Galaxy, Fenster, Lance you are all missing the point entirely.

I'm not saying Marquez shouldn't be the RING champion, I've agreed with that all along. According to the RING criteria Marquez is the the champ at 130 because he beat the man. I completely agree as I have said from the start. The linear title IS important to the RING magazine.

BUT I REGARD Manny Pacquaio as the number 1 because he is the p4p best fighter on the planet (universally recognised) AND beat Marquez just 6 months ago.

I put Campbell at number 2 because he beat the BEST LIGHTWEIGHT in the divison in the 3 TIMES champ Juan Diaz.

Marquez gets the number 3 spot for beating a washed up and done Casamayor who got stripped of his belt through inactivity and should have lost it against Santa Cruz anyhow.


I'm NOT saying that these should be the ring rankings, I agree they SHOULD NOT BUT THEY ARE THE MOST ACCURATE!!!!!!!!!!


That's all I've been saying all along. That in is this particular instance the Ring Magazines insistence of following the title lineage actually gives an innacurate picture of who is really the best in the division.

I've said this from my first post. How are you all so dull to understand this?

I agree with you that the Ring rankings should be 1.Marquez, 2. Pacquiao, 3. Campbell BUT I disagree that they are the most accurate rankings.

From the sounds of it you (galaxy and Fenster at least) agree with me on this so why are you still arguing the point?

The RING method of ranking fighters is only one way to rank them. It is not definitive, and it is not sacrosanct.

Manny Pacquaio IS the number 1 fighter in the lightweight division, by virtue of the fact that he is clearly the best fighter p4p in the world AND beat Marquez earlier this year. It takes a moron not to be able to see this. I agree MARQUEZ is the RING CHAMP but Manny Pacquiao IS the number 1 in reality.

Forgive me my capitals but I'm really having a hard time getting this across to you.

I'm not disagreeing that the Ring magazine should rank Marquez at number 1, they SHOULD, it's just that IN THIS CASE he clearly isn't number 1.


As regards Calzaghe why would he not be considered the man at light heavy? He beat Hopkins who beat Tarver. He didn't lose to Hopkins at a lower weight and he's never lost a fight. It's a completely different scenario to Pacquiao and Marqauez.

I'm not saying that lineage should be ignored, merely that in the case of Pacquiao and Marquez, to follow the lineage over everthing else leads to an inaccurate picture of the lightweight division.

Anyway the whole thing is completely arbitary anyway, it matters not one bit as the rankings are purely subjective and Manny's next fight will be at junior welter anyway.

I just wish you'd get the point.

Anyway rant over