Curious...How does everyone here think the P4P rankings work?

[DaxxKahn]

Just wondering on how people here think the P4P rankings work?...Or how they make their list......It seems that when reading the post of some people here they think just because a fighter beats another fighter or any fighter on the P4P list that they should either replace them or be put on the list...Some feel even higher......

Before I explain how I do mine or how it is actually complied by the experts (No BOXREC DOES NOT COUNT THEY ARE IDIOTS)....I think thereb is a lot pf confusion on how this works

[Kel]

This will be one messy thread

You need wins over some top P4P fighters to be in the top 10 IMO. Calzaghe (as much as I'm a fan of him) has only beaten one top 10 P4P fighter so why is he up there?

That's kind of my take on it. But people will do it in so many different ways.

[PRIDE OF BOSTON]

P4P rankings are compiled on level of opposition(relative to the compiler) ,records ... and also as stated above will pretty much always need a win over a current P4P fighter. This is paramount. Joe had trouble making many lists prior to this but was on many due to his record and longevity as champ.

[Kel]

P4P rankings are compiled on level of opposition(relative to the compiler) ,records ... and also as stated above will pretty much always need a win over a current P4P fighter. This is paramount. Joe had trouble making many lists prior to this but was on many due to his record and longevity as champ.

That's what I don't agree with, an undefeated record means fuck all unless you have top guys on your resume, imagine if Valuev was made top ten because of his record (before he got beat that is) that would be nuts.

All the best fighters have losses because they fought the best there was. Marciano may be an exeption though.

[PRIDE OF BOSTON]

P4P rankings are compiled on level of opposition(relative to the compiler) ,records ... and also as stated above will pretty much always need a win over a current P4P fighter. This is paramount. Joe had trouble making many lists prior to this but was on many due to his record and longevity as champ.

That's what I don't agree with, an undefeated record means fuck all unless you have top guys on your resume, imagine if Valuev was made top ten because of his record (before he got beat that is) that would be nuts.

All the best fighters have losses because they fought the best there was. Marciano may be an exeption though.

That's exactly what I was attempting to say... It does mean fuck all but if you're gonna let Marciano(one of my all time favorite fighters...) go you have to let a slew of others go...

So had Calzaghe not beat Hopkins and that fight never tool place... and his record was still intact... would he have been on you P4P list?

Like Marciano fought aging champs and aging challengers and a lot of tomato cans... (course Louis had his "bum of the month club as well) But he is still seen as one of the best not even taking into account his retiring undefeated when some say he was in his prime...

[Kel]

P4P rankings are compiled on level of opposition(relative to the compiler) ,records ... and also as stated above will pretty much always need a win over a current P4P fighter. This is paramount. Joe had trouble making many lists prior to this but was on many due to his record and longevity as champ.

That's what I don't agree with, an undefeated record means fuck all unless you have top guys on your resume, imagine if Valuev was made top ten because of his record (before he got beat that is) that would be nuts.

All the best fighters have losses because they fought the best there was. Marciano may be an exeption though.

That's exactly what I was attempting to say... It does mean fuck all but if you're gonna let Marciano(one of my all time favorite fighters...) go you have to let a slew of others go...

So had Calzaghe not beat Hopkins and that fight never tool place... and his record was still intact... would he have been on you P4P list?

Like Marciano fought aging champs and aging challengers and a lot of tomato cans... (course Louis had his "bum of the month club as well) But he is still seen as one of the best not even taking into account his retiring undefeated when some say he was in his prime...

Without the Hopkins win I'd say no, Lacy and Kessler puts him easily in the top 20 maybe, but guys at smaller weights especially have fought better opposition more often than Joe. I dunno, P4P ratings really do fuck my head in.

[Spicoli]

Honestly,I try to avoid them.So much subjectiveness and broad interpretation.The point about beating one fighter amongst the top ten and consequently being put into the p4p is spot on.I just can not buy that as a sole reason to make the rankings.I think it has to be a current evaluation on recent showings....fight by fight taking into consideration Caliber of competition,performance,and ....this is where it gets sujective....a broad assessment of skillset and how they compare.I'm already dizzy.

