Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
It's amazing how serioulsy fans take the P4P rankings. It's all utter bollocks.
Joan Guzman would beat half the current ranked P4P top 10 (legit, respected, :rolleyes:) with his eyes closed.. but no-one rates him in the top 10 because even though he possesses a clear sick talent he doesn't have the "names" on his resume.. the very same "names" that wont fight him because he's avoidable.. :rolleyes:
Just playing devil's advocate here.
If he hasn't been matched up against top-tier opposition how can you be sure his skills are as sick as you claim? You can have all the potential/skills in the world, but until to prove you can beat or compete with the best you do not belong among them IMO. Plenty of guys look great until they meet a Pacquiao or a Hopkins.
P4P is about mythical match-ups with size and weight leveled. Guzman fighting Pac doesn't need the mythical bullshit, they're the same weight.. they fight - we get the better man.
But the likes of Pac can avoid Guzman because he doesn''t need him. Too big a risk for too little reward.. and even were they to fight and Pac wins would that mean as a hardcore follower of boxing, in a P4P scenario would you bet against Guzman over the likes of Hatton, Marquez, Cotto, Pavlik, Vasquez etc...?
I don't see p4p as being about mythical matchups at all. I rate fighters based purely on what they have already achieved. What they might go on to do doesn't come into it at all.
I don't even think when done properly that subjective experience comes into it that much. I wouldn't say it does for me.
I think the majority of boxing experts and well educated fans on here rate fighters strictly according to their actual acomplishments so far and not whether they think afighter is potentially better or not.
I actually agree with you regarding Guzman. I'd pick him right now over Marquez and Paquaio. I also believe R Marquez and maybe Isreal as well are no longer the fighers they were when they began their trilogy and that they could end up losing to the likes of Cabellero, Molitor and Ponce De Leon as their wars have taken too much out of them both.
Does this mean I'd even consider rating any og these fighters above them? Hell no, they havn't acomplished anything like these guys have.
In reality the P4P rankings are always a bit out of date as they reflect past acomplishments.
I absolutely belive Hopkins, Pacquiao, JMM Marquez are all top 5 p4p stars but I absolutely believe that there are younger fighters coming up who could beat them. Guzman would beat both Manny and Juan Marquez imo and I really think Hopkins wouldn't be able to beat a young lion like Chad Dawson or a a relentless young puncher like Kelly Pavlik. He's too old, although he'd give them a hell of a tough fight.
Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
SweetPea
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Pacstraightleft
A fighter who ALWAYS give fans satifaction and doesn't rob their PPV money should be the #1 p4p.
You're talking about Erik Morales, right? ;)
Certainly NOT Pretty Boy Fraud.
Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
I just hate it when stupid bastards try and put heavyweights in the pound for pound rankings.
NEWFLASH! THE P4P SYSTEM WAS CREATED TO LIST THE BEST FIGHTERS OUTSIDE THE HEAVYWEIGHT DIVISION!!!!
The only time any heavyweight should be listed in the P4P is if that heavyweight came up from a lighter weight ie: Gene Tunney, Roy Jones Jr., but not Evander Holyfield as he fought the majority of his career at heavyweight.
People who list ALI as a P4Per are fucking annoying and have lost their God damn minds as Ali was the biggest motherfucker fighting in the division at the time!!!!
Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
I just hate it when stupid bastards try and put heavyweights in the pound for pound rankings.
NEWFLASH! THE P4P SYSTEM WAS CREATED TO LIST THE BEST FIGHTERS OUTSIDE THE HEAVYWEIGHT DIVISION!!!!
The only time any heavyweight should be listed in the P4P is if that heavyweight came up from a lighter weight ie: Gene Tunney, Roy Jones Jr., but not Evander Holyfield as he fought the majority of his career at heavyweight.
People who list ALI as a P4Per are fucking annoying and have lost their God damn minds as Ali was the biggest motherfucker fighting in the division at the time!!!!
I disagree. It may have started out that way but I think a fair p4p system should rate all fighters across all divisions.
Ali and everyone else should have their place in boxing history properly assessed.
Are you saying that the Ring and everyone else should remove all the heavyweights from their All Time p4p rankings?
Because I think that would absolutely suck balls to be honest.
The top 10 p4p ranking should, in this little hobbit's opinion rate the best 10 fighters currently boxing today.
Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
Just playing devil's advocate here.
