins/Taylor must be one.
Tszyu/Judah.
Hatton/Paulie (only after the L was Paulie questioned)
-
sockdolager
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1455
- Joined: 17 Jun 2005, 08:57
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
eff off back to the Other Sports forum you know nothing prick!kevo wrote:I think that fight was at Super Middle, so they won't have been classed as the consensus 1 & 2Asterix wrote:Pavlik vs Taylor II :??
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Tszyu vs Judah for certain.Mensa07 wrote:Jones/Tarver?
am trying to think of ones where there was a definite #1 and an obvious or consensus #2, as in Cal/Kessler, whereas for some like Jones/Tarver there may be a question mark on it?
Hopkins/Taylor must be one.
Tszyu/Judah.
Hatton/Paulie (only after the L was Paulie questioned)
Hopkins vs Taylor - I would say so, maybe a case for Abraham/Sturm back then also.
Hatton vs Paulie - Again I would say so, but not clear cut even at the time. Judah, Bradley might have a case.
What about Hatton vs Castillo?
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Ah, I forgot about that.kevo wrote:I think that fight was at Super Middle, so they won't have been classed as the consensus 1 & 2Asterix wrote:Pavlik vs Taylor II :??
-
Captain Hook
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 4730
- Joined: 07 May 2007, 09:40
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Oscar v Tito
Morales v Barrera?
Naz v Soto
Morales v Barrera?
Naz v Soto
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
sockdolager wrote:eff off back to the Other Sports forum you know nothing prick!kevo wrote:I think that fight was at Super Middle, so they won't have been classed as the consensus 1 & 2Asterix wrote:Pavlik vs Taylor II :??
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Hatton vs Malignaggi - No, Holt and Bradley both had a very good claim to the number two spot, especially after Malignaggi struggled against Ngoudjo and N'dou.
Calzaghe vs Lacy - Kessler was generally rated as the number two after his win against Mundine, and Beyer even had a claim to be rated higher than Lacy as well.
Haye vs Maccarinelli - Maccarinelli was never the number two: Cunningham, Mormeck and Bell all had a better claim.
According to my ratings at the time: None of these fights were between the number one and two in the division.
Calzaghe vs Lacy - Kessler was generally rated as the number two after his win against Mundine, and Beyer even had a claim to be rated higher than Lacy as well.
Haye vs Maccarinelli - Maccarinelli was never the number two: Cunningham, Mormeck and Bell all had a better claim.
According to my ratings at the time: None of these fights were between the number one and two in the division.
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
I stand corrected over Macca/Haye then.
-
Captain Hook
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 4730
- Joined: 07 May 2007, 09:40
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Don't listen to Horse, the "ratings" are the ones he comes up with in his bathroom...Horse wrote:Hatton vs Malignaggi - No, Holt and Bradley both had a very good claim to the number two spot, especially after Malignaggi struggled against Ngoudjo and N'dou.
Calzaghe vs Lacy - Kessler was generally rated as the number two after his win against Mundine, and Beyer even had a claim to be rated higher than Lacy as well.
Haye vs Maccarinelli - Maccarinelli was never the number two: Cunningham, Mormeck and Bell all had a better claim.
According to my ratings at the time: None of these fights were between the number one and two in the division.
-
Khaosai-Galaxy
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 2739
- Joined: 29 Apr 2007, 12:15
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
For such an "informed" bloke, your spelling is truly atrocious....lefthook82 wrote:I was talking with my slightly uninformed friend about Joe Calzaghe as he as raving about hi performance against Roy Jones Jr. I was saying that his win against Kessler is his best win and that he should check it out on youtube. Obviouly he ddnt know who Kessler was so I told him he was at he very least seen as the number 2 super middlleight after Joe and is now seen as the number 1
It got me thinking, so I am here asking how many fights in the new millenium have been between the consensus number 1 and 2 in the division?
Now I know conensus is a contentious word becase boing, more than any sport, is about opinions. but lets just build up a list and then e can debate what we diagree with and of alternative figfhters ho may have been top 2 at the time of the fight
I'll start. Joe v Kessler
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Yuoure not supposwed to pick on ppls' spelling & grammar on a fforum.
-
lefthook82
- Heavyweight

- Posts: 1837
- Joined: 07 Mar 2008, 04:33
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Seriously @ Khaosai-Galaxy what is up with you?
