Is Nonito Donaire really the 6th best boxer in the world??

Just was looking at the Pound For Pound rankings on The Ring & saw that Donaire is #6 :o

The Ring Pound For Pound Ratings

I mean seriously, he's a good fighter, but he's only got one worthy name on there in Darchinyan & even he isn't that good.

The problem I have with this is however you look at it, there are plenty of guys who should be above him.

If it's on resume, Cotto, Dawson, Williams, Chris John, both Klitschkos & Arthur Abraham all trump him.

If it's on talent Hasegawa, Cotto, Dawson, Williams, Wlad Klitschko, Abraham, Kessler, Calderon, Caballero & Roman Gonzalez are all better.

Can you really have this high because people thought Vic was p4p at one point & he beat him?

I mean he's good, probably Top 20, but no way is he the 6th best fighter in the world.

OK gonna have to ban Bilbo from this thread :vd:

The more talented parts obviously more subjective, I definitely wouldn't put Caballero above him in that category and I think Caballero at 8 is an all time WTF moment. And this is coming from somebody who kind of championed Caballero for a while when he was unknown or underrated. He is NOT one of the ten best fighters in the world IMO, no way. I think Donaire could be but his resume doesn't match up yet.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OumaFan

OK gonna have to ban Bilbo from this thread :vd:

The more talented parts obviously more subjective, I definitely wouldn't put Caballero above him in that category and I think Caballero at 8 is an all time WTF moment. And this is coming from somebody who kind of championed Caballero for a while when he was unknown or underrated. He is NOT one of the ten best fighters in the world IMO, no way. I think Donaire could be but his resume doesn't match up yet.

---

Right now I'd say Caballero is the more talented fighter. Still I agree he's not Top 10 p4p.

I don't Donaire has the potential to be, but you can't have people in there off potential.

Anyway you can't ban Bilbo, think of his delight when he finally sees we agree on something, although no doubt he will take it too far & start ranting about midgets getting benefits in the p4p rankings :-X

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OumaFan

OK gonna have to ban Bilbo from this thread :vd:

The more talented parts obviously more subjective, I definitely wouldn't put Caballero above him in that category and I think Caballero at 8 is an all time WTF moment. And this is coming from somebody who kind of championed Caballero for a while when he was unknown or underrated. He is NOT one of the ten best fighters in the world IMO, no way. I think Donaire could be but his resume doesn't match up yet.

---

Right now I'd say Caballero is the more talented fighter. Still I agree he's not Top 10 p4p.

I don't Donaire has the potential to be, but you can't have people in there off potential.

Anyway you can't ban Bilbo, think of his delight when he finally sees we agree on something, although no doubt he will take it too far & start ranting about midgets getting benefits in the p4p rankings :-X

---

IMO neither Donaire, Juanma Lopez, Gamboa, or Caballero have done enough to be p4p, and with that said Caballero's done the most out of the bunch

Donaire is a really good fighter, and people need to stop caring about what someone has done and just analyze how good somebody is. I knew Floyd was better than Bernard Hopkins before he got the p4p title just because of how he fought and how good he was. That's why when there are two prospects we just know who is likely to be better than who, and thats what the p4p rankings are all about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

Donaire is a really good fighter, and people need to stop caring about what someone has done and just analyze how good somebody is. I knew Floyd was better than Bernard Hopkins before he got the p4p title just because of how he fought and how good he was. That's why when there are two prospects we just know who is likely to be better than who, and thats what the p4p rankings are all about.

---

That's an incredibly subjective way to categorize a fighter. I think skills should weight into P4P rankings, but more so I think a fighters record and consistency should be what matter most. Either way, P4P lists are useless in my opinion, far too subjective.

Taeth is somewhat right, imo. I think there is definitely an argument to be made that Nonito is one of the most 10 most talented fighters in the game. He's DEFINITELY more skilled then Celestino Caballero.

Buuuut if you asked me my list of the most talented fighters in boxing, guys like Joan Guzman would be on there when their accomplishments clearly don't merit that sort of recognition. There has to be a balance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

Donaire is a really good fighter, and people need to stop caring about what someone has done and just analyze how good somebody is. I knew Floyd was better than Bernard Hopkins before he got the p4p title just because of how he fought and how good he was. That's why when there are two prospects we just know who is likely to be better than who, and thats what the p4p rankings are all about.

---

when it comes to skills, Judah, Taylor, and hell even David Reid, were all great, had awesome potential, did either ever fully live up to it, no, meaning they weren't "p4p material" thats why you don't just base it on skill alone, you can have all the skill in the world, if you don't apply it against equal quality opponents you haven't proven shit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

Donaire is a really good fighter, and people need to stop caring about what someone has done and just analyze how good somebody is. I knew Floyd was better than Bernard Hopkins before he got the p4p title just because of how he fought and how good he was. That's why when there are two prospects we just know who is likely to be better than who, and thats what the p4p rankings are all about.

