If you happen to clicked on this piece anticipating to discover a pound-for-pound listing or some debate relating to who belongs on such an inventory, you’re WAY off. As a matter of reality, in case you’re a hardcore pound-for-pound aficionado, I would carry you to tears or have you ever tinkling your chonis in anger by the point you’re finished studying this.
Pound-for-pound rankings are absolute idiocy. Disgrace on you in case you even marginally regard them as one thing value speaking about– particularly in a sport like boxing, which is all the time in determined want of significant dialogue regarding any variety of urgent, generally life-and-death, points.
However whereas points relating to 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 listing that, actually, has no which 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 option 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 High 10 listing, compiled by the parents over at Ring Journal, who have been lower than one technology 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 turn into a factor of significance, although (as a result of we’re largely chimps who’re simply distracted by shiny objects). They’ve turn into an more and more large deal in recent times and a supply of debate amongst followers, in addition to a supply of satisfaction 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 is no such thing as a established standards relating to pound-for-pound score 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 consultants to agenda-wielding lunk heads. That’s why the pound-for-pound debate has about as a lot foundation in actuality as a debate relating to the pecking order of house aliens on Earth– greys vs. greens vs. reptilians vs. hybrids, and so on.
One common guideline for score fighters appears to be primarily based on the fantastical concept of: “In the event that they have been all the identical weight, who would win?”
However how do you start any cheap dialogue in regards to the sport’s finest fighters by asking you to fee them primarily based on such an illogical premise? Some elements of a boxer’s sport are very particular to their bodily realities. Naoya Inoue and Shakur Stevenson could not actually do what they do in the event that they have 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 skills he had as a brilliant featherweight, can be the best large man of all time; Anthony Joshua– along with his mindset and general strategy—would’ve made for one extraordinarily terrible featherweight.
This entire “assuming they have been the identical weight” standards ought to instantly relegate pound-for-pound speak to the class of meaningless fantasy fan chatter. If we’re going to go that far, why not simply rank fighters primarily based on them probably having three arms or the power to shoot laser beams from their eyes?
Among the many most rational of the pound-for-pound believers {and professional} media listing makers, some cheap standards are utilized. Physique of labor, degree of competitors, relative ability degree, and inherent capacity can come into consideration when figuring out the world’s finest fighters, no matter weight. However, even nonetheless, all of that’s wildly subjective.
Largely, 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 is named), are simply reflections of the non-public biases of the board/panel members compiling them.
You don’t eliminate bias by including extra biased voices to the discourse. That’s like you probably have a restaurant with a shitty prepare 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 approach.
Any moderately savvy observer, keen to spend the time to take action, may simply decide aside the pound-for-pound rankings and hint again the non-public 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 have to be a catty teenage woman) 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 the way their listing was put collectively was that it gelled with their very own tackle issues.
Not surprisingly, fighters out of favor (for no matter cause) 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 compelled 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 through exorcism to vanish from the rankings.
And the way, actually, may 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 absolute best, the idea of pound-for-pound rankings is innocent fluff. Again in my early days of boxing writing, I used to be compelled by editors to place collectively pound-for-pound rankings and my lists have been most likely simply as biased and altogether dumb as everybody else’s.
At its worst, although, this type 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 return alongside.
You’ll be able to’t repair what wants fixing in case you can’t apply fixed strain to these in energy. In boxing, one thing all the time appears to return alongside to conveniently pull consideration away from something of substance. And pound-for-pound rankings, with the foolish individuals behind them, have turn into the silliest distraction of all of them.
Bought one thing for Magno? Ship it right here: paulmagno@theboxingtribune.com
