p4p, what is your definition?

[p4pking]

For sure, Pacquiao was to and that's why they are/were so easy to label that way.

The trouble is that ability and achievements actually have nothing to do with each other, there is no common denominator between them. When you combine the two in ranking fighters it is inherently just speculation, then add the fact that men fight differently to suit their natural size/frame and it's left without merit. Is Wladimir Klitschko better than Juan Estrada, or Rigondeaux? It's a ridiculous thing to ask.

[TitoFan]

How else to compare fighters from different divisions? Just 'cause it's a difficult concept to grasp for some, it doesn't mean it has no merit. You take fighters from different weight categories, and you boil them down to a few common denominators. Dominance in their weight... quality of opponent... ring generalship... power... chin... heart... fan-friendly style... etc. And no, you can't just imagine a 220-pound Mayweather with all his speed and agility in order to compare him with Wlad or any other heavyweight. It doesn't work that way. A heavyweight will rarely, if ever, match a lightweight in hand speed. Physics. We'll always want to compare, so until someone comes up with a better concept than p4p, that's good enough for me.

[p4pking]

[Silkeyjoe]

Its pretty pointless really. Floyd has been most peoples P4P#1 for a long time. But has what he has done been any more impressive then either of the Klits who have beaten everyone in their divs while floyd hasnt really fought the best.

[Beanflicker]

Its pretty pointless really. Floyd has been most peoples P4P#1 for a long time. But has what he has done been any more impressive then either of the Klits who have beaten everyone in their divs while floyd hasnt really fought the best.

How about going 17 years without a loss? How about being a world champion since 1998 and fighting world class opposition ever since? Not impressive enough for you?

I don't understand why people say p4p is pointless. P4P is probably the most significant title you can have. It means you are considered the best fighter in the sport (or in the history of the sport, if you're talking about all time p4p). What could be more important (besides making a lot of money) than being considered the greatest in your sport by the boxing community?

There's nothing wrong with the concept. It's the bias and ignorance of those casting their p4p opinions that fucks with the concept.

It makes me shake my head to see guys on here claiming that some old timer who they've never seen fight is one of the greatest of all time. A guy like Benny Leonard, who lost a fuck load of fights in his prime and got KO'd half a dozen times.

[imp]

P4P is not real but i feel we need it.

I think if you ask what makes a floyd mayweather or anderson silva a p4p of their respected sports then you would get alot of varied positive answers.

Its not a real thing but its a great sign of respect to give soneone that tag who is so much better than everyone else.