BoxRec

So I took a look at the ESPN and RING p4p rankings and noticed something strange.

The only non-HBO fighters were 9(Yamanaka) & 10(Frampton) on the RING list.

So, there aren't any top 10 p4p worthy fighters in ALL of the PBC.
The most popular boxing media organization in the world are ignoring half of the top level boxers in the world.

If Frampton is worthy of #10 ...
If Crawford jumps to #4 by beating Postol ...

You're telling me Keith Thurman isn't even ranked?
Not one PBC fighter ESPN, not even ONE.
How could this be considered fair journalism?

This is getting a bit too stupid.

Didn't Frampton sign with Haymon? I know he fought on PBC last year and of course his most recent bout was on an Al Showtime card.

I'd have people like Thurman and Garcia, as well as some non-PBC fighters, above Yamanaka, but I don't really think the rankings are a major injustice. There are loads of good fighters with Haymon, but many them just miss the top ten in my view, or at least aren't locks for it if they have a case. By the way, BoxRec's computerized ranking only have one PBC guy if we're not counting Frampton; is that shady too? Should there be a Haymon fighter quota?

BAD INTENTIONS wrote:So I took a look at the ESPN and RING p4p rankings and noticed something strange.

The only non-HBO fighters were 9(Yamanaka) & 10(Frampton) on the RING list.

So, there aren't any top 10 p4p worthy fighters in ALL of the PBC.
The most popular boxing media organization in the world are ignoring half of the top level boxers in the world.

If Frampton is worthy of #10 ...
If Crawford jumps to #4 by beating Postol ...

You're telling me Keith Thurman isn't even ranked?
Not one PBC fighter ESPN, not even ONE.
How could this be considered fair journalism?

This is getting a bit too stupid.

Frampton is a PBC fighter and he's in the top 10.

Thurman is close to the top ten now.

It might help if some of the other PBC boxers would fight better opposition, don't you think?

Only Thurman and Frampton (I believe) are in the Boxrec top 10 p4p as well. Which is, of course, objective, just a mathematical formula. So it shouldn't seem odd for Ring Magazine to have as few also.

You guys are missing the point.
Crawford's win over Postol placed him at #4 on Ring and ESPN.

BASED ON THAT ... How can Crawford be ranked above Garcia and Thurman?
Even if you think so (Crawford has one a half good wins), how can Crawford be #4 and Thruman not even be top 10.

The standards don't match up. Get it?

You could make the same argument against GGG, Canelo, and others too. The p4p lists seem doctored.

Also, the Boxrec ranking systems have not been calculated correctly for years.
To the point that any topic that challenges it get shut down (not locked) immediately.
Also, knowing math, you can manipulate the system.

I don’t know if I believe in this pound-for-pound rankings conspiracy theory, but there are several interesting political/business relationships/issues that could potentially have an indirect influence on how ESPN and Ring Magazine formulate their ratings:

• A few years ago, ESPN & HBO agreed to share PPV boxing content. I believe that ESPN and HBO have a working relationship also with other sports. So I don’t know if they can be considered as shared-interest allies of sorts.
• The next Pacquiao fight is rumoured to be televised by ESPN instead of HBO.
• Al Haymon has to pay ESPN to televise PBC’s events.
• HBO refuse to work with Al Haymon.
• Ring Magazine is owned by Oscar De La Hoya.
• Ring Magazine publishes HBO produced content.
• Golden Boy Promotions, a company also owned by Oscar De La Hoya, main fighter is Canelo Alvarez, who has an exclusive contract with HBO.
• Top Rank & Main Events are seemingly exclusively tied to HBO.

The thing is… I don’t know if I’ve been unduly influenced by the journalists that have formulated these rankings, but generally-speaking, I tend to agree with the men listed in their pound-for-pound ratings.

The other point to consider… relates to the fact that pound-for-pound rankings are utterly meaningless. They’re only meant to be a bit of fun… or at most, a marketing ploy to help encourage TV viewership figures.

crusader wrote:Didn't Frampton sign with Haymon? I know he fought on PBC last year and of course his most recent bout was on an Al Showtime card.

I'd have people like Thurman and Garcia, as well as some non-PBC fighters, above Yamanaka, but I don't really think the rankings are a major injustice. There are loads of good fighters with Haymon, but many them just miss the top ten in my view, or at least aren't locks for it if they have a case. By the way, BoxRec's computerized ranking only have one PBC guy if we're not counting Frampton; is that shady too? Should there be a Haymon fighter quota?

