Is Nonito Donaire really the 6th best boxer in the world??

[ElTerribleMorales]

you're out of your mind. if nonito was a coward "then why the hell he called this fighters out on air?" does a coward do that?

cowards are those who run from challenges like what they did to nonito. now that's a fact.

umm yea they would, David Haye called out both Klitschkos and ran like a bitch for his dear life, Amir Khan called out everyone at 140 and is now scheduled to fight Salita, Mayweather said he would have dropped the Marquez fight, that he would pay Marquez to step down to fight Pacquiao, did that happen? no, nice try though, next

i applaud you. are you born with gamma rays?
it's easy to say a fighter avoided that, avoided who, but beyond that there's a lot of reasons. like running away especially after being challenged.now that's shameful.
anyway i know our arguments will definitely get redundant. all i would say is wait for those fights to happen, it will definitely come. if those fights will happen who do you think will be in a losing end? me or you? coz now donaire's going to be handled by top rank. those fights will come by popular demand. it's the rule of money.

did your dad tell you that as well? well my dad works in a looney bin and the schizophrenics told him that Donaire is gonna be taking on Hulk Hogan and Bugs Bunny in a triple threat hopscotch match....

[Kev]

Ah FINALLY somebody else agrees with on this!. Nonito has done NOTHING to merit p4p status, he's beaten a guy in Darchinyan who is probably on the level of a Humberto Soto, a guy that Juan Guzman beat with ease.

Comparing the rest of Guzman's career to Donaires there is no comparison, Donaire has fought NOBODY!!! He almost got beat last time out by a 13-3-1 club fighter.

He's not even top 20 p4p, and will fall faster than you can say 'Mijares' when he actually fights somebody half decent.

As Johnny Perez has now beaten the man who beat the man who the man beat surely he should be p4p top 5 now right?

It's fucking ludicrous and I will tell you why this happens. It's positive discrimination in which the Ring Magazine openly gives benefits to the midgets in their p4p rankings.......

[JazMerkin]

Ah FINALLY somebody else agrees with on this!. Nonito has done NOTHING to merit p4p status, he's beaten a guy in Darchinyan who is probably on the level of a Humberto Soto, a guy that Juan Guzman beat with ease.

Comparing the rest of Guzman's career to Donaires there is no comparison, Donaire has fought NOBODY!!! He almost got beat last time out by a 13-3-1 club fighter.

He's not even top 20 p4p, and will fall faster than you can say 'Mijares' when he actually fights somebody half decent.

As Johnny Perez has now beaten the man who beat the man who the man beat surely he should be p4p top 5 now right?

It's fucking ludicrous and I will tell you why this happens. It's positive discrimination in which the Ring Magazine openly gives benefits to the midgets in their p4p rankings.......

Darchinyan is nowhere near as good as Soto imo, Soto has just had a tougher road to the top & Guzman was a bad style matchup.

I disagree with your last bit (c'mon Bilbo you know I have to), but you're right Donaire has done little to justify his placement on the list & if we are doing it purely off talent as Taeth suggests, I gave a list of fighters at least some of whom are more talented. Are we really saying that only Mayweather, Pacquiao, Mosley, Hopkins & Marquez are better fighters?

[sumkalambay]

Ah FINALLY somebody else agrees with on this!. Nonito has done NOTHING to merit p4p status, he's beaten a guy in Darchinyan who is probably on the level of a Humberto Soto, a guy that Juan Guzman beat with ease.

Comparing the rest of Guzman's career to Donaires there is no comparison, Donaire has fought NOBODY!!! He almost got beat last time out by a 13-3-1 club fighter.

He's not even top 20 p4p, and will fall faster than you can say 'Mijares' when he actually fights somebody half decent.

As Johnny Perez has now beaten the man who beat the man who the man beat surely he should be p4p top 5 now right?

It's fucking ludicrous and I will tell you why this happens. It's positive discrimination in which the Ring Magazine openly gives benefits to the midgets in their p4p rankings.......

what a truly fuking awful post this is... darchinyan is on the level of humberto soto? what the hell are you talking about?

how many donaire/darchinyan fights have you seen? do you even follow these divisions?

lmao at rafael concepcion almost beating donaire. the dude came in with a significant weight advantage and donaire injured his hand in that fight. and donaire still won convincingly.

as for the thread, no i don't believe donaire is top 10 p4p.

[Kev]

Ah FINALLY somebody else agrees with on this!. Nonito has done NOTHING to merit p4p status, he's beaten a guy in Darchinyan who is probably on the level of a Humberto Soto, a guy that Juan Guzman beat with ease.

