Boxing Forums



User Tag List

Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  0
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: The Ring P4P Rankings

Share/Bookmark

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    9,562
    Mentioned
    88 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    983
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: The Ring P4P Rankings

    Quote Originally Posted by shza View Post
    Froch has faced tougher competition overall, sure. But Dawson is clearly the better fighter. It's no accident that Floyd Mayweather himself said Dawson is one of the top P4P fighters in the sport. Do you honestly think Carl Froch could beat Dawson at 168 or 175? I sure don't. Froch couldn't even beat Mikkel Kessler. (I rate the Pascal loss for Dawson as something of a fluke -- he lost because he took off half the fight and then the fight got ended on an injury when he was really coming on.)

    I don't want to trash Froch. He's great for what he is -- a guy who has fought all comers. He deserves massive credit for that. But that's not the same thing as talent. I wouldn't argue with him somewhere in the 8-10 spots, even.
    youre probably one of many whosaid he couldnt beat bute and AA
    Officially the only saddo who has had a girlfriend

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Bay Area
    Posts
    1,927
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Punch Power
    1083
    Cool Clicks

    Default Re: The Ring P4P Rankings

    Quote Originally Posted by erics44 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by shza View Post
    Froch has faced tougher competition overall, sure. But Dawson is clearly the better fighter. It's no accident that Floyd Mayweather himself said Dawson is one of the top P4P fighters in the sport. Do you honestly think Carl Froch could beat Dawson at 168 or 175? I sure don't. Froch couldn't even beat Mikkel Kessler. (I rate the Pascal loss for Dawson as something of a fluke -- he lost because he took off half the fight and then the fight got ended on an injury when he was really coming on.)

    I don't want to trash Froch. He's great for what he is -- a guy who has fought all comers. He deserves massive credit for that. But that's not the same thing as talent. I wouldn't argue with him somewhere in the 8-10 spots, even.
    youre probably one of many whosaid he couldnt beat bute and AA
    I don't believe there was anyone who said he couldn't beat the previously-exposed AA -- certainly not me. I did say he couldn't compete with Ward, which was true.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Ring rankings are a bit retarded.
    By Kev in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 10-11-2011, 06:09 AM
  2. New Ring Magazine Rankings
    By C-Lo in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 22
    Last Post: 08-04-2008, 06:23 PM
  3. The new ring rankings suck, and here's why!
    By Kev in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 05-26-2007, 02:08 AM
  4. The New Ring Heavyweight Rankings Our Out
    By Lance Uppercut in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-12-2007, 11:33 PM
  5. New Square-ring rankings
    By cityboy in forum Boxing Talk
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 05-05-2006, 06:52 AM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




Boxing | Boxing Photos | Boxing News | Boxing Forum | Boxing Rankings

Copyright © 2000 - 2025 Saddo Boxing - Boxing