---

when it comes to skills, Judah, Taylor, and hell even David Reid, were all great, had awesome potential, did either ever fully live up to it, no, meaning they weren't "p4p material" thats why you don't just base it on skill alone, you can have all the skill in the world, if you don't apply it against equal quality opponents you haven't proven shit

---

but hypothetically you would have guess who would win if nonito fights arce and mijares. forget about montiel, he's a coward. and the answer is: nonito donaire right?
wrong for you, but thats' what hypothesis are, if it's close enough to reality. it's not "fantasy."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mad_takamura

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taeth

Donaire is a really good fighter, and people need to stop caring about what someone has done and just analyze how good somebody is. I knew Floyd was better than Bernard Hopkins before he got the p4p title just because of how he fought and how good he was. That's why when there are two prospects we just know who is likely to be better than who, and thats what the p4p rankings are all about.

---

when it comes to skills, Judah, Taylor, and hell even David Reid, were all great, had awesome potential, did either ever fully live up to it, no, meaning they weren't "p4p material" thats why you don't just base it on skill alone, you can have all the skill in the world, if you don't apply it against equal quality opponents you haven't proven shit

---

but hypothetically you would have guess who would win if nonito fights arce and mijares. forget about montiel, he's a coward. and the answer is: nonito donaire right?
wrong for you, but thats' what hypothesis are, if it's close enough to reality. it's not "fantasy."

---

um no, i'm not even sure Donaire beats Darchinyan again at 116, Montiel a coward? he's fought bigger names and tougher guys than Donaire, if anyone's a coward it's the 5'6" Donaire who hasn't fought anyone worth mention (aside from Concepcion) since his win over Darchinyan

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mad_takamura

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

when it comes to skills, Judah, Taylor, and hell even David Reid, were all great, had awesome potential, did either ever fully live up to it, no, meaning they weren't "p4p material" thats why you don't just base it on skill alone, you can have all the skill in the world, if you don't apply it against equal quality opponents you haven't proven shit

---

but hypothetically you would have guess who would win if nonito fights arce and mijares. forget about montiel, he's a coward. and the answer is: nonito donaire right?
wrong for you, but thats' what hypothesis are, if it's close enough to reality. it's not "fantasy."

---

um no, i'm not even sure Donaire beats Darchinyan again at 116, Montiel a coward? he's fought bigger names and tougher guys than Donaire, if anyone's a coward it's the 5'6" Donaire who hasn't fought anyone worth mention (aside from Concepcion) since his win over Darchinyan

---

you're out of your mind. if nonito was a coward "then why the hell he called this fighters out on air?" does a coward do that?

cowards are those who run from challenges like what they did to nonito. now that's a fact.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mad_takamura

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mad_takamura

but hypothetically you would have guess who would win if nonito fights arce and mijares. forget about montiel, he's a coward. and the answer is: nonito donaire right?
wrong for you, but thats' what hypothesis are, if it's close enough to reality. it's not "fantasy."

---

um no, i'm not even sure Donaire beats Darchinyan again at 116, Montiel a coward? he's fought bigger names and tougher guys than Donaire, if anyone's a coward it's the 5'6" Donaire who hasn't fought anyone worth mention (aside from Concepcion) since his win over Darchinyan

---

you're out of your mind. if nonito was a coward "then why the hell he called this fighters out on air?" does a coward do that?

cowards are those who run from challenges like what they did to nonito. now that's a fact.

---

umm yea they would, David Haye called out both Klitschkos and ran like a bitch for his dear life, Amir Khan called out everyone at 140 and is now scheduled to fight Salita, Mayweather said he would have dropped the Marquez fight, that he would pay Marquez to step down to fight Pacquiao, did that happen? no, nice try though, next

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mad_takamura

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

um no, i'm not even sure Donaire beats Darchinyan again at 116, Montiel a coward? he's fought bigger names and tougher guys than Donaire, if anyone's a coward it's the 5'6" Donaire who hasn't fought anyone worth mention (aside from Concepcion) since his win over Darchinyan

---

you're out of your mind. if nonito was a coward "then why the hell he called this fighters out on air?" does a coward do that?

cowards are those who run from challenges like what they did to nonito. now that's a fact.

---

umm yea they would, David Haye called out both Klitschkos and ran like a bitch for his dear life, Amir Khan called out everyone at 140 and is now scheduled to fight Salita, Mayweather said he would have dropped the Marquez fight, that he would pay Marquez to step down to fight Pacquiao, did that happen? no, nice try though, next

---

i applaud you. are you born with gamma rays?
it's easy to say a fighter avoided that, avoided who, but beyond that there's a lot of reasons. like running away especially after being challenged.now that's shameful.
anyway i know our arguments will definitely get redundant. all i would say is wait for those fights to happen, it will definitely come. if those fights will happen who do you think will be in a losing end? me or you? coz now donaire's going to be handled by top rank. those fights will come by popular demand. it's the rule of money.

and hypothetically imo donaire will prove he deserve the p4p #6 spot when he beats those fighters he challenged.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mad_takamura

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mad_takamura

you're out of your mind. if nonito was a coward "then why the hell he called this fighters out on air?" does a coward do that?

cowards are those who run from challenges like what they did to nonito. now that's a fact.

