How credible is Ring Magazine and it's ratings?

[Galaxy]

The Ring Ratings are the best & most unbaised around! Although I don't agree with everyones rating they are pretty fair unlike the alphabet boys. The Ring panel is just there to get a broader view on issue (like Margarito/ Mosley being for the championship) but at the end of the day the editors have the final say on the rankings!

Not everyone is going to agree with everyones ratings because a lot of it comes down to opinion.

In the original post it asks why Williams & others are not rated in the P4P? The P4P is just a mythical list & no one will every agree on one set list as its too objective but the Rings divisional ratings are based on achievement in that weight division.

Some people may weight Donaire's win over Darchinyan, followed by Maldonaldo & then his blowout of the highly respected prospect Martinez as more important than Williams win over an inactive middle aged Wright, a Phillips on the slide, plus his loss to Quintana (although revenged in style)

I question why Homcall would say the Ring is not one of the better ones to benchmark against, but says he likes Fightnews? They are very similar

Also Sakata is nowhere to be found in his Flyweight rankings! Sure he lost but it was to his supposed #2 rated guy (that surely doesn't push him out of the top 15 does it? Not when you've got Takashi Masuda ranked at 13. Luis Concepcion seems an excellent prospect but his biggest win was over a guy who did his best work at strawweight about 6 years ago.

See what I mean its all opinion based!!!

[Hunter]

The ring is 100 times better than the sanctioning bodies but they are still flawed. We all need to remember money makes the world go round so it is impossible to get a unbiased opinion with golden boy owning the ring effectively......

[generalbulldog]

The ring is 100 times better than the sanctioning bodies but they are still flawed. We all need to remember money makes the world go round so it is impossible to get a unbiased opinion with golden boy owning the ring effectively......

Yeah its definitely better than the alphabet organizations out there, its just that I just read that in it's history it was already manipulated by Don King.

So I was wondering if it would be manipulated by GBP? Because as everyone knows money talks. And it was manipulated once. People say well its just a magazine, but it's seen in the boxing world as the so called credible source and authoritative source.

In 1976 The Ring magazine fabricated records of selected boxers, to elevate them, thereby securing them lucrative fights on the American ABC television network, as part of the United States Championship Tournament. [1]

A King-Size Scandal in the Ring - TIME

[holmcall]

The Ring Ratings are the best & most unbaised around! Although I don't agree with everyones rating they are pretty fair unlike the alphabet boys. The Ring panel is just there to get a broader view on issue (like Margarito/ Mosley being for the championship) but at the end of the day the editors have the final say on the rankings!

Not everyone is going to agree with everyones ratings because a lot of it comes down to opinion.

In the original post it asks why Williams & others are not rated in the P4P? The P4P is just a mythical list & no one will every agree on one set list as its too objective but the Rings divisional ratings are based on achievement in that weight division.

Some people may weight Donaire's win over Darchinyan, followed by Maldonaldo & then his blowout of the highly respected prospect Martinez as more important than Williams win over an inactive middle aged Wright, a Phillips on the slide, plus his loss to Quintana (although revenged in style)

I question why Homcall would say the Ring is not one of the better ones to benchmark against, but says he likes Fightnews? They are very similar

Also Sakata is nowhere to be found in his Flyweight rankings! Sure he lost but it was to his supposed #2 rated guy (that surely doesn't push him out of the top 15 does it? Not when you've got Takashi Masuda ranked at 13. Luis Concepcion seems an excellent prospect but his biggest win was over a guy who did his best work at strawweight about 6 years ago.

See what I mean its all opinion based!!!

Yes, Sakata was a mistake, but hey, it's easy to point out two or three questionable ones, but try doing 15 for each division. Not so easy. The Ring only does ten and they are a bit too international for my blood. I never said mine were all that good, but I definitly don't care for the Ring's because it has always been my belief that knowlegable posters know just as much as guys who do it for the Ring. And yes, I prefer mine to the Ring's.

[holmcall]

The Ring Ratings are the best & most unbaised around! Although I don't agree with everyones rating they are pretty fair unlike the alphabet boys. The Ring panel is just there to get a broader view on issue (like Margarito/ Mosley being for the championship) but at the end of the day the editors have the final say on the rankings!

Not everyone is going to agree with everyones ratings because a lot of it comes down to opinion.

In the original post it asks why Williams & others are not rated in the P4P? The P4P is just a mythical list & no one will every agree on one set list as its too objective but the Rings divisional ratings are based on achievement in that weight division.

Some people may weight Donaire's win over Darchinyan, followed by Maldonaldo & then his blowout of the highly respected prospect Martinez as more important than Williams win over an inactive middle aged Wright, a Phillips on the slide, plus his loss to Quintana (although revenged in style)

I question why Homcall would say the Ring is not one of the better ones to benchmark against, but says he likes Fightnews? They are very similar

Also Sakata is nowhere to be found in his Flyweight rankings! Sure he lost but it was to his supposed #2 rated guy (that surely doesn't push him out of the top 15 does it? Not when you've got Takashi Masuda ranked at 13. Luis Concepcion seems an excellent prospect but his biggest win was over a guy who did his best work at strawweight about 6 years ago.

See what I mean its all opinion based!!!

No, it's not entitely opinion based. I try to get it as quantified as possible, but boxing is a subjective business. One of my things is to be harsh on a fighter who loses badly. I also put a lot of stock in quality of opposition and how many times a fighter fights outside of his country. Each ranker goes at it a bit differentlly I suspect, and I'm pretty satified that when I hit the "send buttin" on the first of each month, I have put in as much research and work as I am capable of--with the ephasis on research. Like I said, it's not easy, but for some strange reason, I love doing it. Here are three takes on the Batamweight Division (they will change in July, of course):

Bantamweight (118 lbs) = Mine

1. Anselmo Moreno
2.Fernando Montiel
3. Hozumi Hasegawa
4. Joseph Agbeko
5 Wladimir Sidorenko
6. Abner Mares
7. Eric Morel
8. Yonnhy Perez
9. Toshiaki Nishioka
10. Gerry Penalosa
11. Nehomar Cermeño
12. Silence Mabuza
13, Alejandro Valdez
14. Michael Domingo
15. Kohei Ohba


1. Hozumi Hasegawa = RING
2, Anselmo Moreno
3. Wladimir Sidorenko
4. Yonnhy Perez
5. Silence Mabuza
6. Joseph Agbeko
7. Abner Mares
8. Nehomar Cermeño
9. Roberto Vasquez
10. Fernando Montiel


1.Fernando Montiel = Fight News
2. Anselmo Moreno
3. Hozumi Hasegawa
4. Wladimir Sidorenko
5. Joseph Agbeko
6. Simone Maludrotto
7. Yonnhy Perez
8. Eric Morel
9. Abner Mares
10. Christian Mijares
11. Silence Mabuza
12. Alejandro Valdez
13. Sasha Bakhtin
14. Leon Moore
15. Z. Gorrez
16. Kohei Ohba