Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

Printable View

10-10-2011, 01:08 AM
Kev

Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

Was just looking at the Ring rankings.

They have Tim Bradley as number 7 in the world p4p, yet they rank him second in his own weight class behind Amir Khan.

Can anyone explain this anomoly? :confused:

Very strange...
10-10-2011, 02:34 AM
J_C

Re: Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

I guess they must really rate his win over Abregu at Welterweight ;D
10-10-2011, 02:55 AM
Kev

Re: Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

Quote:

Originally Posted by J_C

I guess they must really rate his win over Abregu at Welterweight ;D

haha :p
10-10-2011, 08:32 AM
CFH

Re: Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

The Ring seems to have lost a ton of credibility over the past couple of years.
10-10-2011, 09:54 AM
Mark TKO

Re: Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

Not looked at site and stopped buying a couple of years ago after 20+ years

I find this surprising as to me the Ring ratings were the ones that always made the moset sense and I swore by them.

Will check out site later
10-10-2011, 10:44 AM
erics44

Re: Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

all this ring magazine shit came along and coz of all of the belts and governing bodies and noone knowing who the real champ was and all that and everyone looking for an answer to all the nonesense it was seem as the answer to all of our prayers

when in reality its just another one to add to the confusion
10-10-2011, 04:09 PM
Spicoli

Re: Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

It's Oscars fault. It's become a vehicle for promotion rather than the once proclaimed bible of boxing.
10-10-2011, 09:21 PM
Leighton

Re: Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

Before the Brook Jackiewicz fight they had Jackiewicz ranked 7 in the welterweight devision. Boxrec had him no where near the top ten. Boxrec now rate him 33 in the devision after the loss. Sounds like a better rating to me.
10-10-2011, 10:00 PM
ElTerribleMorales

Re: Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

boxrec's rankings aren't much better
10-10-2011, 10:20 PM
superheavyrhun

Re: Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

I appreciate that the anomaly is probably an oversight on behalf of whoever's doing the editing over there, but generally when it comes to P4P rankings, its so much down to opinion, and people will always have their favourites and see things differently to those people at Ring magazine.

They've often been the most respected producer of rankings, and especially the P4P rankings, but really it is all down to individual opinion.
10-11-2011, 06:09 AM
Gandalf

Re: Ring rankings are a bit retarded.

Quote:

Originally Posted by superheavyrhun

I appreciate that the anomaly is probably an oversight on behalf of whoever's doing the editing over there, but generally when it comes to P4P rankings, its so much down to opinion, and people will always have their favourites and see things differently to those people at Ring magazine.

They've often been the most respected producer of rankings, and especially the P4P rankings, but really it is all down to individual opinion.

Exactly, and that is why I don't place much credence into P4P rankings. I have a general idea of who are the best in each division and leave it at that. Anything more is just too subjective.