ring magazine, tbrb, boxrec, meOriginally Posted by powerpuncher
Still? Who has him at #1?
 |
|
|
|
Thanks: 1
Likes: 26
Dislikes: 0
larry's daddy
Array
Re: Canelo’s short list
ring magazine, tbrb, boxrec, meStill? Who has him at #1?
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
Forum Greatest Of All Time
Array
Re: Canelo’s short list
Ring magazine doesn’t count because who runs it. Very biased. Boxrec aren’t real rankings. Most reputable sources still have him at #3ring magazine, tbrb, boxrec, meStill? Who has him at #1?
larry's daddy
Array
Re: Canelo’s short list
i can't help that you don't like the answerRing magazine doesn’t count because who runs it. Very biased. Boxrec aren’t real rankings. Most reputable sources still have him at #3ring magazine, tbrb, boxrec, meStill? Who has him at #1?
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
Old Guard
Array
Re: Canelo’s short list
TBRB had Canelo at #5 about a month ago.
The top 4 must've died since then.
Forum Greatest Of All Time
Array
Re: Canelo’s short list
Well I’m just letting you know that if anyone uses boxrec and acts like it’s a legitimate ranking system then you are proving yourself to be unknowledgable about boxrec. And everybody who knows anything knows that Ring would obviously put Canelo first.i can't help that you don't like the answerRing magazine doesn’t count because who runs it. Very biased. Boxrec aren’t real rankings. Most reputable sources still have him at #3ring magazine, tbrb, boxrec, meStill? Who has him at #1?
Maybe if you would have researched and found more reputable sources then your point of him being #1 p4p “still” would make sense. But at it stands, basically you think he is #1 along with a computer and his own team. You can think what you want, but I’m just letting you know that no other real sources think that he’s #1.
Old Guard
Array
Re: Canelo’s short list
I still want to hear the explanation as to how TBRB has him #1.
larry's daddy
Array
Re: Canelo’s short list
you asked, i answered, i can't help that you don't like the answer. tell me, is p4p a legitimate ranking system? you are now putting stipulations on your question "who has him at #1?" which do not relate to my answer and telling me i needed to research to satisfy your opinion. my reply perfectly answers your questionWell I’m just letting you know that if anyone uses boxrec and acts like it’s a legitimate ranking system then you are proving yourself to be unknowledgable about boxrec. And everybody who knows anything knows that Ring would obviously put Canelo first.i can't help that you don't like the answerRing magazine doesn’t count because who runs it. Very biased. Boxrec aren’t real rankings. Most reputable sources still have him at #3ring magazine, tbrb, boxrec, meStill? Who has him at #1?
Maybe if you would have researched and found more reputable sources then your point of him being #1 p4p “still” would make sense. But at it stands, basically you think he is #1 along with a computer and his own team. You can think what you want, but I’m just letting you know that no other real sources think that he’s #1.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
Forum Greatest Of All Time
Array
Re: Canelo’s short list
His mom probably has him at #1 too. You should have included her. See how ridiculous that sounds? That’s why there are reputable sources and non reputable sources. That’s what I’m trying to tell you.you asked, i answered, i can't help that you don't like the answer. tell me, is p4p a legitimate ranking system? you are now putting stipulations on your question "who has him at #1?" which do not relate to my answer and telling me i needed to research to satisfy your opinion. my reply perfectly answers your questionWell I’m just letting you know that if anyone uses boxrec and acts like it’s a legitimate ranking system then you are proving yourself to be unknowledgable about boxrec. And everybody who knows anything knows that Ring would obviously put Canelo first.i can't help that you don't like the answerRing magazine doesn’t count because who runs it. Very biased. Boxrec aren’t real rankings. Most reputable sources still have him at #3ring magazine, tbrb, boxrec, meStill? Who has him at #1?
Maybe if you would have researched and found more reputable sources then your point of him being #1 p4p “still” would make sense. But at it stands, basically you think he is #1 along with a computer and his own team. You can think what you want, but I’m just letting you know that no other real sources think that he’s #1.
You can put him at whatever number you want, but the whole argument is that you said he will “still” be #1 p4p. If you would have ended that statement with “on my list” then it would have been fine. I would have disagreed but the claim would have at least made sense.
larry's daddy
Array
Re: Canelo’s short list
it's not just my list though is it? you asked who? i answered with some examples. in your opinion those examples aren't reputable, others would disagree with you. there are more i could list but then i would have to check with you if each is acceptable to your standards. p4p is subjective or do you think it is a legitimate ranking system? my statement made sense. he is number one p4p according to others and myself and will still be number one this time next year. i don't agree with lomachenko being number one on some lists, or crawford but i wouldn't call those sources not real, because p4p has no set criteriaHis mom probably has him at #1 too. You should have included her. See how ridiculous that sounds? That’s why there are reputable sources and non reputable sources. That’s what I’m trying to tell you.you asked, i answered, i can't help that you don't like the answer. tell me, is p4p a legitimate ranking system? you are now putting stipulations on your question "who has him at #1?" which do not relate to my answer and telling me i needed to research to satisfy your opinion. my reply perfectly answers your questionWell I’m just letting you know that if anyone uses boxrec and acts like it’s a legitimate ranking system then you are proving yourself to be unknowledgable about boxrec. And everybody who knows anything knows that Ring would obviously put Canelo first.i can't help that you don't like the answerRing magazine doesn’t count because who runs it. Very biased. Boxrec aren’t real rankings. Most reputable sources still have him at #3ring magazine, tbrb, boxrec, meStill? Who has him at #1?
Maybe if you would have researched and found more reputable sources then your point of him being #1 p4p “still” would make sense. But at it stands, basically you think he is #1 along with a computer and his own team. You can think what you want, but I’m just letting you know that no other real sources think that he’s #1.
You can put him at whatever number you want, but the whole argument is that you said he will “still” be #1 p4p. If you would have ended that statement with “on my list” then it would have been fine. I would have disagreed but the claim would have at least made sense.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks