is it actually possible for a heavyweight to ever be the p4p #1??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p4pking

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by p4pking

Yeah it's a fair gripe really, and I've no idea as to whether a Heavyweight has ever been ranked at no.1 for any length of time.

However, from what I've read before, the whole concept of the ring having a p4p ranking initially was meant to indicate who the best fighter in the world was ASIDE from the Heavyweight champion. As the division has fallen into shambles in recent years it's kind of a moot point as your hard pressed to find a HW who deserves to be ranked in the top 10 anyways imo... But perhaps they were meant to be exempt to begin with, as it was a given that the best heavyweights around were the best fighters in the world at one point.

Furthermore, if you were to somehow compile a p4p list of athletes from ALL sports, I think it would consist of almost entirely of heavyweights, due to biomechanics alone, but that's up for debate to some extent, and not worth debating really. Fact is HW boxing hasn't had anyone you could really chalk up with a Lebron James type of athlete etc. since the 90's at best(really ever imo, but whatever), and even then it's extremely unlikely. But it's a whole can of worms not worth opening, the debate just doesn't work. P4P lists are never going to be concrete due to the vast differences in physical attributes between men of a given size.

---

What does that even mean, it's only combat sports pretty much that have weight catagories?

If you mean that in most other sports only big men rise to the top that's simply not true. Sure big men are best in basketball of most American Football positions, but there are many sports where big men are at a huge disadvantage.

There's an interesting article here related to distance running, but it would apply to most endurance based sports.


weight and performance

---

I meant to say that the best athletes in the world, with the best combination of sheer physical attributes are men who weigh over 200 lbs, but I realize that it is a pointless arguement. Weight classes don't really have anything to do with a p4p ranking in the first place, but of course the term is irrelevant without them. I suppose I am just trying to think of specific measures of athletecism which aren't specific to one sport or another. I would also assert that whatever advantages a smaller man would have in dexterity and speed etc. would be more than negated by the strength and power a larger man can achieve, and that the extent to which a big man can still possess speed is greater than to which a smaller one could hope to match with power, without getting into anything specific? I don't even know what I mean, I'm basically being an airhead. I'll read the article shortly;D

---

Thanks, p4p, Best post of the day! LOLOLOL

OK. It's not really a guessing game or matter of opinion. Here's the actual mathematical formula used to figure the P4P ratings.

P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF

Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.

It's designed that way so you don't have to consider weight classes. So of course the heavyweights can be rated pound for pound.

p4p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hughey

OK. It's not really a guessing game or matter of opinion. Here's the actual mathematical formula used to figure the P4P ratings.

P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF

Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.

It's designed that way so you don't have to consider weight classes. So of course the heavyweights can be rated pound for pound.

p4p

---

Pretty sure level of opposition comes into it somewhere. That'll be why you have Wlad and Vitali up there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ono

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hughey

OK. It's not really a guessing game or matter of opinion. Here's the actual mathematical formula used to figure the P4P ratings.

P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF

Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.

It's designed that way so you don't have to consider weight classes. So of course the heavyweights can be rated pound for pound.

p4p

---

Pretty sure level of opposition comes into it somewhere. That'll be why you have Wlad and Vitali up there.

---

Of course. Silly me. I forgot the last part of the formula.

It should read:
P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF
ARO


Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.
ARO = average ranking of opponents fought

Individual opponent ranking is figured as:

The individual opponent's ranking in his weight class X the average weight of the class of the opponent. (for instance, the light heavyweight division is 160 -175 pounds. That divided by 2 equals 167.5). The heavyweight division rating is set at an estimated average of all the ranked heavyweights. This is usually set at 220 pounds these days. (I guess it is considered legitimate to forget about Valuev, LOL).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hughey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ono

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hughey

OK. It's not really a guessing game or matter of opinion. Here's the actual mathematical formula used to figure the P4P ratings.

P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF

Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.

It's designed that way so you don't have to consider weight classes. So of course the heavyweights can be rated pound for pound.

p4p

---

Pretty sure level of opposition comes into it somewhere. That'll be why you have Wlad and Vitali up there.

