Latest p4p rankings. Agree or disagree?

[TitoFan]

C'mon.... between you and me. You know Canelo has no business in the top 10 p4p list.



Take off your biased hat and put on your knowledgeable boxing hat.... that's right.
Now think about it.

Just trying to be helpful here.

A victory over Austin Trout. You know the guy who had his way with your Miguel Cotto means a lot more than wins over Matthew Macklin and Curtis Stevens combined. It's that simple. If you think otherwise than there really is no hope for you.

One meaningful victory, VD. ONE. There's a conga line of boxers out there with more than just the one meaningful victory who are a hell of a lot more deserving for a spot in the top ten p4p than Canelo.

Canelo is still on the way up, VD. But there's no shortcuts into the elite. That shit's got to be earned over time, and with a hell of a lot more than one meaningful opponent.

Golovkin ain't even got one yet. And you got him up there. You can't even follow your own stupid logic. I'm a big fan of Triple G. But lets be real here. Stevens and Macklin ain't big wins.

Yeah... you're right.
They're nowhere as big as a shot Shane Mosley and an undersized Josesito Lopez.

But hey it's my mistake.
Just goes to show you can't be civil to a proven moron.

[Violent Demise]

C'mon.... between you and me. You know Canelo has no business in the top 10 p4p list.



Take off your biased hat and put on your knowledgeable boxing hat.... that's right.
Now think about it.

Just trying to be helpful here.

A victory over Austin Trout. You know the guy who had his way with your Miguel Cotto means a lot more than wins over Matthew Macklin and Curtis Stevens combined. It's that simple. If you think otherwise than there really is no hope for you.

One meaningful victory, VD. ONE. There's a conga line of boxers out there with more than just the one meaningful victory who are a hell of a lot more deserving for a spot in the top ten p4p than Canelo.

Canelo is still on the way up, VD. But there's no shortcuts into the elite. That shit's got to be earned over time, and with a hell of a lot more than one meaningful opponent.

Golovkin ain't even got one yet. And you got him up there. You can't even follow your own stupid logic. I'm a big fan of Triple G. But lets be real here. Stevens and Macklin ain't big wins.

Yeah... you're right.
They're nowhere as big as a shot Shane Mosley and an undersized Josesito Lopez.

But hey it's my mistake.
Just goes to show you can't be civil to a proven moron.

I'm gonna make this question as idiot proof as possible for you. You have Golovkin over Alvarez on the list. Which of Golovkin wins is better than Alvarez win over Austin Trout? All you gotta do state a name. That's it. Just a name. Don't even try and a give a reason why you think it's better. You'll only embarrass yourself further with your nonsense. So just state a name. There's no way you can fuck this up. Just give a name

[powerpuncher]

does it really matter who has the best win out of them? isnt this just a list of who you think is better?

[Gandalf]

Outrageous talk. James Toney is clearly P4P number one again after Prizefighter and Manny Pac is still number 2 for me. I don't see how a single loss can erase the previous years of exceptionalism (Obama's word, not mine).

[Violent Demise]

does it really matter who has the best win out of them? isnt this just a list of who you think is better?

Lot of people are idiots. There opinion on who they think is better is useless. So yes it matters.

[TitoFan]

C'mon.... between you and me. You know Canelo has no business in the top 10 p4p list.



Take off your biased hat and put on your knowledgeable boxing hat.... that's right.
Now think about it.

Just trying to be helpful here.

A victory over Austin Trout. You know the guy who had his way with your Miguel Cotto means a lot more than wins over Matthew Macklin and Curtis Stevens combined. It's that simple. If you think otherwise than there really is no hope for you.

One meaningful victory, VD. ONE. There's a conga line of boxers out there with more than just the one meaningful victory who are a hell of a lot more deserving for a spot in the top ten p4p than Canelo.

Canelo is still on the way up, VD. But there's no shortcuts into the elite. That shit's got to be earned over time, and with a hell of a lot more than one meaningful opponent.

Golovkin ain't even got one yet. And you got him up there. You can't even follow your own stupid logic. I'm a big fan of Triple G. But lets be real here. Stevens and Macklin ain't big wins.