BI has an unhealthy hatred of HBO, he thinks they're the cause of the demise of Boxing. Including the oh so important ESPN p4p ratings.

Ignoring half of the top level boxers in the world? Who from the PBC realistically deserves to be top 10 p4p?

You named Thurman, that's it. Even he only has 1 really good win against Porter with a few more decent wins against the tough but a bit limited Chavez, past prime Guerrero and past prime Collazo. Hardly knocking down the door of the top 10, even if he is a very good boxer. Crawford has established himself as the #1 in 2 divisions and has unified at 140. Difficult to argue that Thurman has a better resume than that. I like Thurman but let's be honest, he hasn't even established himself as the #1 in his own division, never mind done enough to claim it's stupid than he's not top 10 p4p.

Who else is there from the PBC? Frampton is a 2 weight world champion with wins over undefeated Scott Quigg and undefeated 3 weight world champion Leo Santa Cruz, he has a good shout at being top 10 and they have him on their list.

I don't see what the problem is.

Rigondeaux's a HBO fight? O_o

Freedom2013 wrote:

BAD INTENTIONS wrote:So I took a look at the ESPN and RING p4p rankings and noticed something strange.

The only non-HBO fighters were 9(Yamanaka) & 10(Frampton) on the RING list.

So, there aren't any top 10 p4p worthy fighters in ALL of the PBC.
The most popular boxing media organization in the world are ignoring half of the top level boxers in the world.

If Frampton is worthy of #10 ...
If Crawford jumps to #4 by beating Postol ...

You're telling me Keith Thurman isn't even ranked?
Not one PBC fighter ESPN, not even ONE.
How could this be considered fair journalism?

This is getting a bit too stupid.

Frampton is a PBC fighter and he's in the top 10.

Thurman is close to the top ten now.

It might help if some of the other PBC boxers would fight better opposition, don't you think?

The better opposition #4 Crawford has fought.

Boxing Prospect wrote:Rigondeaux's a HBO fight? O_o

I thought Rigondeaux was dropped by Top Rank and HBO?

Enlightened-One wrote:

Boxing Prospect wrote:Rigondeaux's a HBO fight? O_o

I thought Rigondeaux was dropped by Top Rank and HBO?

Seems that way to me. His last few fights have been in the U.K. I was under the impression that Eddie Hearn was trying to work him into a big matchup over there with Quigg or something.

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

crusader wrote:Didn't Frampton sign with Haymon? I know he fought on PBC last year and of course his most recent bout was on an Al Showtime card.

I'd have people like Thurman and Garcia, as well as some non-PBC fighters, above Yamanaka, but I don't really think the rankings are a major injustice. There are loads of good fighters with Haymon, but many them just miss the top ten in my view, or at least aren't locks for it if they have a case. By the way, BoxRec's computerized ranking only have one PBC guy if we're not counting Frampton; is that shady too? Should there be a Haymon fighter quota?

BI has an unhealthy hatred of HBO, he thinks they're the cause of the demise of Boxing. Including the oh so important ESPN p4p ratings.

Oh Saad, you're doing it again. You know that wife thing you do. Someone explains their point and you start to jab with little smart-ass comments instead of a discussing your logical point.

I though the break changed you ... you just relaxed for while and then reverted back into this.

gilgamesh wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote:

Boxing Prospect wrote:Rigondeaux's a HBO fight? O_o

I thought Rigondeaux was dropped by Top Rank and HBO?

Seems that way to me. His last few fights have been in the U.K. I was under the impression that Eddie Hearn was trying to work him into a big matchup over there with Quigg or something.

allegedly is working with him in the UK not Eddie Hearn

Boxing Prospect wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:

Enlightened-One wrote: I thought Rigondeaux was dropped by Top Rank and HBO?

Seems that way to me. His last few fights have been in the U.K. I was under the impression that Eddie Hearn was trying to work him into a big matchup over there with Quigg or something.

allegedly is working with him in the UK not Eddie Hearn

It's all just U.K. to me, I don't really keep up with which promoter over there has which fighters.

I don't care about ranking or titles. I just find it weird that everyone is accepting Crawford as p4p #4 because he beat Postol.

Forget the rest. I won't win that. Let's just focus on Crawford.
How do you rank Crawford over Garcia and Thurman?
If you can't answer that, how can the major sports publication in the world come to that conclusion?