---

Of course. Silly me. I forgot the last part of the formula.

It should read:
P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF
ARO


Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.
ARO = average ranking of opponents fought

Individual opponent ranking is figured as:

The individual opponent's ranking in his weight class X the average weight of the class of the opponent. (for instance, the light heavyweight division is 160 -175 pounds. That divided by 2 equals 167.5). The heavyweight division rating is set at an estimated average of all the ranked heavyweights. This is usually set at 220 pounds these days. (I guess it is considered legitimate to forget about Valuev, LOL).

---

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/...76_468x392.jpg

Dave is that you by any chance??

I think heavyweights should be part of the p4p equation.

I mean in MMA Fedor Emelianenko is considered by everybody to be in the top 1-3 p4p. It would be frankly absurd to have a UFC p4p ranking without him in it

@Fenster, I personally find the issue of whether Wlad and Vitali's height helps them or not to be irelevent.

Nobody argues that Mike Tyson should be downgraded because his punching power gave him an unfair edge, or that Pacquaio would not be beating guys if he wasn't so naturally fast. All of the strengths and weaknesses of a fighter are a largely part of their genetically inherited makeup and whether a fighter wins because he is freakishly tall, or has freakishly good stamina is neither here or there, as long as both are using their attributes and gifts to win the big fights that's all that matters.

Well the thing is, I don't think they should be on the p4p lists.

Because they both refuse to fight the most dominant heavyweight in their division and that is each other. Until one of them fights or beats the other one and they are both champs they won't be p4p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skel1983

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hughey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ono

Pretty sure level of opposition comes into it somewhere. That'll be why you have Wlad and Vitali up there.

---

Of course. Silly me. I forgot the last part of the formula.

It should read:
P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF
ARO


Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.
ARO = average ranking of opponents fought

Individual opponent ranking is figured as:

The individual opponent's ranking in his weight class X the average weight of the class of the opponent. (for instance, the light heavyweight division is 160 -175 pounds. That divided by 2 equals 167.5). The heavyweight division rating is set at an estimated average of all the ranked heavyweights. This is usually set at 220 pounds these days. (I guess it is considered legitimate to forget about Valuev, LOL).

---

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2008/...76_468x392.jpg

Dave is that you by any chance??

---

I don't think so, Skel. This guy is ugly as sin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Majesty

Well the thing is, I don't think they should be on the p4p lists.

Because they both refuse to fight the most dominant heavyweight in their division and that is each other. Until one of them fights or beats the other one and they are both champs they won't be p4p

---

That IS a good point!

The reason why heavyweights are dominated by lower weights in the P4P list is based on the assumption that they can rely more on strength, power and the vast differences in height, weight and reach that can be found in their division and that if they could not rely on these attributes in a hypothetical fight with the lower weight fighters at the same weight class than they would have more of a chance of losing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jahmez

The reason why heavyweights are dominated by lower weights in the P4P list is based on the assumption that they can rely more on strength, power and the vast differences in height, weight and reach that can be found in their division and that if they could not rely on these attributes in a hypothetical fight with the lower weight fighters at the same weight class than they would ave more of a chance of losing.

---

Rather than guess how the P4P rankings are arrived at, why don't you just consult the formula used?

It should read:

P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF
ARO


Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.
ARO = average ranking of opponents fought

Individual opponent ranking is figured as:

The individual opponent's ranking in his weight class X the average weight of the class of the opponent. (for instance, the light heavyweight division is 160 -175 pounds. That divided by 2 equals 167.5). The heavyweight division rating is set at an estimated average of all the ranked heavyweights. This is usually set at 220 pounds these days. (I guess it is considered legitimate to forget about Valuev, LOL).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hughey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ono

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hughey

OK. It's not really a guessing game or matter of opinion. Here's the actual mathematical formula used to figure the P4P ratings.

P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF

Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.

It's designed that way so you don't have to consider weight classes. So of course the heavyweights can be rated pound for pound.

p4p

---

Pretty sure level of opposition comes into it somewhere. That'll be why you have Wlad and Vitali up there.