Yeah... you're right.
They're nowhere as big as a shot Shane Mosley and an undersized Josesito Lopez.

But hey it's my mistake.
Just goes to show you can't be civil to a proven moron.

I'm gonna make this question as idiot proof as possible for you. You have Golovkin over Alvarez on the list. Which of Golovkin wins is better than Alvarez win over Austin Trout? All you gotta do state a name. That's it. Just a name. Don't even try and a give a reason why you think it's better. You'll only embarrass yourself further with your nonsense. So just state a name. There's no way you can fuck this up. Just give a name

I'll give you 3 names. Three names of fighters who should easily rank ahead of Ginger in the p4p list. Matthysse, Donaire, and Mikey Garcia. Lucas and Nonito have lost... but each has a hell of a lot better resume than Ginger. I'll say it again, but my patience with your biased ignorance is wearing thin. One good fight does not a top 10 p4p fighter make. No matter how many times you may have serviced the young man.

Got it? Ginger's one good fight against a credible opponent does not warrant p4p consideration. To keep insisting that it does undermines your already ridiculously low credibility.

[Galaxy]

P4P is bullsh*t! I don't waste my time with P4P lists anymore

[TitoFan]

It's not the concept that's flawed. It's how it's put into practice.
Like many things in life, it's rife with politics.
And if someone like Jose "Sullied-man" has anything to do with it, it's even worse.

[Galaxy]

It's not the concept that's flawed. It's how it's put into practice.
Like many things in life, it's rife with politics.
And if someone like Jose "Sullied-man" has anything to do with it, it's even worse.

It is a flawed concept! There's no defined outline that should be followed. Some just if all were same weight who would win, others consider opposition, other consider longevity, then personal favourites come into play

I only concentrate on divisional ratings as they are more relevant to the sport

[Violent Demise]

C'mon.... between you and me. You know Canelo has no business in the top 10 p4p list.



Take off your biased hat and put on your knowledgeable boxing hat.... that's right.
Now think about it.

Just trying to be helpful here.

A victory over Austin Trout. You know the guy who had his way with your Miguel Cotto means a lot more than wins over Matthew Macklin and Curtis Stevens combined. It's that simple. If you think otherwise than there really is no hope for you.

One meaningful victory, VD. ONE. There's a conga line of boxers out there with more than just the one meaningful victory who are a hell of a lot more deserving for a spot in the top ten p4p than Canelo.

Canelo is still on the way up, VD. But there's no shortcuts into the elite. That shit's got to be earned over time, and with a hell of a lot more than one meaningful opponent.

Golovkin ain't even got one yet. And you got him up there. You can't even follow your own stupid logic. I'm a big fan of Triple G. But lets be real here. Stevens and Macklin ain't big wins.

Yeah... you're right.
They're nowhere as big as a shot Shane Mosley and an undersized Josesito Lopez.

But hey it's my mistake.
Just goes to show you can't be civil to a proven moron.

I'm gonna make this question as idiot proof as possible for you. You have Golovkin over Alvarez on the list. Which of Golovkin wins is better than Alvarez win over Austin Trout? All you gotta do state a name. That's it. Just a name. Don't even try and a give a reason why you think it's better. You'll only embarrass yourself further with your nonsense. So just state a name. There's no way you can fuck this up. Just give a name

I'll give you 3 names. Three names of fighters who should easily rank ahead of Ginger in the p4p list. Matthysse, Donaire, and Mikey Garcia. Lucas and Nonito have lost... but each has a hell of a lot better resume than Ginger. I'll say it again, but my patience with your biased ignorance is wearing thin. One good fight does not a top 10 p4p fighter make. No matter how many times you may have serviced the young man.

Got it? Ginger's one good fight against a credible opponent does not warrant p4p consideration. To keep insisting that it does undermines your already ridiculously low credibility.