NOT THAT ANY OF THIS REALLY MATTERS. BUT FOR ARGUMENT SAKE, THIS IS A BOXING FORUM RIGHT.

I think it's clear ESPN and HBO have a business relationship that extends beyond the usual media relationship.

BAD INTENTIONS wrote:I don't care about ranking or titles. I just find it weird that everyone is accepting Crawford as p4p #4 because he beat Postol.

Forget the rest. I won't win that. Let's just focus on Crawford.
How do you rank Crawford over Garcia and Thurman?
If you can't answer that, how can the major sports publication in the world come to that conclusion?

NOT THAT ANY OF THIS REALLY MATTERS. BUT FOR ARGUMENT SAKE, THIS IS A BOXING FORUM RIGHT.

I think it's clear ESPN and HBO have a business relationship that extends beyond the usual media relationship.

I find it very easy to rank Crawford over Garcia and Thurman. Garcia has done virtually nothing meaningful since 2013, should've lost to Herrera and struggled to beat Lamont Peterson...other than that he's been beating up on no hopers the last few years.

Thurman has been beating up on no hopers or past it fighters (Collazo and Guerrero) pretty much his whole career. The only dangerous opponents he's faced are Diego Chaves and Shawn Porter and he struggled to beat both of them. I don't have either of those two on my P4P list at all.

Crawford has beaten Gamboa (2x Olympic Gold Medalist), Beltran (#1 Lightweight contender at the time) and Viktor Postol (#1 Jr. Welterweight Contender at the time, and a Titleholder) and has looked impressive in all of these outings winning by lopsided decision or taking control and knocking out his opponent. He has far more upside than either Garcia or Thurman and would beat either of them if they were to be his next opponents, but they won't be because PBC fighters don't want dangerous fights.

Boxing is a what have you done for me lately sport, and lately Danny Garcia's career barely even matters anymore to fight fans.

gilgamesh wrote:

BAD INTENTIONS wrote:I don't care about ranking or titles. I just find it weird that everyone is accepting Crawford as p4p #4 because he beat Postol.

Forget the rest. I won't win that. Let's just focus on Crawford.
How do you rank Crawford over Garcia and Thurman?
If you can't answer that, how can the major sports publication in the world come to that conclusion?

NOT THAT ANY OF THIS REALLY MATTERS. BUT FOR ARGUMENT SAKE, THIS IS A BOXING FORUM RIGHT.

I think it's clear ESPN and HBO have a business relationship that extends beyond the usual media relationship.

I find it very easy to rank Crawford over Garcia and Thurman. Garcia has done virtually nothing meaningful since 2013, should've lost to Herrera and struggled to beat Lamont Peterson...other than that he's been beating up on no hopers the last few years.

Thurman has been beating up on no hopers or past it fighters (Collazo and Guerrero) pretty much his whole career. The only dangerous opponents he's faced are Diego Chaves and Shawn Porter and he struggled to beat both of them. I don't have either of those two on my P4P list at all.

Crawford has beaten Gamboa (2x Olympic Gold Medalist), Beltran (#1 Lightweight contender at the time) and Viktor Postol (#1 Jr. Welterweight Contender at the time, and a Titleholder) and has looked impressive in all of these outings winning by lopsided decision or taking control and knocking out his opponent. He has far more upside than either Garcia or Thurman and would beat either of them if they were to be his next opponents, but they won't be because PBC fighters don't want dangerous fights.

Boxing is a what have you done for me lately sport, and lately Danny Garcia's career barely even matters anymore to fight fans.

If you are listing Beltran as a legitimate win, but can't find any evidence in favor of Thurman and Garcia, you're biased.

Crawford
Postol, Lundy, Jean, Dulorme, Beltran, Gamboa, Burns, Klimov, Sanabria, Prescott

Thurman
Porter, Collazo, Guerrero, Bundu, Diaz, Soto Karass, Chavez, Zaveck, Quintana, Lora

Garcia
Guerrero, Malinaggi, Peterson, Salka, Herrera, Mattysse, Judah, Morales, Khan, Morales

THESIS
I'm not saying who should be where. I think of p4p as groups, not necessarily in ranked order.
However, if you look at those lists, and conclude that Crawford is #4 and the other two don't even rank, ur buggin.

