TIME TO GET RIDE OF RING MAGS RANKINGS

grant suggested it.some said yes some said no i said put them on probation.grant to his credit said there on thin ice..look all of us know how to get to there site to see there rankings.heres a few things just a few that piss me off.1.pound for pound manny and foyd are tied for second.how can you be tied for second when no ones first.lol they call number 1 vacant..does it not make sence that if you feel both are so close you cant make up your mind that they should both be tied for first..2. donaire they say is the forth best fighter in the world.i dont have a problem with that except if you feel hes the forth best in the world why is he ranked third in his division below a guy with just nine fights.the other 2 ahead of him are not in there top ten nor were they ever i believe...i dont want to hear its a new division for donaire.hes the forth best fighter in the world yet going up 4 pounds he isnt considered that good to be placed first in the division..geez please.3. pulov is ranked high.yes maybe too high but he beats via ko a untill recent a top ten heavy yet is ranked below potevikin who actualy lost his last fight to a cruizer.forget the offical results he stunk up the joint and lost..by doing that he doesnt drop in the rankings at all but is rewarded number 2..lets get ride of them please..we have honored them yes because we felt they deserved the recognition..there resent and continuing actions like there championship policies no longer merit that honor..

lol another reason is ring is sliping big time..twice in articles that there so called experts wrote and i feel realy most of them like roger says dont know shit about boxing..they said the ref in last nights fight was going to administer a ten count to bute because the ropes held him up.a standing 10 count..thats a new one on me.dont they proof read there articles.
get some writers that actualy know something please..

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....this makes me look like Nostradamus.

I'm keeping them up for now because there is nothing to replace them with. And there's too many divisions and unknown fighters for us to do our own ranking.

Fat Dan is just as biase with fighters in his rankings and Boxrec computer rankings do not reflect reality a lot of times

GrantZilla wrote:I'm keeping them up for now because there is nothing to replace them with. And there's too many divisions and unknown fighters for us to do our own ranking.

Fat Dan is just as biase with fighters in his rankings and Boxrec computer rankings do not reflect reality a lot of times

..just a question.why do we need any rankings from anyone at all.like with ring we can go to espn for dans and boxing rec for fighters info.there rankings i dont take serious at all.

The problem with ring rankings is the panel that makes them up consist mainly of us based experts who put guys into their rankings they've never seen fights. They also keep fighters their high rankings when they are awarded highly dubious decisions. The way boxing is governed e.g. Too many promototional outfits, too many governing bodies and too many bogus trinkets make it impossible for any ranking systems to be perceived as being truly legitimate. Until the best are made to fight the best regularly without the bullshit politics and multiple championships, this is a problem that will never be resolved. Too many people make too much money for this to ever happen

dmar5143 wrote:

GrantZilla wrote:I'm keeping them up for now because there is nothing to replace them with. And there's too many divisions and unknown fighters for us to do our own ranking.

Fat Dan is just as biase with fighters in his rankings and Boxrec computer rankings do not reflect reality a lot of times

..just a question.why do we need any rankings from anyone at all.like with ring we can go to espn for dans and boxing rec for fighters info.there rankings i dont take serious at all.

Just for a quick look at who is ranked. No ranking is perfect. It's subjective. The Ring is on thin ice, but not so much for The Rankings so far. But their horrible belt policy.

Tell me a better ranking right out there right now, and I'll gladily put that up instead.

GrantZilla wrote:

dmar5143 wrote:

GrantZilla wrote:I'm keeping them up for now because there is nothing to replace them with. And there's too many divisions and unknown fighters for us to do our own ranking.

Fat Dan is just as biase with fighters in his rankings and Boxrec computer rankings do not reflect reality a lot of times

..just a question.why do we need any rankings from anyone at all.like with ring we can go to espn for dans and boxing rec for fighters info.there rankings i dont take serious at all.

Just for a quick look at who is ranked. No ranking is perfect. It's subjective. The Ring is on thin ice, but not so much for The Rankings so far. But their horrible belt policy.

Tell me a better ranking right out there right now, and I'll gladily put that up instead.