I was just trying to get a debate started. The spelling was clear enough for people to understand what I was asking for
Besides, what has being 'informed' about boxing have to do with my ability to spell or not
Happy New Year to you anyways. I apologise for offending your eyes with my spelling and grammar and I'll use a spellcheck next time. Perhaps after that you might actually contribute positively to a thread. Here's hoping anyway.....
I was just trying to get a debate started. The spelling was clear enough for people to understand what I was asking for
Besides, what has being 'informed' about boxing have to do with my ability to spell or not
Happy New Year to you anyways. I apologise for offending your eyes with my spelling and grammar and I'll use a spellcheck next time. Perhaps after that you might actually contribute positively to a thread. Here's hoping anyway.....
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
My ratings are sound, and I mostly come up with them sat in front of a computer screen.Captain Hook wrote:Don't listen to Horse, the "ratings" are the ones he comes up with in his bathroom...
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
this is probably true. Porn on one half of the screen, ratings system on the other. The man just gets a bit distracted.Horse wrote:My ratings are sound, and I mostly come up with them sat in front of a computer screen.Captain Hook wrote:Don't listen to Horse, the "ratings" are the ones he comes up with in his bathroom...
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
If you hold a WBO title and that is the only title you have held you will not be number 2Dioufy wrote:I always thought Enzo Macc was second, with Cunningham a very close third. But I suppose you could argue that Mormeck was still right up there too, so I will retract my statement. But in my opinion Haye was first and Macca was second.
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
I know that, but people around him were getting beat (Mormeck, Cunningham and Bell).
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Cunnigham?Dioufy wrote:I know that, but people around him were getting beat (Mormeck, Cunningham and Bell).
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Krzysztof Wlodarczyk, although it was allegedly quite close and contentious.
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
what, because tey were actually fighting each other.Dioufy wrote:I know that, but people around him were getting beat (Mormeck, Cunningham and Bell).
If Cunningham had a WBO title and Mac had an IBF, Mac would have probably got beaten by someone in the IBF top 10.
Some fighters get an easier schedule.
Have to say, things look rosy for Mac if Warren could, say, deliver IBF and Ring champ Adamek. Same recognition as Haye fight, vs a man much smaller than Haye (Adamek up from light heavy).
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
I frelt Cunningham just lost that first fight - he was quite poor in it - but well won the rematch, with Wlod down and feeling sorry for himself through much o the contest.Dioufy wrote:Krzysztof Wlodarczyk, although it was allegedly quite close and contentious.
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
I have since said I stand corrected on the issue of Enzo Macc being second only to Haye at the time of their fight. I just put down a fact, that Haye beat Mormeck, Mormeck beat Bell, and lost, and Cunningham lost to Wlodarczyk (deservedly you say). All the time, Enzo remained unbeaten holding his "world title", but I have now realised that wasn't enough to get him second spot, because he was fighting bums like Azzoui and Gunn. Really thinking about it now, I think Enzo was probably third or fourth.Autobarn wrote:what, because tey were actually fighting each other.Dioufy wrote:I know that, but people around him were getting beat (Mormeck, Cunningham and Bell).
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
This is a good thread but isn't it depressing that we're scratching around having found just a handful of times in EIGHT years and SEVENTEEN weight classes when the two best fighters in a division have actually fought?
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Yeah, I think Enzo was #3.Dioufy wrote:I have since said I stand corrected on the issue of Enzo Macc being second only to Haye at the time of their fight. I just put down a fact, that Haye beat Mormeck, Mormeck beat Bell, and lost, and Cunningham lost to Wlodarczyk (deservedly you say). All the time, Enzo remained unbeaten holding his "world title", but I have now realised that wasn't enough to get him second spot, because he was fighting bums like Azzoui and Gunn. Really thinking about it now, I think Enzo was probably third or fourth.Autobarn wrote:what, because tey were actually fighting each other.Dioufy wrote:I know that, but people around him were getting beat (Mormeck, Cunningham and Bell).
Re: Fights between consensus 1 and 2 in the division
Disagree, Cunnigham was a little negative but well won the first fight also.Autobarn wrote:I frelt Cunningham just lost that first fight - he was quite poor in it - but well won the rematch, with Wlod down and feeling sorry for himself through much o the contest.Dioufy wrote:Krzysztof Wlodarczyk, although it was allegedly quite close and contentious.