The great myth of boxing…pound for pound!

Ben Pierce

28.01 - The fights last Saturday evening once again reinforced and justified my firmly held belief that boxing's mythical "pound for pound" ratings/rankings are nothing more than media hype and hold little meaning. Ricardo Mayorga, not on one "pound for pound" list that I know of or have read, defeated a boxer that was called one of boxing's "pound for pound" best.

Herein lies the problem with pound for pound rankings…and this is not meant to take anything away from the great career of Vernon Forrest, but he entered into everyone's pound for pound lists based upon one victory over Shane Mosley. Yes, I know he beat Mosley twice, but the boxing pundits did not even wait for or need the second win to deem him one of the best in boxing.

So I assume in order to look further into this great myth of boxing we call "pound for pound", we would have to examine the man Forrest defeated to be named one of the best in boxing. That would be Shane Mosley, who became the pound for pound best boxer in the world…by virtue of nothing more than one victory over Oscar De la Hoya. Yes, I am aware that Mosley was undefeated and had faced and beaten some decent competition, but he had not been tested or proven by facing the top level of competition, save the one fight with Oscar De la Hoya.

Now these two scenarios bring to the surface my first point about these pound for pound rankings. The people that make them must be easily swayed by one great showing…one big win. That would have to be apparent by the past entries into the lists by virtually unproven boxers after one career-defining victory.

If that is not the case, then maybe the pundits are just covering their proverbial butts because this particular boxer they are now touting as one the best defeated another boxer that they had previously deemed as being the best. But for whatever reason, it seems you win one big fight and you are on everybody's list as "pound for pound" one of the best!

Which makes obvious the most revealing problem with these "pound for pound" rankings, and that is they are based on no particular criteria and very much on differing criteria. Every publication, website and boxing pundit makes these pound for pound lists based on what "they" feel are the important factors. The criteria for rating boxers differs on most every list. There is no base criteria, no consistency and no rhyme or reason behind the rankings…they are simply someone's opinion, based on what they deem to be important. Excuse me if I put no credibility in a flawed system of rating boxers.

The flaws of the system become more evident with each passing fight. If Felix Trinidad was the pound for pound best boxer in the world than why did he lose to Bernard Hopkins? If you are the best, you should not lose…right? Being the best means you are better than everyone else...right? The why did Shane Mosley lose to Vernon Forrest? Why do boxers on the proverbial pound for pound lists lose all the time to boxers not even considered for the rankings? I can cite example after example of this happening…

Moreover, if the lists are so important and reflect the real talent level of the boxers today, then why is everyone constantly changing the lists? If these lists were accurate, then they would not need to be changed so often and surely when a change was necessary it would come when one of the "pound for pound" best boxers on the list were defeated another "pound for pound" best boxer on the list.

Pound for pound lists are nothing more than media hype, created by and/or used by promoters and others to promote certain boxers and certain fights. There is no credibility and thus no reason to consider them any more than what they are…someone's list of their favorite boxers based on their own criteria.

Maybe we can create a pound for pound list of who has the best pound for pound list…it makes about as much sense!

But that is one competition for which you can count me out …I have never made a pound for pound list and I am not about to start buying into the myth now. Have your fun with "pound for pound", but realize it what it is…a flawed system of ranking boxers.

Questions/Comments: benp1000@msn.com