..grant thats not the question.i asked why do we need it at all.especialy since we know how to go to there sites.to anser your question i feel dan rs over the past months have exceeded ring mags rankings.

to say dans rankings are biase goes without fact or merit.he gives more thought and fairness overall in his rankings .overall rings reputation is based on its past and not reflected in whats going on today or chisora would be in the top ten ii feel based on his last 2 fights.morales based on his last 2 fights doesnt merit a top ten ranking.thoses are 2 examples..years ago ring was excellent but had a equal in boxing illustrated.today you can toss out all rankings given by the abc boys.there not legit and thats not subjective at all but resonable fact.without biase ill take dans over rings.
again why do we need it and why honor them since there far from what they were in the past including the resent past.there top 10 middle champs or top one punch ko artists is an example of them sliping so bad that to use them as a standard of knowledge is foolish.now a standing 10 count.i gave you my thoughts.they no longer warrant the honor or respect they deserved in the past.they slipped so bad that they joined the abc boys with like you say there championship policy.they are no longer the bible of boxing nor the voice of reason like before.
again why do we need anyones ranking system..we can follow them espn boxing rec the abc boys etc etc by going to there site.

dmar5143 wrote:to say dans rankings are biase goes without fact or merit.he gives more thought and fairness overall in his rankings .

Fat Dan takes his rankings from The Ring and likely Boxrec and just re-does the order as he sees fit. I will put cash down that's how he does it.

He's already been busted countless times for just taking some AP release of a fight he didn't watch and posting it as his Weekend Scorecard.

No way in hell he goes through all the fighters in all the divisions and ranks them accordingly.

grant i think you will lose your cash on that bet.dan as much as some and rightly so dont like his attitude at times probably watches more fights then any one else in the business plus ive noticed his rankings of late come out before rings.
hes as familar with fighters in all classes as much as anyone else.i think the lower 3 or so weight classes isnt his cup of tea maybe thats why he puts a top 5 there.most of us are familar with most weight classes.i know i am with classes from heavy to lightweight for sure except cruzier since im not interested in that division and below lightweight my interest is in top fights only and the 105 108 112 class im not interested at all except a fight here and there.this is a hobby for me and us.dan its his job which he does 24-7.and he does it well.
on his scoreboard i find nothing wrong with posting a ap release telling of the fight unless he claims he watched a fight and did not.ring mag and others do the same thing.
there has been several times ive read that dan has said i havent seen the fight yet but im going to watch it today etc etc.
in all fairness many times you have said if dan didnt work for espn he would not get inside info etc etc.or if he didnt have a background with usa today..of course he wouldnt.he would then be just a fan like us and none of us can pick the phone up and call arum floyd golden boy and talk on a constant basis could we.
he loves the sport.his knowledge of recent times is very very good.the past history no hes not that familar.0neither are a majority of posters here or on most forums.
give credit where its due.his personality lacks of course.his reporting or doing his job is done well.his rankings of late are better then rings period.to say he copies ring mag and rearranges the order is a charge based on dislike for the guy loyalty to ring mag and not fact.
in his job hes as good as anyone out there and better then most.
hes rude at times unfair with remarks at times in his chats.all of us can agree on that but he does a fantastic job.he does put his heart and soul into it dispite his personality..overall at least for me hes one of the first sources i look for to find out whats going on.
again the question of why do we need to have any rankings honored by our site goes unansered.its not needed.

GrantZilla wrote:

dmar5143 wrote:to say dans rankings are biase goes without fact or merit.he gives more thought and fairness overall in his rankings .

Fat Dan takes his rankings from The Ring and likely Boxrec and just re-does the order as he sees fit. I will put cash down that's how he does it.

He's already been busted countless times for just taking some AP release of a fight he didn't watch and posting it as his Weekend Scorecard.

No way in hell he goes through all the fighters in all the divisions and ranks them accordingly.

He doesn't even bother filling out a top ten below 126, weight classes of the sandwiches he eats. ESPN once deleted several posts that I and others posted of him clearly writing about a fight he didn't actually watch (Matthysse-Harris) and likely just looked at the result off BoxRec.

lol lol.give dan credit he eats sandwiches that weight 15 pounds or less.

flapanther2001 wrote:Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.....this makes me look like Nostradamus.

Chilllllll. I had beef with the way Ring operated over on ESPN. Pre-robust days.

Dmar you give Fat Dan WAY too much credit. You know more about boxing in your left ass cheek then in his entire fat ass.

He got into boxing in like the early 2000s. He's a newbie compared to most of us. His knowledge of boxing is limited to the last 12 years, if that, and it shows. This is a guy that has said reapidly he would vote Gatti into the HOF.

Come on man.

No way in hell he has time or would go through all the fighters in all the divisions and rank them. No way. As said, he's already been busted countless times posting some AP report on fights he didn't see on his Weekend Scorecard.