Comments Thread For: Pacquiao/Joshua, Past/Future: BoxingScene Ratings Update

[BIGPOPPAPUMP]

Heavyweight: Anthony Joshua gets his first win against a top ten contender, his first belt, and now the fun really gets started. Joshua will be an attractive opponent sooner than later for champion Tyson Fury and they could be in a football stadium within the next twelve months. Charles Martin exits the top ten while Joseph Parker enters.
[Click Here To Read More]

[aboutfkntime]

Heavyweight: Anthony Joshua gets his first win against a top ten contender, his first belt, and now the fun really gets started. Joshua will be an attractive opponent sooner than later for champion Tyson Fury and they could be in a football stadium within the next twelve months. Charles Martin exits the top ten while Joseph Parker enters.
[Click Here To Read More]

Not convinced that Bradley can beat Kell Brook.

Pacquiao either for that matter.

There are still a lot of unanswered questions at welter.

[R-C]

Pacquiao with 5 Lineal Championships, WOW! Amazing career.

[ShoulderRoll]

At super middleweight I think Badou Jack still deserves to be ranked higher than Gilberto Ramirez.

Jack has victories over two of the top ten contenders on the list (he's about to fight a third one in Bute)and he has one successful title defense.

Ramirez in comparison just got to the party.

[aboutfkntime]

Pacquiao with 5 Lineal Championships, WOW! Amazing career.

Right, there had to be some silly **** who would run with that

[aboutfkntime]

Pacquiao is as much a 5-time lineal champ, as he is a featherweight champ.

NOT !

And let me guess, you **** are also going to count Golovkin's WBA "interim" defences as legitimate..... right?

[aboutfkntime]

Pacquiao is as much a 5-time lineal champ, as he is a featherweight champ.

NOT !

And let me guess, you **** are also going to count Golovkin's WBA "interim" defences as legitimate..... right?

How can historians, with a genuine love/understanding of the sport, allow these watered-down, bull**** "achievements" to remain unchecked?

Come on Cliff, how can you guys perpetuate that rubbish ?

I thought the " let's all suck Manny off " era, was over ?

Why disrespect the sport by diluting the achievements of past fighters ?

Everybody knows that Pac/Bradley was not for lineage.....

1) how fkn weak can you get, naming Pacquiao as a lineal champ, simply because Mayweather has retired.... how fkn weak is that.

2) I doubt that Bradley can beat Kell Brook, nor Pacquiao at this point.

3) Bradley openly admitted that he may never fight the top welters because of "boxing politics"..... and you are going to reward that, with lineage?

4) What about Brook, Thurman, Spence, Khan, Garcia, Porter, Vargas? Do we simply forget about those guys when Manny is fighting?

Why can't you guys keep it real ?

And now, Golovkin's interim defences put him up there with Hopkins, despite the fact that he has never beaten a genuine world-class opponent?

***it, you can stick BJS up there with Hopkins as well then, because he would have beaten all of Golovkin's opponents to date.

[crold1]

How can historians, with a genuine love/understanding of the sport, allow these watered-down, bull**** "achievements" to remain unchecked?

Come on Cliff, how can you guys perpetuate that rubbish ?

I thought the " let's all suck Manny off " era, was over ?

Why disrespect the sport by diluting the achievements of past fighters ?

Everybody knows that Pac/Bradley was not for lineage.....

1) how fkn weak can you get, naming Pacquiao as a lineal champ, simply because Mayweather has retired.... how fkn weak is that.

2) I doubt that Bradley can beat Kell Brook, nor Pacquiao at this point.

3) Bradley openly admitted that he may never fight the top welters because of "boxing politics"..... and you are going to reward that, with lineage?

4) What about Brook, Thurman, Spence, Khan, Garcia, Porter, Vargas? Do we simply forget about those guys when Manny is fighting?

Why can't you guys keep it real ?

And now, Golovkin's interim defences put him up there with Hopkins, despite the fact that he has never beaten a genuine world-class opponent?

***it, you can stick BJS up there with Hopkins as well then, because he would have beaten all of Golovkin's opponents to date.

Going into the fight, the site had Pac and TB 1-2 with the title vacant. That fills a vacancy, same as it did with Crawford-Beltran. The only other guy who has any real case at 47 IMO is Brook but there just isn't enough there yet. Ring doesn't concur. Folks can feel free to debate this one. Be a better debate if the guys you name had taken tougher challenges in the last year. As is, It was consistent with the way things are always done.

As to GGG, addressed his #s issue previously: //krikya360.com/-golovkin-catch-hopkins-defense-record-160--94855

[aboutfkntime]

Going into the fight, the site had Pac and TB 1-2 with the title vacant. That fills a vacancy, same as it did with Crawford-Beltran. The only other guy who has any real case at 47 IMO is Brook but there just isn't enough there yet. Ring doesn't concur. Folks can feel free to debate this one. Be a better debate if the guys you name had taken tougher challenges in the last year. As is, It was consistent with the way things are always done.

As to GGG, addressed his #s issue previously: //krikya360.com/-golovkin...ord-160--94855

It fills A vacancy, on THAT site.

The Ring currently have Brook #1.

Manny hasn't unified, OR proven that he is the best welterweight.

And Bradley hasn't unified, OR proven that he is the best at 147 either.

The fact that Pac has not unified or beaten anyone other than Bradley, is second to the fact that Mayweather just whooped him.

That is a HUGE call in my book.

There is no proof of lineage, NONE..... that is nothing but a guess, based purely on speculation/opinion.

Sorry, I have to disagree on that one bro.

The point is this..... if lineage comes down to opinion, then it should never be mentioned again, because opinion is worthless when it comes to genuine achievements.

You used to have to PROVE lineage, by unifying, like Hopkins did.

I doubt that Bradley can beat Brook.

[aboutfkntime]

Cliff, that Golovkin article was a great read.....

.... but you simply cannot consider those interim fights as genuine defences.

Golovkin was not even ranked #1 by the WBA, so how can those fights possibly be classified as legit defences?

You are comparing Golovkins era with Monzons, back when there were only 2 legit titles available...... by recognizing these new "interim" titles, you have devalued Monzon's achievements and lowered the standards within boxing.

Golovkin IS the best middleweight on the planet, no question, but he has beaten NOBODY of note..... and yet now he is included in discussions alongside Monzon, despite not actually beating any noteworthy opponents, simply because of lesser "interim" titles, that did not even exist during Monzons era?

That is more than a headache.... that makes me (a 3, nearly 4, decade boxing vet) really look forward to the McGregor/Diaz fight coming soon.

I love boxing for its history, among other things, so it is very difficult to watch history being eroded and devalued by these bull**** "achievements".

Pac also got "awarded" a featherweight title, despite never actually winning one..... we seem so eager to heap accolades and lineage on fighters just because we like them, so that they inflate existing achievements.

Back in the day some fighters would have cut off one of their fingers to get their chance at greatness, and then they still had to front up and earn it..... now, we just give it away.

#disappointed