[Kev]

This will be one messy thread

You need wins over some top P4P fighters to be in the top 10 IMO. Calzaghe (as much as I'm a fan of him) has only beaten one top 10 P4P fighter so why is he up there?

That's kind of my take on it. But people will do it in so many different ways.

Your criteria makes no sense Kel. If a fighter needs to beat more than one p4p top 10 to get into the top 10 then nobody would make it.

Look at the current top 10, how many have beaten more than one top 10 p4p guy?

Margarito beat Cotto who was top 10 p4p but never got a win over a top 10 p4p fighter. Pavlik has only beaten Taylor who was in the p4p thanks to wins over B Hop and nobody else.

Ivan Calderon has never beaten a p4p fighter, neither has Paul Williams, unless you count Margarito retrospectively. He wasn't p4p when he fought Williams.

Mijares has never beaten a p4p fighter either.

In fact the ONLY fighters who have beaten more than one top 10 p4p are Pacquaio, Hopkins and Vazquez for sure.

JM Marquez beat Barrera but to my knowledge he hasn't beaten any other Ring top 10 p4p stars. I'm not R Marquez either? They have beaten probably loads of top 10 stars in their weight class but the top 10 p4p is an elite group and most divisions don't have any fighter in the top 10 p4p so according to your criteria if you are in those divisions you are fucked as you can never beat any top 10 p4p star to make your own claim for greatness.

The correct way to assess a fighter's worth is quality of opponents, dominating a division, fighting and beating the best in their respective divisions, being unbeaten, number of defenses, number of belts, number of weight classes and length of reign.

Under all of those criteria Joe Calzaghe excels, the longest reigning world champ out there, beat both the number 1 challengers at super middle, beat a genuine legend of the sport in B Hop, has the most title defenses of any current fighter, a double weight champ (in spirit at least if not on technicality) and completely unbeaten throughout.

His resume puts him deservedly at number 2 in the p4p rankings imo.

According to your scale, Margarito, Pavlik, Cotto, Mijares, Calderon and Hatton would all have to go as they havn't beaten more than one p4p star.

Actually according to your criteria I'm not sure we have enough active fighters who even qualify at all and we probably couldn't compile a top 10 at all.

[Mikkel_K]

The correct way to assess a fighter's worth is quality of opponents, dominating a division, fighting and beating the best in their respective divisions, being unbeaten, number of defenses, number of belts, number of weight classes and length of reign.

Great post, but I don't get why 'length of reign' is an independent variable to be reckoned with? Sergei Dzindiruk and Zsolt Erdei are currently the longest reigning champs at LMW and LHW respectively, but neither of them are half as interesting as other fighters in their divisions. In other words 'length of reign' is only worth mentioning when defined by 'quality of opponents', 'dominating a division' etc - as a factor itself it shouldnt matter [1].

Also I disagree that being unbeaten matters much on a P4P-list. Pac, Hopkins and Margarito all lost early in their career, but that doesnt take anything away from their current level or status. Juan Manuel Marquez losing to Pac does not make him unworthy of P4P-status either.

As for the rest of your post I completely agree, although I would add to your assesment, that the P4P-list for me is something more based on achievements than current level. In other words it does not necessarily reflect the 10 best fighters in the world, but the 10 fighters with the best (recent) career.

[1] This is not to say that it isnt a fine record, Calzaghe's 11 years surely are for example. It just has nothing to do with P4P.

[Fenster]

P4P rankings are basically a popularity/flavour of the month contest.

I believe far more emphasis should be put on TALENT/ABILITY rather than wins over "quality" opposition. Reason being - the strength in depth per division varies greatly, and is constantly changing.

Pavlik would currently make MOST peoples top 10 because of his standing in the middleweight divison and wins over Taylor. Joan (the disgrace) Guzman wouldn't make hardly anyones because he doesn't have a standout name on his record (Soto and Barrios are good wins). But who would honestly back Pavlik to beat Guzman in a mythical match-up with their size and weight EQUAL? I'd bet my life Guzman would SLAUGHTER him.

