The Quality of Some Articles...Really

CJ JamesContributor IJune 16, 2010

Just a quick comment on this.

The lead article on this site, by the no.1 writer, is called something like:

"Do you read Ring Floyd? Pacquiao is still no.1".

It's just a great example of the depths that boxing writing has sunk, since all the sites just went chasing web hits from Asia.

Leo ONLY writes articles about Manny Pacquiao. And they, are, in general, written to just try and talk down his main rival Floyd Mayweather, more than likely, in an attempt to try and annoy people.

Much of this Mayweather loathing, in truth just comes about because they are secretly acknowledging how dominant he is in the sport.

The problem I have with this one, and most of his:

1: It's actually, 100% completely wrong

2: Even a trained Elephant who'd been watching the sport for more than a decade could spot the error.

Let me get this right. The source of the article is basically the fact that Pacquiao remains Ring magazine PFP no.1. And Mayweather no.2.

This what annoys me. WWF fans, with no boxing knowledge, not doing any research.

Leo, my friend, read closesly.

A Ring Magazine PFP no.1, can NOT be displaced at the top unless:

1: They lose

2: They remain inactive for 12 months

3: They aren't seen to be defending the title against legitimate opposition. By legitimate, they mean "contenders".

4: You retire

That's it. That is Ring Magazines consitution. It doesn't matter who Mayweather beats, or who Pacquiao beats. Nothing is going to change, unless Pacquiao loses.

Manny Pacquiao isn't no.1 now, because of who he's beaten. He's no.1 now, because Floyd Mayweather gave up the number 1 status by retiring.

If Floyd never took the break, he'd still be no.1. That's how it works with Ring.

Floyd has gone no.1 with most other sites, as they base their rankings on current form. Not the archane, old, rules that Ring operate with.

To make this clear. No fighter will ever lose their no.1 PFP status unless they basically lose, or retire.

It's the exact same rules as the Ring Belt. You can't lose a ring title unless you retire, or lose, either.

Ricky Hatton remained Ring Champion at 140 for four years, without ever facing a divisional no.2.

Pacquiao's ring champion at 140 as I type this. He doesn't even fight there.

Anyway, this is the quality of lead articles on this site?

As in, 100% wrong?