Comparing the rest of Guzman's career to Donaires there is no comparison, Donaire has fought NOBODY!!! He almost got beat last time out by a 13-3-1 club fighter.

He's not even top 20 p4p, and will fall faster than you can say 'Mijares' when he actually fights somebody half decent.

As Johnny Perez has now beaten the man who beat the man who the man beat surely he should be p4p top 5 now right?

It's fucking ludicrous and I will tell you why this happens. It's positive discrimination in which the Ring Magazine openly gives benefits to the midgets in their p4p rankings.......

what a truly fuking awful post this is... darchinyan is on the level of humberto soto? what the hell are you talking about?

how many donaire/darchinyan fights have you seen? do you even follow these divisions?

lmao at rafael concepcion almost beating donaire. the dude came in with a significant weight advantage and donaire injured his hand in that fight. and donaire still won convincingly.

as for the thread, no i don't believe donaire is top 10 p4p.

So you are suggesting Darchinyan is significantly better than Humberto Soto?

I disagree, as I suspect will most....

[Fenster]

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

[Kev]

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

[Fenster]

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

[ElTerribleMorales]

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

difference is that Guzman has never looked like he was gonna lose, where Froch was getting schooled for the first 9 rounds against Taylor, and flat out got a home town decision against Dirrell, another fight were he was horribly outboxed, same way you had Haye beating Valuev you should have had Dirrell beating Froch, it was the same fight only difference was in weight class

[Fenster]

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

difference is that Guzman has never looked like he was gonna lose, where Froch was getting schooled for the first 9 rounds against Taylor, and flat out got a home town decision against Dirrell, another fight were he was horribly outboxed, same way you had Haye beating Valuev you should have had Dirrell beating Froch, it was the same fight only difference was in weight class

Right.. but Froch has a better record than Guzman, right? He has beat a "star." He is unbeaten.

So judging P4P by resumes Froch would beat Guzman?

What idiot what back Froch to beat Guzman in a P4P fight?

[Kev]

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

difference is that Guzman has never looked like he was gonna lose, where Froch was getting schooled for the first 9 rounds against Taylor, and flat out got a home town decision against Dirrell, another fight were he was horribly outboxed, same way you had Haye beating Valuev you should have had Dirrell beating Froch, it was the same fight only difference was in weight class

Right.. but Froch has a better record than Guzman, right? He has beat a "star." He is unbeaten.

So judging P4P by resumes Froch would beat Guzman?

What idiot what back Froch to beat Guzman in a P4P fight?

None of what your saying is relavent. Why not let's just give Guzman a world title belt then as he'd likely win it anyway?

Fighters have to EARN their p4p spot not just get it handed to them because you 'think' they would beat the guy who holds the title.

Right now Froch, whether you like him or not is the undefeated super middlweight world champ, with wins over Taylor, Pascal and Dirrell.

Guzman is currently beltless and in a mythical p4p matchup between the two would be going in as the challenger with Froch being the champ. Yes he might start betting favourite, but he doesn't win the belt, or the place in the rankings occupied by Froch until he BEATS him.

That's how sporting competition works my friend, athletes judged on their acomplishments not their 'potential'.

if that was the case Darren Sutherlan RIP would be the Olympic Gold Medallist and James De Gale would have gone home in the semi finals

[Kev]

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

Well actually it would be you guys who might llabel Dirrell a possible 'star' not me. I go on acomplishments and Dirrell hasn't acomplished a whole lot so that win doesn't catapualt Froch into the p4p for me.

But I generally agree with that premise though. Froch has wins over Taylor, Pascal (now a lightheavyweight champ) and Dirrell. Furthermore he's competing in the Super Six and is committed to fighting the best. He's won all his fights and if he beats Kessler then absolutely he deserves consideration for p4p status whether I think there are other fighters who could beat him or not.

Now back to your 'mythical' poor fighter in a weak division who gets overlooked hypothesis?

How many of these fighters actually exist? Can you name us some?

The fighters who operate in weak divisions, take no risks and choose to stay in their safe waters rather than move up and try and make a name, why do they deserve p4p status exactly?

Did Chris John really deserve to be hailed as a great following his 'win' over Marquez when he followed it up with nothing, and refused to leave Indonesia? Now he's finally gone stateside and struggled to barely get past Rocky Jurez, I'd say the lack of hype surrounding him was entirely justified?

What about Calderon? A very talented guy in the tiniest division, he finally earned his respect, and a top 10 p4p spot with the Ring by MOVING UP, taking a risk and beating the champ.