---

umm yea they would, David Haye called out both Klitschkos and ran like a bitch for his dear life, Amir Khan called out everyone at 140 and is now scheduled to fight Salita, Mayweather said he would have dropped the Marquez fight, that he would pay Marquez to step down to fight Pacquiao, did that happen? no, nice try though, next

---

i applaud you. are you born with gamma rays?
it's easy to say a fighter avoided that, avoided who, but beyond that there's a lot of reasons. like running away especially after being challenged.now that's shameful.
anyway i know our arguments will definitely get redundant. all i would say is wait for those fights to happen, it will definitely come. if those fights will happen who do you think will be in a losing end? me or you? coz now donaire's going to be handled by top rank. those fights will come by popular demand. it's the rule of money.

---

did your dad tell you that as well? well my dad works in a looney bin and the schizophrenics told him that Donaire is gonna be taking on Hulk Hogan and Bugs Bunny in a triple threat hopscotch match.... :rolleyes:

Ah FINALLY somebody else agrees with on this!. Nonito has done NOTHING to merit p4p status, he's beaten a guy in Darchinyan who is probably on the level of a Humberto Soto, a guy that Juan Guzman beat with ease.

Comparing the rest of Guzman's career to Donaires there is no comparison, Donaire has fought NOBODY!!! He almost got beat last time out by a 13-3-1 club fighter.

He's not even top 20 p4p, and will fall faster than you can say 'Mijares' when he actually fights somebody half decent.

As Johnny Perez has now beaten the man who beat the man who the man beat surely he should be p4p top 5 now right?

It's fucking ludicrous and I will tell you why this happens. It's positive discrimination in which the Ring Magazine openly gives benefits to the midgets in their p4p rankings.......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Ah FINALLY somebody else agrees with on this!. Nonito has done NOTHING to merit p4p status, he's beaten a guy in Darchinyan who is probably on the level of a Humberto Soto, a guy that Juan Guzman beat with ease.

Comparing the rest of Guzman's career to Donaires there is no comparison, Donaire has fought NOBODY!!! He almost got beat last time out by a 13-3-1 club fighter.

He's not even top 20 p4p, and will fall faster than you can say 'Mijares' when he actually fights somebody half decent.

As Johnny Perez has now beaten the man who beat the man who the man beat surely he should be p4p top 5 now right?

It's fucking ludicrous and I will tell you why this happens. It's positive discrimination in which the Ring Magazine openly gives benefits to the midgets in their p4p rankings.......

---

Darchinyan is nowhere near as good as Soto imo, Soto has just had a tougher road to the top & Guzman was a bad style matchup.

I disagree with your last bit (c'mon Bilbo you know I have to), but you're right Donaire has done little to justify his placement on the list & if we are doing it purely off talent as Taeth suggests, I gave a list of fighters at least some of whom are more talented. Are we really saying that only Mayweather, Pacquiao, Mosley, Hopkins & Marquez are better fighters?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Just was looking at the Pound For Pound rankings on The Ring & saw that Donaire is #6 :o

The Ring Pound For Pound Ratings

I mean seriously, he's a good fighter, but he's only got one worthy name on there in Darchinyan & even he isn't that good.

The problem I have with this is however you look at it, there are plenty of guys who should be above him.

If it's on resume, Cotto, Dawson, Williams, Chris John, both Klitschkos & Arthur Abraham all trump him.

If it's on talent Hasegawa, Cotto, Dawson, Williams, Wlad Klitschko, Abraham, Kessler, Calderon, Caballero & Roman Gonzalez are all better.

Can you really have this high because people thought Vic was p4p at one point & he beat him?

I mean he's good, probably Top 20, but no way is he the 6th best fighter in the world.

---

No, and Paul Williams shouldn't be in the top ten either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hfahrenheit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Just was looking at the Pound For Pound rankings on The Ring & saw that Donaire is #6 :o

The Ring Pound For Pound Ratings

I mean seriously, he's a good fighter, but he's only got one worthy name on there in Darchinyan & even he isn't that good.

The problem I have with this is however you look at it, there are plenty of guys who should be above him.

If it's on resume, Cotto, Dawson, Williams, Chris John, both Klitschkos & Arthur Abraham all trump him.

If it's on talent Hasegawa, Cotto, Dawson, Williams, Wlad Klitschko, Abraham, Kessler, Calderon, Caballero & Roman Gonzalez are all better.

Can you really have this high because people thought Vic was p4p at one point & he beat him?

I mean he's good, probably Top 20, but no way is he the 6th best fighter in the world.

---

No, and Paul Williams shouldn't be in the top ten either.

---

How is Williams not p4p 10?

He's a two weight, three time world champ and has wins over two former p4p top 10 guys in Margarito and Winky (actually Winky was top 5 not too long ago).

