In the event you clicked on this piece anticipating to discover a pound-for-pound record or some debate concerning who belongs on such a listing, you’re WAY off. As a matter of reality, when you’re a hardcore pound-for-pound aficionado, I’d carry you to tears or have you ever tinkling your chonis in anger by the point you’re achieved studying this.
Pound-for-pound rankings are absolute idiocy. Disgrace on you when you even marginally regard them as one thing value speaking about– particularly in a sport like boxing, which is at all times in determined want of great dialogue regarding any variety of urgent, generally life-and-death, points.
However whereas points concerning well being, security, and our fetid septic tank of an officiating/judging mannequin go comparatively unaddressed, morons spend hours on-line raging in debate over whether or not Naoya Inoue deserves to be ranked above Oleksandr Usyk on some nerds’ fantasy rankings record that, actually, has no that means and no significant standards by which it’s assembled.
The idea of “pound-for-pound” got here to be in the course of the days of welterweight/middleweight legend Sugar Ray Robinson. It was thought of a technique to pretty fee the expertise and accomplishments of lower-weight fighters measured towards the extra publicized heavyweights. Within the 90’s, nonetheless, this casual idea grew to become an precise Prime 10 record, compiled by the parents over at Ring Journal, who had been lower than one era faraway from destroying the credibility of their divisional rankings by promoting rankings placements of their “Bible of Boxing” (see: Ring Journal Scandal).
The pound-for-pound rankings did change into a factor of significance, although (as a result of we’re largely chimps who’re simply distracted by shiny objects). They’ve change into an more and more large deal lately and a supply of debate amongst followers, in addition to a supply of delight among the many fighters themselves.
However how, precisely, are these rankings compiled and by what standards?
That, proper there, is the inherent flaw on this idea. There isn’t any established standards concerning pound-for-pound ranking and, so, the rankings are wildly subjective, compiled by media individuals who run the gamut from good observers to naive fan boys to moronic wannabe specialists to agenda-wielding lunk heads. That’s why the pound-for-pound debate has about as a lot foundation in actuality as a debate concerning the pecking order of house aliens on Earth– greys vs. greens vs. reptilians vs. hybrids, and so forth.
One normal guideline for ranking fighters appears to be based mostly on the fantastical concept of: “In the event that they had been all the identical weight, who would win?”
However how do you start any affordable dialogue in regards to the sport’s finest fighters by asking you to fee them based mostly on such an illogical premise? Some elements of a boxer’s recreation are very particular to their bodily realities. Naoya Inoue and Shakur Stevenson could not actually do what they do in the event that they had been a lot bigger males; Artur Beterbiev and David Benavidez could not do what they do as smaller males. Vasiliy Lomachenko as a heavyweight, with the identical talents he had as an excellent featherweight, could be the best large man of all time; Anthony Joshua– along with his mindset and total method—would’ve made for one extraordinarily terrible featherweight.
This complete “assuming they had been the identical weight” standards ought to instantly relegate pound-for-pound discuss to the class of meaningless fantasy fan chatter. If we’re going to go that far, why not simply rank fighters based mostly on them presumably having three arms or the power to shoot laser beams from their eyes?
Among the many most reasonable of the pound-for-pound believers {and professional} media record makers, some affordable standards are utilized. Physique of labor, stage of competitors, relative talent stage, and inherent means can come into consideration when figuring out the world’s finest fighters, no matter weight. However, even nonetheless, all of that’s wildly subjective.
Principally, although, these pound-for-pound rankings, particularly these pieced collectively by the Ring Journal Rankings Panel and the Transsexual Boxing Scores Board (or no matter that factor known as), are simply reflections of the private biases of the board/panel members compiling them.
You don’t eliminate bias by including extra biased voices to the discourse. That’s like if in case you have a restaurant with a shitty cook dinner and assume that bringing in 30 different shitty cooks will make for higher meals popping out of your kitchen. Nope. Doesn’t work that means.
Any fairly savvy observer, prepared to spend the time to take action, might simply choose aside the pound-for-pound rankings and hint again the private biases main to every placement. That good older girl with the ponytail who serves because the Ring Journal/RingTV editor-in-chief and whoever runs the Ring Journal Twitter account (from the tone they take, it should be a catty teenage lady) lately spent some appreciable time justifying their up to date pound-for-pound rankings. On the finish of the day, although, the one justification for a way their record was put collectively was that it gelled with their very own tackle issues.
Not surprisingly, fighters out of favor (for no matter purpose) with the bosses of the board/panel get decrease rankings or aren’t ranked in any respect. Different fighters solely make the reduce with the begrudging approval of a board/panel pressured to rank them or face apparent criticism. Some fighters get ranked shortly and keep ranked, no matter losses or inactivity, seemingly needing to be murdered or solid out by way of exorcism to vanish from the rankings.
And the way, actually, might you count on something much less from rankings compiled with no established, concrete standards by a boxing media pushed by agenda/bias and filled with handy idiocy?
At its best, the idea of pound-for-pound rankings is innocent fluff. Again in my early days of boxing writing, I used to be pressured by editors to place collectively pound-for-pound rankings and my lists had been most likely simply as biased and altogether dumb as everybody else’s.
At its worst, although, this sort of nonsense serves as sleight of hand in assist of the established order, a distraction from what issues in a sport that wants vigilance greater than every other. We’re coming off of two fights (Romero-Barroso and Haney-Lomachenko) that highlight boxing’s terrible officiating and judging and the warmth from each cases lasted solely so long as the time it took for the primary distraction to come back alongside.
You possibly can’t repair what wants fixing when you can’t apply fixed stress to these in energy. In boxing, one thing at all times appears to come back alongside to conveniently pull consideration away from something of substance. And pound-for-pound rankings, with the foolish individuals behind them, have change into the silliest distraction of all of them.
Received one thing for Magno? Ship it right here: paulmagno@theboxingtribune.com