I knew you would fuck it up. You really are a fucking idiot. And what's funny is you can't even follow your own stupidity. Think about it. You say Alvarez one win over a credible opponent isn't enough. But some how Golovkin 0 wins over credible opponents is enough. And you wonder why they laugh at you

[TitoFan]

C'mon.... between you and me. You know Canelo has no business in the top 10 p4p list.



Take off your biased hat and put on your knowledgeable boxing hat.... that's right.
Now think about it.

Just trying to be helpful here.

A victory over Austin Trout. You know the guy who had his way with your Miguel Cotto means a lot more than wins over Matthew Macklin and Curtis Stevens combined. It's that simple. If you think otherwise than there really is no hope for you.

One meaningful victory, VD. ONE. There's a conga line of boxers out there with more than just the one meaningful victory who are a hell of a lot more deserving for a spot in the top ten p4p than Canelo.

Canelo is still on the way up, VD. But there's no shortcuts into the elite. That shit's got to be earned over time, and with a hell of a lot more than one meaningful opponent.

Golovkin ain't even got one yet. And you got him up there. You can't even follow your own stupid logic. I'm a big fan of Triple G. But lets be real here. Stevens and Macklin ain't big wins.

Yeah... you're right.
They're nowhere as big as a shot Shane Mosley and an undersized Josesito Lopez.

But hey it's my mistake.
Just goes to show you can't be civil to a proven moron.

I'm gonna make this question as idiot proof as possible for you. You have Golovkin over Alvarez on the list. Which of Golovkin wins is better than Alvarez win over Austin Trout? All you gotta do state a name. That's it. Just a name. Don't even try and a give a reason why you think it's better. You'll only embarrass yourself further with your nonsense. So just state a name. There's no way you can fuck this up. Just give a name

I'll give you 3 names. Three names of fighters who should easily rank ahead of Ginger in the p4p list. Matthysse, Donaire, and Mikey Garcia. Lucas and Nonito have lost... but each has a hell of a lot better resume than Ginger. I'll say it again, but my patience with your biased ignorance is wearing thin. One good fight does not a top 10 p4p fighter make. No matter how many times you may have serviced the young man.

Got it? Ginger's one good fight against a credible opponent does not warrant p4p consideration. To keep insisting that it does undermines your already ridiculously low credibility.

I knew you would fuck it up. You really are a fucking idiot. And what's funny is you can't even follow your own stupidity. Think about it. You say Alvarez one win over a credible opponent isn't enough. But some how Golovkin 0 wins over credible opponents is enough. And you wonder why they laugh at you

You can't defend having Ginger in the top 10 p4p, so you resort to our infantile insults.
You're so pathetically predictable.

Go ahead... buy yourself some monogrammed kneepads for when you're deep-throating Ginger like you've done MargaCheato, the panty-wearing JCC Jr., and all the scumbags you so lustily defend.

[Violent Demise]

C'mon.... between you and me. You know Canelo has no business in the top 10 p4p list.



Take off your biased hat and put on your knowledgeable boxing hat.... that's right.
Now think about it.

Just trying to be helpful here.

A victory over Austin Trout. You know the guy who had his way with your Miguel Cotto means a lot more than wins over Matthew Macklin and Curtis Stevens combined. It's that simple. If you think otherwise than there really is no hope for you.

One meaningful victory, VD. ONE. There's a conga line of boxers out there with more than just the one meaningful victory who are a hell of a lot more deserving for a spot in the top ten p4p than Canelo.

Canelo is still on the way up, VD. But there's no shortcuts into the elite. That shit's got to be earned over time, and with a hell of a lot more than one meaningful opponent.

Golovkin ain't even got one yet. And you got him up there. You can't even follow your own stupid logic. I'm a big fan of Triple G. But lets be real here. Stevens and Macklin ain't big wins.

Yeah... you're right.
They're nowhere as big as a shot Shane Mosley and an undersized Josesito Lopez.

But hey it's my mistake.
Just goes to show you can't be civil to a proven moron.