How many fighters have done more than him? Dawson should be top 10 too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hfahrenheit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JazMerkin

Just was looking at the Pound For Pound rankings on The Ring & saw that Donaire is #6 :o

The Ring Pound For Pound Ratings

I mean seriously, he's a good fighter, but he's only got one worthy name on there in Darchinyan & even he isn't that good.

The problem I have with this is however you look at it, there are plenty of guys who should be above him.

If it's on resume, Cotto, Dawson, Williams, Chris John, both Klitschkos & Arthur Abraham all trump him.

If it's on talent Hasegawa, Cotto, Dawson, Williams, Wlad Klitschko, Abraham, Kessler, Calderon, Caballero & Roman Gonzalez are all better.

Can you really have this high because people thought Vic was p4p at one point & he beat him?

I mean he's good, probably Top 20, but no way is he the 6th best fighter in the world.

---

No, and Paul Williams shouldn't be in the top ten either.

---

How is Williams not p4p 10?

He's a two weight, three time world champ and has wins over two former p4p top 10 guys in Margarito and Winky (actually Winky was top 5 not too long ago).

How many fighters have done more than him? Dawson should be top 10 too.

---

Yep, Winky sure was at the top of the boxing World when he fought Williams...

And Margarito, that fight happened two and half years ago... why shouldn't that be include in a current p4p ranking, it's a perfect barometer for how a fighter's doing CURRENTLY.

And Freddie Roach is right too--Amir Khan is the 10 best fighter in the World.

No sense in arguing any of that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hfahrenheit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hfahrenheit

No, and Paul Williams shouldn't be in the top ten either.

---

How is Williams not p4p 10?

He's a two weight, three time world champ and has wins over two former p4p top 10 guys in Margarito and Winky (actually Winky was top 5 not too long ago).

How many fighters have done more than him? Dawson should be top 10 too.

---

Yep, Winky sure was at the top of the boxing World when he fought Williams...

And Margarito, that fight happened two and half years ago... why shouldn't that be include in a current p4p ranking, it's a perfect barometer for how a fighter's doing CURRENTLY.

And Freddie Roach is right too--Amir Khan is the 10 best fighter in the World.

No sense in arguing any of that.

---

in Williams' defense he was set to fight Pavlik, but Kelly pussied out, and well now he's fighting Martinez which is still a top opponent and a tough fight, it's a bigger risk than anything Donaire has taken

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hfahrenheit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

How is Williams not p4p 10?

He's a two weight, three time world champ and has wins over two former p4p top 10 guys in Margarito and Winky (actually Winky was top 5 not too long ago).

How many fighters have done more than him? Dawson should be top 10 too.

---

Yep, Winky sure was at the top of the boxing World when he fought Williams...

And Margarito, that fight happened two and half years ago... why shouldn't that be include in a current p4p ranking, it's a perfect barometer for how a fighter's doing CURRENTLY.

And Freddie Roach is right too--Amir Khan is the 10th best fighter in the World.

No sense in arguing any of that.

---

in Williams' defense he was set to fight Pavlik, but Kelly pussied out, and well now he's fighting Martinez which is still a top opponent and a tough fight, it's a bigger risk than anything Donaire has taken

---

Just for clarity, I happen to think Williams is a good boxer.

BUT, just because people are ducking you, doesn't mean you deserve a p4p ranking. You still have to go win those fights--despite any circumstance, you cannot be awarded status biased on hyperbole or conjecture.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hfahrenheit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hfahrenheit

Yep, Winky sure was at the top of the boxing World when he fought Williams...

And Margarito, that fight happened two and half years ago... why shouldn't that be include in a current p4p ranking, it's a perfect barometer for how a fighter's doing CURRENTLY.

And Freddie Roach is right too--Amir Khan is the 10th best fighter in the World.

No sense in arguing any of that.

---

in Williams' defense he was set to fight Pavlik, but Kelly pussied out, and well now he's fighting Martinez which is still a top opponent and a tough fight, it's a bigger risk than anything Donaire has taken

---

Just for clarity, I happen to think Williams is a good boxer.

BUT, just because people are ducking you, doesn't mean you deserve a p4p ranking. You still have to go win those fights--despite any circumstance, you cannot be awarded status biased on hyperbole or conjecture.

---

oh i agree, i'm just saying that Williams is at least making more of an effort than Donaire to go and get the big names, or at least the dangerous fights that make you p4p one of the best in the world, Williams going after Pavlik and now Martinez proves that he's at least making the effort, but i agree that he could easily be replaced on a current p4p list, but you can at least make a case for him being on the list, something you can't really do for Donaire

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hfahrenheit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hfahrenheit

No, and Paul Williams shouldn't be in the top ten either.

---

How is Williams not p4p 10?

He's a two weight, three time world champ and has wins over two former p4p top 10 guys in Margarito and Winky (actually Winky was top 5 not too long ago).

How many fighters have done more than him? Dawson should be top 10 too.

---

Yep, Winky sure was at the top of the boxing World when he fought Williams...

