Thread: Boxrec RULES!!!!

Gotta love them having PAC #1 at 140 when he's never fought at that weight.

holy crap! they really do and actually have him above Hatton. how is this possible??

i don't even talk about it anymore, because boxrec's rankings are ALWAYS wayyy off.. they work on some sort of point system i believe, but it's horrible..

crystal ball ftw.

Originally Posted by RP33

i don't even talk about it anymore, because boxrec's rankings are ALWAYS wayyy off.. they work on some sort of point system i believe, but it's horrible..

That's what I usually do too, but this was so off I actually lol'ed.
I don't understand how even a computer run point system could figure that.

Thats is a insult to Hatton, Pac has never fought at 140 yet!

Originally Posted by littlebif

Thats is a insult to Hatton, Pac has never fought at 140 yet!

not only to Hatton mate but the whole 140 division...

the hell with their ratings.. they should stick to recording wins and losses..

Originally Posted by killersheep

Gotta love them having PAC #1 at 140 when he's never fought at that weight.

PAC never fought that weight but he's already scheduled to fight the recognized no. 1 man at 140 (Hatton) on May 2, 2009 in Las Vegas, USA...

link to fight schedule -> BoxRec Boxing Records

Being the no.1 P4P and scheduled to fight the no. 1 (now former ) at 140 makes PAC as the new no. 1 at 140 (according to BoxRec ). Why complain if PAC has not fought at 140? PAC already fought at even higher weight at 147 !!!
.

Originally Posted by SaddoBoxer

Originally Posted by killersheep

Gotta love them having PAC #1 at 140 when he's never fought at that weight.

PAC never fought that weight but he's already scheduled to fight the recognized no. 1 man at 140 (Hatton) on May 2, 2009 in Las Vegas, USA...

link to fight schedule -> BoxRec Boxing Records

Being the no.1 P4P and scheduled to fight the no. 1 (now former ) at 140 makes PAC as the new no. 1 at 140 (according to BoxRec ). Why complain if PAC has not fought at 140? PAC already fought at even higher weight at 147 !!!
.

Why not make Klitschko # 1 at all weights then? He's fought at even higher weights too!!

Originally Posted by killersheep

Originally Posted by SaddoBoxer

Originally Posted by killersheep

Gotta love them having PAC #1 at 140 when he's never fought at that weight.

PAC never fought that weight but he's already scheduled to fight the recognized no. 1 man at 140 (Hatton) on May 2, 2009 in Las Vegas, USA...

link to fight schedule -> BoxRec Boxing Records

Being the no.1 P4P and scheduled to fight the no. 1 (now former ) at 140 makes PAC as the new no. 1 at 140 (according to BoxRec ). Why complain if PAC has not fought at 140? PAC already fought at even higher weight at 147 !!!
.

Why not make Klitschko # 1 at all weights then? He's fought at even higher weights too!!

You got a tiny point... BUT Klitschko needs to fight (or had fought) at minimumweight/mini-flyweight (105 lbs.) and win convincingly in order to be considered as #1 in all weight division. BUT Klitschko can't and will not ever make the 105 lbs. limit That's why we have weight divisions...

At this moment, I think PAC can make 135 and 140... He can be ranked as #1 in those divisions being the #1 overall P4P...
.

Originally Posted by SaddoBoxer

Originally Posted by killersheep

Originally Posted by SaddoBoxer

PAC never fought that weight but he's already scheduled to fight the recognized no. 1 man at 140 (Hatton) on May 2, 2009 in Las Vegas, USA...

link to fight schedule -> BoxRec Boxing Records

Being the no.1 P4P and scheduled to fight the no. 1 (now former ) at 140 makes PAC as the new no. 1 at 140 (according to BoxRec ). Why complain if PAC has not fought at 140? PAC already fought at even higher weight at 147 !!!
.

Why not make Klitschko # 1 at all weights then? He's fought at even higher weights too!!

You got a tiny point... BUT Klitschko needs to fight (or had fought) at minimumweight/mini-flyweight (105 lbs.) and win convincingly in order to be considered as #1 in all weight division. BUT Klitschko can't and will not ever make the 105 lbs. limit That's why we have weight divisions...

At this moment, I think PAC can make 135 and 140... He can be ranked as #1 in those divisions being the #1 overall P4P...
.

FAIL, EPIC FAIL.............

Originally Posted by killersheep

Originally Posted by SaddoBoxer

Originally Posted by killersheep

Why not make Klitschko # 1 at all weights then? He's fought at even higher weights too!!

You got a tiny point... BUT Klitschko needs to fight (or had fought) at minimumweight/mini-flyweight (105 lbs.) and win convincingly in order to be considered as #1 in all weight division. BUT Klitschko can't and will not ever make the 105 lbs. limit That's why we have weight divisions...

At this moment, I think PAC can make 135 and 140... He can be ranked as #1 in those divisions being the #1 overall P4P...
.

FAIL, EPIC FAIL.............

That's all... Why not say something why it fails? Just like how I illustrate why Klitscho can't be #1 in all weight divisions...
.

Originally Posted by SaddoBoxer

Originally Posted by killersheep

Originally Posted by SaddoBoxer

PAC never fought that weight but he's already scheduled to fight the recognized no. 1 man at 140 (Hatton) on May 2, 2009 in Las Vegas, USA...

link to fight schedule -> BoxRec Boxing Records

Being the no.1 P4P and scheduled to fight the no. 1 (now former ) at 140 makes PAC as the new no. 1 at 140 (according to BoxRec ). Why complain if PAC has not fought at 140? PAC already fought at even higher weight at 147 !!!
.

Why not make Klitschko # 1 at all weights then? He's fought at even higher weights too!!

You got a tiny point... BUT Klitschko needs to fight (or had fought) at minimumweight/mini-flyweight (105 lbs.) and win convincingly in order to be considered as #1 in all weight division. BUT Klitschko can't and will not ever make the 105 lbs. limit That's why we have weight divisions...

At this moment, I think PAC can make 135 and 140... He can be ranked as #1 in those divisions being the #1 overall P4P...
.

Originally Posted by killersheep

Gotta love them having PAC #1 at 140 when he's never fought at that weight.

They will probably fight each other next so they belong to the same division and I think it will be at 140 division...

On PAC placed above Hatton on the 140 rankings, I think you can't deny that PAC's boxing record and accomplishments is way above Hatton's and now that they belong to the same division, it carries that PAC is ranked higher than Hatton...

It's not pretty but that's how some rankings orgs operate...
.

Sorry SaddoBoxer but that is a load of shite!Overall accomplishments per division are one thing but it's not a crash a division free card supported by 'probably' and 'I thinks' against the best they have.There are always one too many jumps.No matter where they are 'ranked' at 140 I think Hatton is numero uno!
I can picture Kenny saying this HAHA,

Merry christmas