---

Of course. Silly me. I forgot the last part of the formula.

It should read:
P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF
ARO


Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.
ARO = average ranking of opponents fought

Individual opponent ranking is figured as:

The individual opponent's ranking in his weight class X the average weight of the class of the opponent. (for instance, the light heavyweight division is 160 -175 pounds. That divided by 2 equals 167.5). The heavyweight division rating is set at an estimated average of all the ranked heavyweights. This is usually set at 220 pounds these days. (I guess it is considered legitimate to forget about Valuev, LOL).

---

Is it Ring magazine rankings?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

I say no on account of the fact the Pound for Pound ranking was made to figure out who the best fighter in the world is who isn't the heavyweight champion of the world.

So UNLESS someone like Roy Jones Jr., Michael Spinks, or James Toney, Bob Foster, etc who are not natural heavyweights and they win at heavyweight then they can be P4P #1 but I don't rate true heavyweights in the P4P ratings no Ali no Tyson no nobody from heavyweight.

---

Sorry, Lyle. I have to rate Marciano as an ATG P4Pounder. Just plug his numbers into the formula.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hughey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jahmez

The reason why heavyweights are dominated by lower weights in the P4P list is based on the assumption that they can rely more on strength, power and the vast differences in height, weight and reach that can be found in their division and that if they could not rely on these attributes in a hypothetical fight with the lower weight fighters at the same weight class than they would ave more of a chance of losing.

---

Rather than guess how the P4P rankings are arrived at, why don't you just consult the formula used?

It should read:

P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF
ARO


Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.
ARO = average ranking of opponents fought

Individual opponent ranking is figured as:

The individual opponent's ranking in his weight class X the average weight of the class of the opponent. (for instance, the light heavyweight division is 160 -175 pounds. That divided by 2 equals 167.5). The heavyweight division rating is set at an estimated average of all the ranked heavyweights. This is usually set at 220 pounds these days. (I guess it is considered legitimate to forget about Valuev, LOL).

---

Ok show an example say Albert Sosnowski, Sergio Martinez and Ivan Calderon, I'm not sure how you get the ARO, are you relying on the boxrec ratings? Also is the WO an average over the entire career (same with WF)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Hughey

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jahmez

The reason why heavyweights are dominated by lower weights in the P4P list is based on the assumption that they can rely more on strength, power and the vast differences in height, weight and reach that can be found in their division and that if they could not rely on these attributes in a hypothetical fight with the lower weight fighters at the same weight class than they would ave more of a chance of losing.

---

Rather than guess how the P4P rankings are arrived at, why don't you just consult the formula used?

It should read:

P4P = {(FW - FL) / TF} X WO / WF
ARO


Where:

P4P = pound for pound rating
FW = fights won
FL = fights lost
TF = total fights
WO = weight of opponent (at weigh-in)
WF = weight of fighter being rated.
ARO = average ranking of opponents fought

Individual opponent ranking is figured as:

The individual opponent's ranking in his weight class X the average weight of the class of the opponent. (for instance, the light heavyweight division is 160 -175 pounds. That divided by 2 equals 167.5). The heavyweight division rating is set at an estimated average of all the ranked heavyweights. This is usually set at 220 pounds these days. (I guess it is considered legitimate to forget about Valuev, LOL).

---

Aside from confirming you as the biggest geek on the board (well done by the way) this formula is irelevent as it's clearly not how The Ring makes its rankings.

Maybe the boxrec system works this way but the Ring is clearly based on the purely subjective opinions of its staff and voting panel.

Nonito Donaire for example can't possibly be even in the Top 10 according to this formula, seeing as he has never beaten a p4p ranked fighter (Darchinyan was only p4p after beating Mijares and Arce) and has only ever fought a single fighter who has ever held a world title.

What's even more crazy is that even since Vic has been taken out of the p4p rankings Donaire contiinues to climb further up, on the back of other fighters wins, i.e Hopkins beats Jones so he drops a place to Donaire who hasn't even fought since February.

There is no formula for such bullshit decisions, it's just incompetence or favouritism.

Wlad would be right up there according to any formula imo.