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

[ElTerribleMorales]

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