Boxrec RULES!!!!

[killersheep]

My final thoughts before I leave this thread:

There's no point of criticizing BoxRec's computerized rankings point system. It may not be the perfect one but that's how they calculated each boxer's points. That's their basis. They have a mathematical formula.

Currently on their system, PAC is ranked no. 1 at 140 division (that's where they put PAC presently) but if they place PAC at 135 division, he will only be at no. 2 behind JMM. That's how their system works...
.

After 5 pages all you have is "because they said so"? I'm really dissapointed, I thought for sure by now you would have a reason why PAC should be ahead of Hatton at 140.

I've mentioned my own reasons why PAC could be ahead of Hatton at 140 but you immediately trashed it. Your main reason why you can't accept it because PAC has not fought at 140 which were not really observed by rankings orgs and therefore not a very valid point.

I'm confused, if you are ranking who is the best fighter at 140 why would you use any data from another weight class?

[XaduBoxer]

After 5 pages all you have is "because they said so"? I'm really dissapointed, I thought for sure by now you would have a reason why PAC should be ahead of Hatton at 140.

I've mentioned my own reasons why PAC could be ahead of Hatton at 140 but you immediately trashed it. Your main reason why you can't accept it because PAC has not fought at 140 which were not really observed by rankings orgs and therefore not a very valid point.

I'm confused, if you are ranking who is the best fighter at 140 why would you use any data from another weight class?

BoxRec did it... As I've said no point in continuing to question BoxRec's rankings... We all know it's a computerized ranking point system.

Goodbye?

[killersheep]

I've mentioned my own reasons why PAC could be ahead of Hatton at 140 but you immediately trashed it. Your main reason why you can't accept it because PAC has not fought at 140 which were not really observed by rankings orgs and therefore not a very valid point.

I'm confused, if you are ranking who is the best fighter at 140 why would you use any data from another weight class?

BoxRec did it... As I've said no point in continuing to question BoxRec's rankings... We all know it's a computerized ranking point system.

Goodbye?

So why use data from other weight classes? Computerized or not.

[XaduBoxer]

I'm confused, if you are ranking who is the best fighter at 140 why would you use any data from another weight class?

BoxRec did it... As I've said no point in continuing to question BoxRec's rankings... We all know it's a computerized ranking point system.

Goodbye?

So why use data from other weight classes? Computerized or not.

Why don't you ask BoxRec? Or why don't you take a sleep for now Mr. Killer?

Can I go now? Nice talking to you...
.

[Dizaster]

Haha! I was on page 1 reading between Killersheep and Saddoboxer, and then skipped straight to page 5 and it's still going the same..

Dare I read the other 3 in between.

Love rivalries on here..

[pacfan]

Haha! I was on page 1 reading between Killersheep and Saddoboxer, and then skipped straight to page 5 and it's still going the same..

Dare I read the other 3 in between.

Love rivalries on here..

You had me LOL'd on this one, Diz. That's exactly what I was thinking and I'm still LOL. I'm amazed and more amused at the unusually passionate devotion of Saddoboxer and Killasheep on this somewhat inane issue, not to mention some riders-on (there ain't no such word) taking some potshots in between. Well I needed a good entertainment for my otherwise boring weekend and this thread gave me just that. Who needs a boxing on lazy sundays if there are Saddoboxer and Killasheep debating, and it doesn't even matter whether the issue makes sense or not! Love you guys...

[leftylee]

BoxRec did it... As I've said no point in continuing to question BoxRec's rankings... We all know it's a computerized ranking point system.

Goodbye?

So why use data from other weight classes? Computerized or not.

Why don't you ask BoxRec? Or why don't you take a sleep for now Mr. Killer?

Can I go now? Nice talking to you...
.

That's a clear indication Killersheep just chewed you up and spat you out. And that my friend, is what he just done with you.

He had you off big time here.

Seriousley, your logic is beyond garbage and full of bias and flaws.

I know you adore Pac, but I didn't think that much. Damn!

[XaduBoxer]

So why use data from other weight classes? Computerized or not.

Why don't you ask BoxRec? Or why don't you take a sleep for now Mr. Killer?

Can I go now? Nice talking to you...
.

That's a clear indication Killersheep just chewed you up and spat you out. And that my friend, is what he just done with you.

He had you off big time here.

Seriousley, your logic is beyond garbage and full of bias and flaws.

I know you adore Pac, but I didn't think that much. Damn!

Whatever you say Judge Lefty...
.

[XaduBoxer]

How about Ring Magazine's rankings? It looked acceptable enough... PAC is highly ranked simultaneously at 147 and 135 divisions (No PAC rankings at 140? I guess, maybe after the Hatton fight then PAC will be ranked at the same time in 3 divisions, 135, 140 and 147 by Ring Mag )...

Welterweight
Limit: 147 pounds
1. Antonio Margarito
2. Miguel Cotto
3. Shane Mosley
4. Joshua Clottey
5. Manny Pacquiao
6. Carlos Quintana
7. Zab Judah
8. Luis Collazo
9. Andre Berto
10. Isaac Hlatswayo

Lightweight
Limit: 135 pounds
CHAMPION: Juan Manuel Marquez
1. Nate Campbell
2. Manny Pacquiao
3. Juan Diaz
4. Joel Casamayor
5. David Diaz
6. Julio Diaz
7. Antonio Pitalua
8. Michael Katsidis
9. Ali Funeka
10. Yuri Romanov