That Guzman is not in the top 10 p4p is entirely his own doing. He has a history of pulling out of the big fights and should in no way be rewarded with a p4p spot for costing Nate Campbell half a million dollars by refusing to fight him with less than 24 hours notice. I think Guzman is a great fighter but seriously fuck him, Carl Froch deserves to be places ahead of him, not because of his skills, but because he actually fights his fights, takes on the best and gets the wins.

Your hypothetical defence for mythical hard done by fighters is just a straw man argument.

[ElTerribleMorales]

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

Well actually it would you guys who might llabel Dirrell a possible 'star' not me. I go on acomplishments and Dirrell hasn't acomplished a whole lot so that win doesn't catapualt Froch into the p4p for me.

But I generally agree with that premise though. Froch has wins over Taylor, Pascal (now a lightheavyweight champ) and Dirrell. Furthermore he's competing in the Super Six and is committed to fighting the best. He's won all his fights and if he beats Kessler then absolutely he deserves consideration for p4p status whether I think there are other fighters who could beat him or not.

Now back to your 'mythical' poor fighter in a weak division who gets overlooked hypothesis?

How many of these fighters actually exist? Can you name us some?

The fighters who operate in weak divisions, take no risks and choose to say in their safe waters rather than move up and try and make a name, why do they deserve p4p status exactly?

Did Chris John really deserve to be hailed as a great following his 'win' over Marquez when he followed it up with nothing, and refused to leave Indonesia? Now he's finally gone stateside and struggled to barely get past Rocky Jurez, I'd say the lack of hype surrounding him was entirely justified?

What about Calderon? A very talented guy in the tiniest division, he finally earned his respect, and a top 10 p4p spot with the Ring by MOVING UP, taking a risk and beating the champ.

That Guzman is not in the top 10 p4p is entirely his own doing. He has a history of pulling out of the big fights and should in no way be rewarded with a p4p spot for costing Nate Campbell half a million dollars by refusing to fight him with less than 24 hours notice. I think Guzman is a great fighter but seriously fuck him, Carl Froch deserves to be places ahead of him, not because of his skills, but because he actually fights his fights, takes on the best and gets the wins.

Your hypothetical defence for mythical hard done by fighters is just a straw man argument.

couldn't get much weaker than 106 and Calderon managed to get on most people's p4p lists when he was dominating the division, so Fensters theory can go out the window

[Kev]

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

Well actually it would you guys who might llabel Dirrell a possible 'star' not me. I go on acomplishments and Dirrell hasn't acomplished a whole lot so that win doesn't catapualt Froch into the p4p for me.

But I generally agree with that premise though. Froch has wins over Taylor, Pascal (now a lightheavyweight champ) and Dirrell. Furthermore he's competing in the Super Six and is committed to fighting the best. He's won all his fights and if he beats Kessler then absolutely he deserves consideration for p4p status whether I think there are other fighters who could beat him or not.

Now back to your 'mythical' poor fighter in a weak division who gets overlooked hypothesis?

How many of these fighters actually exist? Can you name us some?

The fighters who operate in weak divisions, take no risks and choose to say in their safe waters rather than move up and try and make a name, why do they deserve p4p status exactly?

Did Chris John really deserve to be hailed as a great following his 'win' over Marquez when he followed it up with nothing, and refused to leave Indonesia? Now he's finally gone stateside and struggled to barely get past Rocky Jurez, I'd say the lack of hype surrounding him was entirely justified?

What about Calderon? A very talented guy in the tiniest division, he finally earned his respect, and a top 10 p4p spot with the Ring by MOVING UP, taking a risk and beating the champ.

That Guzman is not in the top 10 p4p is entirely his own doing. He has a history of pulling out of the big fights and should in no way be rewarded with a p4p spot for costing Nate Campbell half a million dollars by refusing to fight him with less than 24 hours notice. I think Guzman is a great fighter but seriously fuck him, Carl Froch deserves to be places ahead of him, not because of his skills, but because he actually fights his fights, takes on the best and gets the wins.

Your hypothetical defence for mythical hard done by fighters is just a straw man argument.

couldn't get much weaker than 106 and Calderon managed to get on most people's p4p lists when he was dominating the division, so Fensters theory can go out the window

Exactly, argument rejected, case closed

[ElTerribleMorales]

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

or it could be due to the fact that he hasn't done jack shit since beating Humberto Soto in 2007, who you fight defines how good you are, boxing isn't just skill, it's mental toughness as well, who's to say Guzman won't fold against elite opposition, he already bailed out of his biggest fight against Campbell, same thing can be said for Donaire, who (although early in his career) has already been beaten