And Margarito, that fight happened two and half years ago... why shouldn't that be include in a current p4p ranking, it's a perfect barometer for how a fighter's doing CURRENTLY.

And Freddie Roach is right too--Amir Khan is the 10 best fighter in the World.

No sense in arguing any of that.

---

Hmm ok then so let's use YOUR logic to assess the rest of the p4p guys.

How many fights has Floyd won in the past 2 years? How many fighters has he fought in his own weight class in that time?

What about B Hop, I think he's 1-1 in that time?

Cotto? He's gone 2-1 with many thinking he should be 1-2.

I guess JM Marquez should be dropped from the list altogether as his last fight he lost every single round right?

Williams is easily one of the most significant fighters in boxing today, a menace from 147-160. He's been trying to get the big fights, Pavlik pulled out now he's going after Martinez, this guy brings the fans what they want and is actually trying to unify divisions.

Compare that with Floyd, two years off, and only fights guys two weight classes below him.

B Hop, one fight ever couple years, no interest in unifying any divisions, just wants handpicked fights for money.

Cotto, hasn't won a significant fight in a couple years.

Caballero, he's done more than Williams, really?

Donaire? Ok I'll give you him, his win over Darchinyan was immense, no doubting his pedigree.


By the way I'm not slating any of the fighters above, I think (Donaire aside) they all deserve p4p status, but Williams has proven himself repeatedly and absolutely deserves to be there.

Let me ask you, how many other current fighters are there who won weight classes in two weight divisions, then moved up to a third and beat one of the best in that division of the best decade?

Of those fighters how many arn't p4p?

Doniare certainly has the skill to belong where he is ranked but I understand the point of the thread as in the aspect on what has he really done?

Taeth put across the most valid point and that is judging by skill possesed by a fighter and skill wise Doniare is a qualified top 10 P4P canidate but again so are so many other guys.
\
When it comes to who guys fight today it is so complicated to judge it by resume alone because everyone on top seems to fight so in-often and they seem to have soo many other issues with promoters etc.

Thats why the P4P list is more or less a myth

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

---

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

---

or it could be due to the fact that he hasn't done jack shit since beating Humberto Soto in 2007, who you fight defines how good you are, boxing isn't just skill, it's mental toughness as well, who's to say Guzman won't fold against elite opposition, he already bailed out of his biggest fight against Campbell, same thing can be said for Donaire, who (although early in his career) has already been beaten

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

---

or it could be due to the fact that he hasn't done jack shit since beating Humberto Soto in 2007, who you fight defines how good you are, boxing isn't just skill, it's mental toughness as well, who's to say Guzman won't fold against elite opposition, he already bailed out of his biggest fight against Campbell, same thing can be said for Donaire, who (although early in his career) has already been beaten

---

Exactly, skill doesnt automatically mean a fighter will win fights. It's just one part of a boxers makeup. To award fighters with p4p status purely because they possess skill is as flawed as saying Mike Tyson is the greatest ever because he knocked out B level fighters better than anyone else in history.

A fan like Taeth would likely look down his nose at somebody who judged a fighter soley by punching power and point out there are other attributes.

Well, its the same with skill.........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

---

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

---

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

---

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

---

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

---

difference is that Guzman has never looked like he was gonna lose, where Froch was getting schooled for the first 9 rounds against Taylor, and flat out got a home town decision against Dirrell, another fight were he was horribly outboxed, same way you had Haye beating Valuev you should have had Dirrell beating Froch, it was the same fight only difference was in weight class

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Taeth is right.

The emphasis should be on skill not records. Some fighters never even get the chance to fight a "star" fighter (beat a "star" you fly into the P4P without fail) simply because they are avoidable (don't make money sense).

Weight-classes fluctuate constantly. One minute a particular division is dynamite the next it's average.

Guzman is the best current example. There's no way half the current top ten would even live with him. But he can't be ranked because he doesn't have a "great" or current "star" name on his resume.

---

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

---

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

---

Well actually it would be you guys who might llabel Dirrell a possible 'star' not me. I go on acomplishments and Dirrell hasn't acomplished a whole lot so that win doesn't catapualt Froch into the p4p for me.

But I generally agree with that premise though. Froch has wins over Taylor, Pascal (now a lightheavyweight champ) and Dirrell. Furthermore he's competing in the Super Six and is committed to fighting the best. He's won all his fights and if he beats Kessler then absolutely he deserves consideration for p4p status whether I think there are other fighters who could beat him or not.

Now back to your 'mythical' poor fighter in a weak division who gets overlooked hypothesis?

How many of these fighters actually exist? Can you name us some?

The fighters who operate in weak divisions, take no risks and choose to stay in their safe waters rather than move up and try and make a name, why do they deserve p4p status exactly?

Did Chris John really deserve to be hailed as a great following his 'win' over Marquez when he followed it up with nothing, and refused to leave Indonesia? Now he's finally gone stateside and struggled to barely get past Rocky Jurez, I'd say the lack of hype surrounding him was entirely justified?

