Quote Originally Posted by beenKOed View Post
Quote Originally Posted by p4pking View Post
Quote Originally Posted by beenKOed View Post
Why don't we divide the fighters weight by his or her earnings? Who ever has the best earnings for body weight can be the #1 p4p.
If some of you guys want to add a little extra for belts, that's cool. Haha
Chavez jr would be in the top 10, just saying.
I hear you, it's going to have to be a complex formula, if we want to get it right. Maybe you can talk IamInuit into helping us with that.

Thanks for the vote of confidence but in the present tense we'd have to do a complete refit lol. Besides I'm most likely the absolute dumbest person on the forum where math is concerned. Plus, there are a lot of people on this forum more wise then I on these matters. In a real way the phrase has become a product of its environment, a buzz word and you first have to remove it from that role.
Trouble is its part of the fabric. Look I don't use the phrase at all unless I find myself in the odd thread such as this. It's ubiquitous and I've accepted that but every once in awhile the elastic breaks and I feel the need to dismiss it as anything relevant other then the fact that its a favourite list. I also think its habitual and even those that agree with me use it because its easier in the world we live in. See there's that damn environment again. It's origins come from a time when there were only 8 divisions and hardship was the norm. A time when you did not lose your title on the scales because you forgot to cut your toenails. When Armstrong weighed 133 and still challenged Ross for his title along with countless other examples I wont bother to list. I'm afraid that history repeating itself may be the only answer.