If he hasn't been matched up against top-tier opposition how can you be sure his skills are as sick as you claim? You can have all the potential/skills in the world, but until to prove you can beat or compete with the best you do not belong among them IMO. Plenty of guys look great until they meet a Pacquiao or a Hopkins.
P4P is about mythical match-ups with size and weight leveled. Guzman fighting Pac doesn't need the mythical bullshit, they're the same weight.. they fight - we get the better man.
But the likes of Pac can avoid Guzman because he doesn''t need him. Too big a risk for too little reward.. and even were they to fight and Pac wins would that mean as a hardcore follower of boxing, in a P4P scenario would you bet against Guzman over the likes of Hatton, Marquez, Cotto, Pavlik, Vasquez etc...?
I don't see p4p as being about mythical matchups at all. I rate fighters based purely on what they have already achieved. What they might go on to do doesn't come into it at all.
I don't even think when done properly that subjective experience comes into it that much. I wouldn't say it does for me.
I think the majority of boxing experts and well educated fans on here rate fighters strictly according to their actual acomplishments so far and not whether they think afighter is potentially better or not.
I actually agree with you regarding Guzman. I'd pick him right now over Marquez and Paquaio. I also believe R Marquez and maybe Isreal as well are no longer the fighers they were when they began their trilogy and that they could end up losing to the likes of Cabellero, Molitor and Ponce De Leon as their wars have taken too much out of them both.
Does this mean I'd even consider rating any og these fighters above them? Hell no, they havn't acomplished anything like these guys have.
In reality the P4P rankings are always a bit out of date as they reflect past acomplishments.
I absolutely belive Hopkins, Pacquiao, JMM Marquez are all top 5 p4p stars but I absolutely believe that there are younger fighters coming up who could beat them. Guzman would beat both Manny and Juan Marquez imo and I really think Hopkins wouldn't be able to beat a young lion like Chad Dawson or a a relentless young puncher like Kelly Pavlik. He's too old, although he'd give them a hell of a tough fight.
It's all nonsense.
How can it NOT be about mythical match-ups? :confused:
Especially highlighted if you are basing it on fighters accomplishments per weight division. You get penalised for NOT having "name" fighters to fight.. even though the P4P names may not exist around your divison or can easily DODGE you if you're avoidable :rolleyes:
Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
Bilbo why on Earth would anyone want to compare HEAVYWEIGHTS to lower weight classes?
It's counter productive....you can say a guy like Pacquiao or Mayweather moved up or down in weight to beat X,Y, and Z but heavyweights are on an island of their own and whether they are great or not has nothing to do with it but it's harder to appreciate the heavyweights because they can't take on a light heavyweight or cruiserweight and get respect for it they can only tarnish their legacies.
Yes I am saying Ring should remove all heavyweights from their all-time P4P rankings....Ali was THE BIGGEST heavyweight of his era and therefore deserves no place in the P4P....it would be like if Roy Jones Jr. fought only junior middleweights and welterweights when he was at 168-175 and he got props for that.....the heavyweight division is best judged against itself historically and not against every other division all-time.
Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
Bilbo why on Earth would anyone want to compare HEAVYWEIGHTS to lower weight classes?
It's counter productive....you can say a guy like Pacquiao or Mayweather moved up or down in weight to beat X,Y, and Z but heavyweights are on an island of their own and whether they are great or not has nothing to do with it but it's harder to appreciate the heavyweights because they can't take on a light heavyweight or cruiserweight and get respect for it they can only tarnish their legacies.
Yes I am saying Ring should remove all heavyweights from their all-time P4P rankings....Ali was THE BIGGEST heavyweight of his era and therefore deserves no place in the P4P....it would be like if Roy Jones Jr. fought only junior middleweights and welterweights when he was at 168-175 and he got props for that.....the heavyweight division is best judged against itself historically and not against every other division all-time.
Of course Ali deserves recognition in the p4p rankings.
By overwhelming consensus he's the second best fighter ever to lace up a pair of gloves, certainly in terms of his achievments.
I don't really see p4p the way you do. I see it as a reflection of the best fighters and a comparison of their respective achievements.
And you do realize the you gave me negative rep for saying I didn't the ranking system used on this site and have now got the reputation of being a moaner whereas you can moan and grumble about the p4p ranking system used to rate boxers and thats ok :-\
You damn hypocrite :p
Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
CFH
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fenster
It's amazing how serioulsy fans take the P4P rankings. It's all utter bollocks.