Also, don't know where this Robert Guerrero hate comes from. Never been a big fan of his,
but the guy fights hard and gave everyone except Floyd a tough time.
Guess some of you don't know the difference between a bum and someone who fights to the level of their competition.

PS - You said that Thurman struggled to beat Chavez and Porter but said nothing about Crawford/Gamboa except the result.
You can't see your own bias in this example?

Crawford definitely had a hard time with Gamboa, but came through with flying colors, yes he had as much trouble with Gamboa as Thurman had with Chaves though certainly.

I stand by my opinion that Crawford is a P4P ranked fighter while Garcia and Thurman aren't. I don't know if I have Crawford as high as #4 though I know he's on the list, but I don't remember where. I'll look again in a minute.

The Guerrero hate for me comes from the fact that you can't see the guy fight on TV without them bringing up that his wife had cancer and the fact that he is all buddy buddy with that piece of sh*t Pat Robertson. He's a good fighter definitely, but I can't stand him and I always root for him to lose.

He's just a name now for better fighters to beat up.

Here's my current P4P list for the record

1. Roman Gonzalez
2. Sergey Kovalev
3. Gennady Golovkin
4. Andre Ward
5. Guillermo Rigondeaux
6. Terence Crawford
7. Saul "Canelo" Alvarez
8. Vasyl Lomachenko
9. Carl Frampton
10. Shinsuke Yamanaka

First of all, Frampton is a PBC guy.

Second of all, Thurman is really the only obvious omission, and P4P lists are highly debatable to begin with so I don't think you can claim a conspiracy on this one.

jujigatame wrote:First of all, Frampton is a PBC guy.

Second of all, Thurman is really the only obvious omission, and P4P lists are highly debatable to begin with so I don't think you can claim a conspiracy on this one.

I don't think Thurman belongs on a P4P list yet. Another win like the Porter win and he does, but he's not there yet.

BAD INTENTIONS wrote:

SaadOffTheDeck wrote:

crusader wrote:Didn't Frampton sign with Haymon? I know he fought on PBC last year and of course his most recent bout was on an Al Showtime card.

I'd have people like Thurman and Garcia, as well as some non-PBC fighters, above Yamanaka, but I don't really think the rankings are a major injustice. There are loads of good fighters with Haymon, but many them just miss the top ten in my view, or at least aren't locks for it if they have a case. By the way, BoxRec's computerized ranking only have one PBC guy if we're not counting Frampton; is that shady too? Should there be a Haymon fighter quota?

BI has an unhealthy hatred of HBO, he thinks they're the cause of the demise of Boxing. Including the oh so important ESPN p4p ratings.

Oh Saad, you're doing it again. You know that wife thing you do. Someone explains their point and you start to jab with little smart-ass comments instead of a discussing your logical point.

I though the break changed you ... you just relaxed for while and then reverted back into this.

Ok, pudding. You fix it!

gilgamesh wrote:Here's my current P4P list for the record

1. Roman Gonzalez
2. Sergey Kovalev
3. Gennady Golovkin
4. Andre Ward
5. Guillermo Rigondeaux
6. Terence Crawford
7. Saul "Canelo" Alvarez
8. Vasyl Lomachenko
9. Carl Frampton
10. Shinsuke Yamanaka

You have ward at 4 but say Thurman only has 1-2 good wins, those wins were in the last couple of years, ward has the worst resume in that time yet you have him at 4, how is that possible

Pureist wrote:

gilgamesh wrote:Here's my current P4P list for the record

1. Roman Gonzalez
2. Sergey Kovalev
3. Gennady Golovkin
4. Andre Ward
5. Guillermo Rigondeaux
6. Terence Crawford
7. Saul "Canelo" Alvarez
8. Vasyl Lomachenko
9. Carl Frampton
10. Shinsuke Yamanaka

You have ward at 4 but say Thurman only has 1-2 good wins, those wins were in the last couple of years, ward has the worst resume in that time yet you have him at 4, how is that possible

Andre Ward would be #1 if not for his inactivity. He has the best resume of any active fighter in the sport. Kessler, Froch, Arthur Abraham, Chad Dawson, Sakio Bika and other good fighters.

Thurman doesn't have wins worthy of inclusion on a P4P list IMO. P4P lists are subjective if you think he belongs on your list by all means add him, and see if I give a sh*t.

I like Keith Thurman, I'm a much bigger fan of Thurman than I am of Ward. There's no comparison between the two though on a P4P list.