The Rings' Latest P4P Ratings

Next month's ratings apparently leaked from somewhere:

1: Floyd Mayweather Junior
2: Manny Pacquiao
3: Sergio Gabriel Martinez
4: Andre Ward
5: Juan Manuel Marquez
6: Nonito Donaire
7: Wladimir Klitschko
8: Tim Bradley
9: Pongsaklek Wonjongkam
10: Lucian Bute.

Your thoughts?

About fair although Pong needs to be kicked out. Not sure who i'd put in his place though.

Wonjongkam just got stopped by a journeyman. That normally is enough to mean you lose a p4p top 10 spot. Bhop could come in. Cotto could have come in - in fact - there are plenty of decent options. Wonjongkam cannot stay in the p4p top 10 after his last result.

Thats why I think those arent the correct ratings

Wonjongkam retaining his place is a little baffling, but that aside the names in general are fair enough. I think a top half dozen of Mayweather, Pacquiao, Marquez, Donaire, Martinez and Ward (that's the order I'd have them, though I find myself going back and forth on the order of the final two) is pretty much set in stone, although naturally people are going to have those six in differing orders.

Not sure Bute has really done enough for a top ten spot, mind. If he beats Froch then he's worthy of consideration. Right now, I'd have Hopkins, Gamboa and Cotto ahead of him for sure. Others, such as Khan, Rios etc, I might concede after debate.

Pretty strange I think. Checked there and at the moment they are:

1. Pacquaio
2. Mayweather
3. Martinez
4. Donaire
5. Ward
6. Marquez
7. Wlad
8. Bradley
9. Vitali
10. Gamboa

Vitali has dropped out despite winning, and replaced by Wonjongkam who has moved up into the top ten despite being upset and losing his title. Bute seems to have replaced Gamboa for no real reason either.

Mayweather has has overtaken Pacquiao, which is fine but it seems to be on the basis of not actually doing anything. You would have thought if he was going to move up one it would have been right after the Pacquiao/Marquez fight as opposed to now.

Eastside boxing ran an article saying the info was leaked from May's edition of the magazine, which is out shortly.

It is odd to swap Mayweather and Pac now as both have done nothing lately and if a change was considered then should have been done straight after the Pac/Marquez fight?!?

The Ring normally are quite critical of Mayweather so why they've changed now I have no idea!

Or maybe the leaked info is wrong!

Strange, Bute in the top ten is ridiculous.

manos de piedra wrote:Pretty strange I think. Checked there and at the moment they are:

1. Pacquaio
2. Mayweather
3. Martinez
4. Donaire
5. Ward
6. Marquez
7. Wlad
8. Bradley
9. Vitali
10. Gamboa

Vitali has dropped out despite winning, and replaced by Wonjongkam who has moved up into the top ten despite being upset and losing his title. Bute seems to have replaced Gamboa for no real reason either.

Mayweather has has overtaken Pacquiao, which is fine but it seems to be on the basis of not actually doing anything. You would have thought if he was going to move up one it would have been right after the Pacquiao/Marquez fight as opposed to now.

Maybe Don King is influencing them.

Had the judges scored the JJM/Paq fight correctly, would Paq be top 2?

Good question az

Bradley at 8 irritates me.

He's not that good. How are these decided?

azania wrote:Had the judges scored the JJM/Paq fight correctly, would Paq be top 2?

Doubt it, they are normally odd in their ranking workings.

In last month's mag they listed the Top 10 worst robberies of last year and had the JMM/Paq fight as one of them which surely means they fought he won and in turn I would assumed that JMM would be ranked above Paq but it didn't happen

I think that people read too much into the Manny Marquez fight. For me that is more about styles than Marquez being better than Manny, he just has a style which is a nightmare for him. I don't think anyone would rank Junior Jones above Barrera.

Yeah but if he beats him after beating everyone else then he should be ahead of him.

JabMachineMK2 wrote:Bradley at 8 irritates me.

He's not that good. How are these decided?

If you're good you might/might not get in.

If you're good but American you will make the top 10

If you're very good you get into the top 10.

If you're very good and American you get into the top 5.

Bute and Pong...no. The rest is ok.

I think Bradley is very underrated by the common fan. I think he will give Pacquiao a tough fight. He may not have the flash and panache of some but hes very well rounded and does some of the subtler things in boxing very well. Having listened to him speak I also think he has a good eye and brain for the sport and is tactically very sound. Hes well worth a top 10 place for me.

The problem I have with the Ring is that it being an American publication it tends to less than subtley favour the American fighters.

I saw no real reason why Chad Dawson was ranked 7/8 at one point on the basis of beating ageing fighters like Tarver and Johnson way past their best. Also their continued instance to place the dreadfully inactive Steve Cunningham as the no.1 cruiserweight (before he lost to Hernandez) based on nothing at all are two examples I can think of.

Super D Boon wrote:The problem I have with the Ring is that it being an American publication it tends to less than subtley favour the American fighters.

I saw no real reason why Chad Dawson was ranked 7/8 at one point on the basis of beating ageing fighters like Tarver and Johnson way past their best. Also their continued instance to place the dreadfully inactive Steve Cunningham as the no.1 cruiserweight (before he lost to Hernandez) based on nothing at all are two examples I can think of.

I think a lot of it has to do with the fact there isn't that much p4p talent out there mate. I would have Dawson not far off the top 10 TBH

I dont think there is much bias in the Ring ratings. Theres only three U.S fighters in there at the moment and they are worth their place in my view. Hopkins for instance isnt even in the top ten despite being one of the few actual Ring champions.

Like others I can't see how this could possibly by the new Ring p4p list. While I agree that the ring have a small flavour of bias towards Americans in their rankings, they are generally fair - and certainly a far, far more valid barometer than any of the alphabet rankings.

The old rankings seem reasonable enough:

1. Pacquaio
2. Mayweather
3. Martinez
4. Donaire
5. Ward
6. Marquez
7. Wlad
8. Bradley
9. Vitali
10. Gamboa

Although I think Az and Valero make good points: the ring feel Pacquiao lost (against the LW champion), while Mayweather dominated the WW champion. There really doesn't seem to be much justification in keeping Pacquiao at no.1. For me I'd have it:

1. Mayweather
2. Pacquaio
3. Martinez
4. Marquez
5. Ward
6. Donaire
7. Wlad
8. Hopkins
9. Bradley
10. Vitali

To be fair, it says "Next month's ratings apparently leaked from somewhere" in the OP. So given some of the bizzare selections I'd say this list probably isn't going to be appearing Ring magazine next month.