Joan Guzman would beat half the current ranked P4P top 10 (legit, respected, :rolleyes:) with his eyes closed.. but no-one rates him in the top 10 because even though he possesses a clear sick talent he doesn't have the "names" on his resume.. the very same "names" that wont fight him because he's avoidable.. :rolleyes:
Just playing devil's advocate here.
If he hasn't been matched up against top-tier opposition how can you be sure his skills are as sick as you claim? You can have all the potential/skills in the world, but until to prove you can beat or compete with the best you do not belong among them IMO. Plenty of guys look great until they meet a Pacquiao or a Hopkins.
Very true. Like MAB being considered as the king of the featherweight after defeating Naz. Then suddenly, a Pacman from nowhere battered him badly...:cool:
Anyway, I can not discount the fact that Guzman is quite skillful. Someday, his time to reign will come. As for now, against Pacquaio, we still do not know how he will fare. A win against Soto is not a guarantee that he will also be able to win over Pacquaio. Besides, Pacquaio has deadlier punches than Soto.
All are just speculations.As to the P4P ranking, let's respect that. Those fighters in that list are not there without any reason. One way or the other, they have fought their way to be there.
Lastly, as to the recognition and respect the fighters are getting or not getting, like in Saddo, it is being earned through time and quality fights.:cool:
Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
Bilbo no one is doubting Ali's greatness (although some vastly overrate him but that's neither here nor there) but he only fought in one fucking division AND he was the biggest fighter in that division and therefore his status at P4P would be limited if he even deserved to be there to begin with.
The P4P is a grouping of non heavyweights to see who is the best non heavyweight either now or all-time and that's why it was created, to give Robinson and Pep and Duran and Leonard etc some credit because the heavyweights already have their place as the premier division and therefore need no special recognition
Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
Bilbo no one is doubting Ali's greatness (although some vastly overrate him but that's neither here nor there) but he only fought in one fucking division AND he was the biggest fighter in that division and therefore his status at P4P would be limited if he even deserved to be there to begin with.
The P4P is a grouping of non heavyweights to see who is the best non heavyweight either now or all-time and that's why it was created, to give Robinson and Pep and Duran and Leonard etc some credit because the heavyweights already have their place as the premier division and therefore need no special recognition
That may be why it was created but its certainly not that any more, at least not the All Time p4p chart.
You're beginning to whine more than me, and that's not easy to do. :p
Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
That may be why it was created but its certainly not that any more, at least not the All Time p4p chart.
You're beginning to whine more than me, and that's not easy to do. :p
I'm not whining I'm merely explaining the flaws in your logic.
Pound 4 Pound means the best fighting ability, skill, and record in the smallest package and therefore ranking Ali in ANY pound for pound list is idiotic because HE WAS THE BIGGEST FIGHTER OF HIS ERA!!!! I don't know if I can stress that enough
Re: Why I hate the P4P rankings
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lyle
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Bilbo
That may be why it was created but its certainly not that any more, at least not the All Time p4p chart.
You're beginning to whine more than me, and that's not easy to do. :p
I'm not whining I'm merely explaining the flaws in your logic.
Pound 4 Pound means the best fighting ability, skill, and record in the smallest package and therefore ranking Ali in ANY pound for pound list is idiotic because
HE WAS THE BIGGEST FIGHTER OF HIS ERA!!!! I don't know if I can stress that enough
That's exactly what I said too :rolleyes:
I don't think p4p means that at all, not any more at any rate.
My own definition of p4p would be
A determination of a fighter's ability and boxing prowess irrespective of his size.
Let me ask you this. If the best fighter in the world, as in most dominant, most eye catching, quickest, slickest boxer was a heavyweight should he be omitted from the p4p list almost as if he doesn't exist because he's a heavyweight?
This wouldn't be a problem if the heavyweight champ was introduced as the 'best fighter in the world' but I've never heard that.
However Floyd always get acknowledeged as the universally recognised p4p best fighter in the world today whenever he fights.
Personally I think if the best fighter in the world happened to be a heavyweight, then he should get that title.
Ultimately I agree with you regarding the origin of the p4p term, but who cares?
Back then when it was invented we had 15 round fights, maybe longer, only 8 weight classes and not nearly as much television coverage.
Back then the heavyweights were the glamour division.
Nowadays the spotlight has completely shifted into the lower divisions. In fact its now the heavyweights that need recognition over the welter and feather weight fighters!
