Printable View
Ok he's not the greatest welterweight in the world but he's a belt holder so why is only rated 9th by the Ring?
It's not as if there's a whole load of talent above him either.
Vivian Harris at 4 :confused: Gavin Rees at 3 :o
And Soulamayne M'baye, Juan Lazcano, Lovemore Ndou AND Demetrius Hopkins all above him :o
I'm baffled, anyone care to explain?
Oh and don't just reply with 'he sucks', I'm not really disagreeing, I just want to know why the Ring thinks those above him suck less?
I can only give you my thoughts on the issue:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Firstly Rees at 3 & Harris at 4:Th Harris was ranked #2 when KO by Witter. Harris dropped 2 places to #4. Rees beat M'Baye who was #4 coming into that fight. With Harris' lose Rees moved to #3.
Second M'Baye at #5: The man who beat him is at #3 & he was ranked #4 before the lose... #5 seems fair to me.
Third who he beat: Torres beat Holt who was ranked #10 at the time of the fight. The fight also could have been a dq lose for Torres or a KO lose had Holt not been hit in the head with a beer can after knocking Torres down.
I kinda agree with you about Lazcano & Ndou though but Hopkins' controversial win over Forbes could be seen in the same light as Torres not being dq'd against Holt by some.
The highest I could rate Torres would be #7, he is currently #9 by the Ring so it seems pretty fair to me.
It seems unfair but then again his best performance was in a fight in which he lost. Nearly beating Cotto doesn't matter. Beating Cotto would have been a different matter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ono
People make their career off of "good efforts" they lose in.
Lets not forget the name Vitali Klitschko.
Best known for losing via TKO to Lennox.. but ooh he was ahead on the scorecards.
And quitting on his stole against Byrd..but ooh he was ahead on the scorecards....
See what I mean? ;)
I guess it has something to do with his failure to fight at the top since losing to Cotto.
The best guy he's fougfht since was Holt.
He may be ranked low but he is more dangerous than some of the fighters ranked above him, he has good power but he can be outboxed.
Ricardo is not a Welter.
I guess because just maybe most of his wins were in Colombia?
Remember Miguel held that belt for about two years. I am sure once Torres begins to defend it a couple more times and continues winning, he will move up. I am not really sure what is going on in the light welterweight division. I swear this sport is hard as phuk to follow. :mad:
I don't think where you fight factor into ranking, I would point to his quality of opposition. 2 big names and he could have easily lost both of those. The rest are journeymen types if ya ask me. But yeah if Rees and Mbaye are ranked above him thats f'ed up.
I'd Rape Ooops! I mean Rep. you but I can't I need to pass some Rep. around...Quote:
Originally Posted by GalaxyI can only give you my thoughts on the issue:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Firstly Rees at 3 & Harris at 4:Th Harris was ranked #2 when KO by Witter. Harris dropped 2 places to #4. Rees beat M'Baye who was #4 coming into that fight. With Harris' lose Rees moved to #3.
Second M'Baye at #5: The man who beat him is at #3 & he was ranked #4 before the lose... #5 seems fair to me.
Third who he beat: Torres beat Holt who was ranked #10 at the time of the fight. The fight also could have been a dq lose for Torres or a KO lose had Holt not been hit in the head with a beer can after knocking Torres down.
I kinda agree with you about Lazcano & Ndou though but Hopkins' controversial win over Forbes could be seen in the same light as Torres not being dq'd against Holt by some.
The highest I could rate Torres would be #7, he is currently #9 by the Ring so it seems pretty fair to me.
Very good breakdown :appl: and good explanation as to how Torres is there.
I just don't think it's fair to rate him much higher than the man he beat to enter the ratings. It's not like he beat the #1 rated guy Holt was only #10. Plus there was controversy surrounding that victory so the Ring maybe waiting to see what he does from hereQuote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMickI'd Rape Ooops! I mean Rep. you but I can't I need to pass some Rep. around...Quote:
Originally Posted by GalaxyI can only give you my thoughts on the issue:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilbo
Firstly Rees at 3 & Harris at 4:Th Harris was ranked #2 when KO by Witter. Harris dropped 2 places to #4. Rees beat M'Baye who was #4 coming into that fight. With Harris' lose Rees moved to #3.
Second M'Baye at #5: The man who beat him is at #3 & he was ranked #4 before the lose... #5 seems fair to me.
Third who he beat: Torres beat Holt who was ranked #10 at the time of the fight. The fight also could have been a dq lose for Torres or a KO lose had Holt not been hit in the head with a beer can after knocking Torres down.
I kinda agree with you about Lazcano & Ndou though but Hopkins' controversial win over Forbes could be seen in the same light as Torres not being dq'd against Holt by some.
The highest I could rate Torres would be #7, he is currently #9 by the Ring so it seems pretty fair to me.
Very good breakdown :appl: and good explanation as to how Torres is there.
I kind of agree but how in hell does D Hop rate above him? He's not even fought for a title and his biggest 'win' was a fight against Steve Forbes that even his uncle thinks he lost?Quote:
Originally Posted by GalaxyI just don't think it's fair to rate him much higher than the man he beat to enter the ratings. It's not like he beat the #1 rated guy Holt was only #10. Plus there was controversy surrounding that victory so the Ring maybe waiting to see what he does from hereQuote:
Originally Posted by CutMeMickI'd Rape Ooops! I mean Rep. you but I can't I need to pass some Rep. around...Quote:
Originally Posted by Galaxy
Very good breakdown :appl: and good explanation as to how Torres is there.
Gavin Rees has fought literally nobody, M'Baye is woeful and guys like Lazcano, Harris and Ndou have all lost recent fights and failed in world title bids.
He should be in the top 5 imo, simply because those above him have done virtually nothing.