It's all nonsense.. but good fun

[brucelee]

P4P rankings are basically a popularity/flavour of the month contest.

I believe far more emphasis should be put on TALENT/ABILITY rather than wins over "quality" opposition. Reason being - the strength in depth per division varies greatly, and is constantly changing.

Pavlik would currently make MOST peoples top 10 because of his standing in the middleweight divison and wins over Taylor. Joan (the disgrace) Guzman wouldn't make hardly anyones because he doesn't have a standout name on his record (Soto and Barrios are good wins). But who would honestly back Pavlik to beat Guzman in a mythical match-up with their size and weight EQUAL? I'd bet my life Guzman would SLAUGHTER him.

It's all nonsense.. but good fun

You've put it all in the exact words I wanted to say. Reps when able.

[DaxxKahn]

I think I stated it wrong....I was trying to ask more or less...How do you determine a P4P list....

I see a lot of guys who believe that because one fighter beats a fighter on the P4P list they automatically belong on the list.....It is not so...They also seem to think because one fighter ranked 10 on the P4P list lets say beats another in same weight class who happens to be on the list but ranked 4...that they get the #4 spot....

Just wondering how they justify this

Sorry for the confusion on the original post

[PRIDE OF BOSTON]

I think I stated it wrong....I was trying to ask more or less...How do you determine a P4P list....

I see a lot of guys who believe that because one fighter beats a fighter on the P4P list they automatically belong on the list.....It is not so...They also seem to think because one fighter ranked 10 on the P4P list lets say beats another in same weight class who happens to be on the list but ranked 4...that they get the #4 spot....

Just wondering how they justify this

Sorry for the confusion on the original post

You know, I'll be honest... I don't know. I think it's normally fairly easy with the top three but after that it's hairy as hell...

I'd like to see what's said here though cuz I seriously don't know beyond what I've said.

Good Thread!

[Spicoli]

I think I stated it wrong....I was trying to ask more or less...How do you determine a P4P list....

I see a lot of guys who believe that because one fighter beats a fighter on the P4P list they automatically belong on the list.....It is not so...They also seem to think because one fighter ranked 10 on the P4P list lets say beats another in same weight class who happens to be on the list but ranked 4...that they get the #4 spot....

Just wondering how they justify this

Sorry for the confusion on the original post

Good stuff Daxx.There was a thread weeks ago about the upcoming Calzaghe/Jones face off.If Jones beats Calzaghe,what ever the circumstances....Should he make the P4P top ten.I don't think so.There is no reason to believe Jones Jr,an undeniable greatly skilled fighter and legit p4p ruler in his prime,is the p4p fighter he once was.Say,he.....or any other fighter, go's out and lands a brick on a p4p fighter and takes a win.Imo,that does not necessarily equate to current p4p skills and ranking.

[PRIDE OF BOSTON]

I think I stated it wrong....I was trying to ask more or less...How do you determine a P4P list....

I see a lot of guys who believe that because one fighter beats a fighter on the P4P list they automatically belong on the list.....It is not so...They also seem to think because one fighter ranked 10 on the P4P list lets say beats another in same weight class who happens to be on the list but ranked 4...that they get the #4 spot....

Just wondering how they justify this

Sorry for the confusion on the original post

Good stuff Daxx.There was a thread weeks ago about the upcoming Calzaghe/Jones face off.If Jones beats Calzaghe,what ever the circumstances....Should he make the P4P top ten.I don't think so.There is no reason to believe Jones Jr,an undeniable greatly skilled fighter and legit p4p ruler in his prime,is the p4p fighter he once was.Say,he.....or any other fighter, go's out and lands a brick on a p4p fighter and takes a win.Imo,that does not necessarily equate to current p4p skills and ranking.

See now that's where I have to disagree... Jones is clearly past it but should Jones eak this out and fights at a level I don't think he's capable of fighting at and OUT BOXES a P4P#4 sure I think he belongs somewhere on the list... Absolutely!