What about Calderon? A very talented guy in the tiniest division, he finally earned his respect, and a top 10 p4p spot with the Ring by MOVING UP, taking a risk and beating the champ.

That Guzman is not in the top 10 p4p is entirely his own doing. He has a history of pulling out of the big fights and should in no way be rewarded with a p4p spot for costing Nate Campbell half a million dollars by refusing to fight him with less than 24 hours notice. I think Guzman is a great fighter but seriously fuck him, Carl Froch deserves to be places ahead of him, not because of his skills, but because he actually fights his fights, takes on the best and gets the wins.

Your hypothetical defence for mythical hard done by fighters is just a straw man argument.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

---

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

---

Well actually it would you guys who might llabel Dirrell a possible 'star' not me. I go on acomplishments and Dirrell hasn't acomplished a whole lot so that win doesn't catapualt Froch into the p4p for me.

But I generally agree with that premise though. Froch has wins over Taylor, Pascal (now a lightheavyweight champ) and Dirrell. Furthermore he's competing in the Super Six and is committed to fighting the best. He's won all his fights and if he beats Kessler then absolutely he deserves consideration for p4p status whether I think there are other fighters who could beat him or not.

Now back to your 'mythical' poor fighter in a weak division who gets overlooked hypothesis?

How many of these fighters actually exist? Can you name us some?

The fighters who operate in weak divisions, take no risks and choose to say in their safe waters rather than move up and try and make a name, why do they deserve p4p status exactly?

Did Chris John really deserve to be hailed as a great following his 'win' over Marquez when he followed it up with nothing, and refused to leave Indonesia? Now he's finally gone stateside and struggled to barely get past Rocky Jurez, I'd say the lack of hype surrounding him was entirely justified?

What about Calderon? A very talented guy in the tiniest division, he finally earned his respect, and a top 10 p4p spot with the Ring by MOVING UP, taking a risk and beating the champ.

That Guzman is not in the top 10 p4p is entirely his own doing. He has a history of pulling out of the big fights and should in no way be rewarded with a p4p spot for costing Nate Campbell half a million dollars by refusing to fight him with less than 24 hours notice. I think Guzman is a great fighter but seriously fuck him, Carl Froch deserves to be places ahead of him, not because of his skills, but because he actually fights his fights, takes on the best and gets the wins.

Your hypothetical defence for mythical hard done by fighters is just a straw man argument.

---

couldn't get much weaker than 106 and Calderon managed to get on most people's p4p lists when he was dominating the division, so Fensters theory can go out the window

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Taeth is dead wrong imo. P4P should be based on acomplishment not personal preference and subjective analysis.

Guzman I believe is a top 10 fighter for sure, does he deserve to be p4p though? I don't think so, he hasn't beaten a marquee fighter yet, and he's had chances to put always finds a way to pull out of the fight.

Plus, and this is important, skills are only ONE part of a fighter assessment. Many better boxers have lost to 'inferior' fighters by being outworked, beaten up, outhustled, knocked out etc.

Just by being skilled doesn't mean you will win all your fights.

Christian Mijares anybody?

---

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

---

difference is that Guzman has never looked like he was gonna lose, where Froch was getting schooled for the first 9 rounds against Taylor, and flat out got a home town decision against Dirrell, another fight were he was horribly outboxed, same way you had Haye beating Valuev you should have had Dirrell beating Froch, it was the same fight only difference was in weight class

---

Right.. but Froch has a better record than Guzman, right? He has beat a "star." He is unbeaten.

So judging P4P by resumes Froch would beat Guzman?

What idiot what back Froch to beat Guzman in a P4P fight? ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

---

Well actually it would you guys who might llabel Dirrell a possible 'star' not me. I go on acomplishments and Dirrell hasn't acomplished a whole lot so that win doesn't catapualt Froch into the p4p for me.

But I generally agree with that premise though. Froch has wins over Taylor, Pascal (now a lightheavyweight champ) and Dirrell. Furthermore he's competing in the Super Six and is committed to fighting the best. He's won all his fights and if he beats Kessler then absolutely he deserves consideration for p4p status whether I think there are other fighters who could beat him or not.

Now back to your 'mythical' poor fighter in a weak division who gets overlooked hypothesis?

How many of these fighters actually exist? Can you name us some?

The fighters who operate in weak divisions, take no risks and choose to say in their safe waters rather than move up and try and make a name, why do they deserve p4p status exactly?

Did Chris John really deserve to be hailed as a great following his 'win' over Marquez when he followed it up with nothing, and refused to leave Indonesia? Now he's finally gone stateside and struggled to barely get past Rocky Jurez, I'd say the lack of hype surrounding him was entirely justified?

What about Calderon? A very talented guy in the tiniest division, he finally earned his respect, and a top 10 p4p spot with the Ring by MOVING UP, taking a risk and beating the champ.

That Guzman is not in the top 10 p4p is entirely his own doing. He has a history of pulling out of the big fights and should in no way be rewarded with a p4p spot for costing Nate Campbell half a million dollars by refusing to fight him with less than 24 hours notice. I think Guzman is a great fighter but seriously fuck him, Carl Froch deserves to be places ahead of him, not because of his skills, but because he actually fights his fights, takes on the best and gets the wins.

Your hypothetical defence for mythical hard done by fighters is just a straw man argument.

---

couldn't get much weaker than 106 and Calderon managed to get on most people's p4p lists when he was dominating the division, so Fensters theory can go out the window

---

Exactly, argument rejected, case closed :smash: :beerchug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

So a guy with obvious skill/talent that operates in a weaker division, or can not get the top names in his division, gets overlooked P4P by a tough fighter in a strong divison.

Carl Froch should have more claims of being P4P than Guzman because he beat a "star" in Taylor, and backed it up with a win over a possible "star" in Dirrell?

---

difference is that Guzman has never looked like he was gonna lose, where Froch was getting schooled for the first 9 rounds against Taylor, and flat out got a home town decision against Dirrell, another fight were he was horribly outboxed, same way you had Haye beating Valuev you should have had Dirrell beating Froch, it was the same fight only difference was in weight class

---

Right.. but Froch has a better record than Guzman, right? He has beat a "star." He is unbeaten.

So judging P4P by resumes Froch would beat Guzman?

What idiot what back Froch to beat Guzman in a P4P fight? ;)

---

None of what your saying is relavent. Why not let's just give Guzman a world title belt then as he'd likely win it anyway?

Fighters have to EARN their p4p spot not just get it handed to them because you 'think' they would beat the guy who holds the title.

Right now Froch, whether you like him or not is the undefeated super middlweight world champ, with wins over Taylor, Pascal and Dirrell.

Guzman is currently beltless and in a mythical p4p matchup between the two would be going in as the challenger with Froch being the champ. Yes he might start betting favourite, but he doesn't win the belt, or the place in the rankings occupied by Froch until he BEATS him.

That's how sporting competition works my friend, athletes judged on their acomplishments not their 'potential'.

if that was the case Darren Sutherlan RIP would be the Olympic Gold Medallist and James De Gale would have gone home in the semi finals ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales

difference is that Guzman has never looked like he was gonna lose, where Froch was getting schooled for the first 9 rounds against Taylor, and flat out got a home town decision against Dirrell, another fight were he was horribly outboxed, same way you had Haye beating Valuev you should have had Dirrell beating Froch, it was the same fight only difference was in weight class

---

Right.. but Froch has a better record than Guzman, right? He has beat a "star." He is unbeaten.

So judging P4P by resumes Froch would beat Guzman?

What idiot what back Froch to beat Guzman in a P4P fight? ;)

---

None of what your saying is relavent. Why not let's just give Guzman a world title belt then as he'd likely win it anyway?

Fighters have to EARN their p4p spot not just get it handed to them because you 'think' they would beat the guy who holds the title.

Right now Froch, whether you like him or not is the undefeated super middlweight world champ, with wins over Taylor, Pascal and Dirrell.

Guzman is currently beltless and in a mythical p4p matchup between the two would be going in as the challenger with Froch being the champ. Yes he might start betting favourite, but he doesn't win the belt, or the place in the rankings occupied by Froch until he BEATS him.

That's how sporting competition works my friend, athletes judged on their acomplishments not their 'potential'.

if that was the case Darren Sutherlan RIP would be the Olympic Gold Medallist and James De Gale would have gone home in the semi finals ;)

---

P4P is about mythical match-ups with the size and weight leveled. That's the point of it. It is fantasy. You can't be proved right or wrong UNLESS the fighters actually fight.

If Wlad/Vitali took on Mayweather or Pac they'd kill them. The fight could not even happen, right?

But P4P (if they were the same size) Floyd or Pac would kill them, right?

That's why the emphasis should be on skill. Would you seriously back Froch against Guzman? Come on now.. ;D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Right.. but Froch has a better record than Guzman, right? He has beat a "star." He is unbeaten.

So judging P4P by resumes Froch would beat Guzman?

What idiot what back Froch to beat Guzman in a P4P fight? ;)

---

None of what your saying is relavent. Why not let's just give Guzman a world title belt then as he'd likely win it anyway?

Fighters have to EARN their p4p spot not just get it handed to them because you 'think' they would beat the guy who holds the title.

Right now Froch, whether you like him or not is the undefeated super middlweight world champ, with wins over Taylor, Pascal and Dirrell.

Guzman is currently beltless and in a mythical p4p matchup between the two would be going in as the challenger with Froch being the champ. Yes he might start betting favourite, but he doesn't win the belt, or the place in the rankings occupied by Froch until he BEATS him.

That's how sporting competition works my friend, athletes judged on their acomplishments not their 'potential'.

if that was the case Darren Sutherlan RIP would be the Olympic Gold Medallist and James De Gale would have gone home in the semi finals ;)

---

P4P is about mythical match-ups with the size and weight leveled. That's the point of it. It is fantasy. You can't be proved right or wrong UNLESS the fighters actually fight.

If Wlad/Vitali took on Mayweather or Pac they'd kill them. The fight could not even happen, right?

But P4P (if they were the same size) Floyd or Pac would kill them, right?

That's why the emphasis should be on skill. Would you seriously back Froch against Guzman? Come on now.. ;D

---

It's still a process based on strict selection criteria though.

As for Floyd/Manny being the same size as Wlad/Vitali, truthfully I don't know who would win. How could you possibly predict what would happen?

Is Floyd jumping up to 6 ft 7 here or is Vitali coming down to 5 ft 7?

Does Floyd keep the same speed at this mythical weight? If so does Vitali keep the same power and length of jab? See how this is going, it's impossible to compare really and therefore the emphasis is on acomplishments.

Heavyweights arn't traditionally included in p4p assesments anyway but if they were I guess Wlad and David Haye would both have to be considerd. As much as I hate the Hayemaker, he is the former undisputed cruiserweight king and now heavyweight champ of the world. On a p4p scale if heavyweights were included I'd probably have him at number 10 even though I think his opposition was garbage and I believe there are 10 other fighters at heavyweight who could starch him.

The fact is, he has achieved what he has acheived fair and square and should be rated accordingly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fenster

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bilbo

None of what your saying is relavent. Why not let's just give Guzman a world title belt then as he'd likely win it anyway?

Fighters have to EARN their p4p spot not just get it handed to them because you 'think' they would beat the guy who holds the title.

Right now Froch, whether you like him or not is the undefeated super middlweight world champ, with wins over Taylor, Pascal and Dirrell.

Guzman is currently beltless and in a mythical p4p matchup between the two would be going in as the challenger with Froch being the champ. Yes he might start betting favourite, but he doesn't win the belt, or the place in the rankings occupied by Froch until he BEATS him.

That's how sporting competition works my friend, athletes judged on their acomplishments not their 'potential'.

if that was the case Darren Sutherlan RIP would be the Olympic Gold Medallist and James De Gale would have gone home in the semi finals ;)

---

P4P is about mythical match-ups with the size and weight leveled. That's the point of it. It is fantasy. You can't be proved right or wrong UNLESS the fighters actually fight.

If Wlad/Vitali took on Mayweather or Pac they'd kill them. The fight could not even happen, right?

But P4P (if they were the same size) Floyd or Pac would kill them, right?

That's why the emphasis should be on skill. Would you seriously back Froch against Guzman? Come on now.. ;D

---

It's still a process based on strict selection criteria though.

As for Floyd/Manny being the same size as Wlad/Vitali, truthfully I don't know who would win. How could you possibly predict what would happen?

Is Floyd jumping up to 6 ft 7 here or is Vitali coming down to 5 ft 7?

Does Floyd keep the same speed at this mythical weight? If so does Vitali keep the same power and length of jab? See how this is going, it's impossible to compare really and therefore the emphasis is on acomplishments.

Heavyweights arn't traditionally included in p4p assesments anyway but if they were I guess Wlad and David Haye would both have to be considerd. As much as I hate the Hayemaker, he is the former undisputed cruiserweight king and now heavyweight champ of the world. On a p4p scale if heavyweights were included I'd probably have him at number 10 even though I think his opposition was garbage and I believe there are 10 other fighters at heavyweight who could starch him.

The fact is, he has achieved what he has acheived fair and square and should be rated accordingly.

---

;D, it's flavour of the month. Look at The Ring's list (the most "credible"), beat a "star" you dive into the rankings.

Heavyweights aren't traditionally included because the heavyweight champ is meant to RULE over all other fighters from every division. P4P is to give smaller fighters a shot at competing with the king of boxing.

You don't know who would win mythical fights between Floyd/Pac-Vitali/Wlad?

How many fights have you seen where Floyd/Pac had HUGE weight/height/reach advantages over their opponents? They beat guys their own size, they move up weights to beat guys naturally bigger than them, they don't have the luxury of entering almost EVERY fight with a huge size ADVANTAGE like the Klits. The Klits don't need to be ranked P4P because they are already the rulers.

P4P is complete nonsense. You're trying to make it make sense. It doesn't. ;)

I wouldn't have Donaire in my list but his win over Darchinyan is getting a little underrated by some, ELTerrible why would Paul Williams fighting Sergio Martinez at 160 be a bigger risk than Donaire fighting Darchinyan? Talk about a guy who hasn't had to beat any big names to become a name, the guy beat Alex Bunema, Alex Fucking Bunema! and all of a sudden he's a dangerman. LOL who hasn't beat Alex Bunema?

Bilbo I demand you become obsessed with Sergio Martinez. The guy's had a solid career but why has he all of a sudden become this badass on the back of a win over Bunema and an uninspired performance versus Cintron? Spam away.

I'm thinking of doing a P4P list, it will be 1/3 achievements, 1/3 perceived ability and 1/3 where they rank on my hate/love list. Wlad will be in the top 115. Somewhere.