I'm gonna make this question as idiot proof as possible for you. You have Golovkin over Alvarez on the list. Which of Golovkin wins is better than Alvarez win over Austin Trout? All you gotta do state a name. That's it. Just a name. Don't even try and a give a reason why you think it's better. You'll only embarrass yourself further with your nonsense. So just state a name. There's no way you can fuck this up. Just give a name

I'll give you 3 names. Three names of fighters who should easily rank ahead of Ginger in the p4p list. Matthysse, Donaire, and Mikey Garcia. Lucas and Nonito have lost... but each has a hell of a lot better resume than Ginger. I'll say it again, but my patience with your biased ignorance is wearing thin. One good fight does not a top 10 p4p fighter make. No matter how many times you may have serviced the young man.

Got it? Ginger's one good fight against a credible opponent does not warrant p4p consideration. To keep insisting that it does undermines your already ridiculously low credibility.

I knew you would fuck it up. You really are a fucking idiot. And what's funny is you can't even follow your own stupidity. Think about it. You say Alvarez one win over a credible opponent isn't enough. But some how Golovkin 0 wins over credible opponents is enough. And you wonder why they laugh at you

You can't defend having Ginger in the top 10 p4p, so you resort to our infantile insults.
You're so pathetically predictable.

Go ahead... buy yourself some monogrammed kneepads for when you're deep-throating Ginger like you've done MargaCheato, the panty-wearing JCC Jr., and all the scumbags you so lustily defend.

I'm just calling you out on your moronic nonsense. You say Alvarez shouldn't be consider cuz he has only one quality win. But some how Golovkin with no quality wins can be considered. You make this to fucking easy. Go ahead defend your stupidity. I dare you. But you won't. You think ignoring it will just make it go away. It don't work that. Stupidity should never be ignored. It needs to be pointed out and laughed at. Now you know why the forum is always laughing at you

[TitoFan]

C'mon.... between you and me. You know Canelo has no business in the top 10 p4p list.



Take off your biased hat and put on your knowledgeable boxing hat.... that's right.
Now think about it.

Just trying to be helpful here.

A victory over Austin Trout. You know the guy who had his way with your Miguel Cotto means a lot more than wins over Matthew Macklin and Curtis Stevens combined. It's that simple. If you think otherwise than there really is no hope for you.

One meaningful victory, VD. ONE. There's a conga line of boxers out there with more than just the one meaningful victory who are a hell of a lot more deserving for a spot in the top ten p4p than Canelo.

Canelo is still on the way up, VD. But there's no shortcuts into the elite. That shit's got to be earned over time, and with a hell of a lot more than one meaningful opponent.

Golovkin ain't even got one yet. And you got him up there. You can't even follow your own stupid logic. I'm a big fan of Triple G. But lets be real here. Stevens and Macklin ain't big wins.

Yeah... you're right.
They're nowhere as big as a shot Shane Mosley and an undersized Josesito Lopez.

But hey it's my mistake.
Just goes to show you can't be civil to a proven moron.

I'm gonna make this question as idiot proof as possible for you. You have Golovkin over Alvarez on the list. Which of Golovkin wins is better than Alvarez win over Austin Trout? All you gotta do state a name. That's it. Just a name. Don't even try and a give a reason why you think it's better. You'll only embarrass yourself further with your nonsense. So just state a name. There's no way you can fuck this up. Just give a name

I'll give you 3 names. Three names of fighters who should easily rank ahead of Ginger in the p4p list. Matthysse, Donaire, and Mikey Garcia. Lucas and Nonito have lost... but each has a hell of a lot better resume than Ginger. I'll say it again, but my patience with your biased ignorance is wearing thin. One good fight does not a top 10 p4p fighter make. No matter how many times you may have serviced the young man.

Got it? Ginger's one good fight against a credible opponent does not warrant p4p consideration. To keep insisting that it does undermines your already ridiculously low credibility.

I knew you would fuck it up. You really are a fucking idiot. And what's funny is you can't even follow your own stupidity. Think about it. You say Alvarez one win over a credible opponent isn't enough. But some how Golovkin 0 wins over credible opponents is enough. And you wonder why they laugh at you

You can't defend having Ginger in the top 10 p4p, so you resort to our infantile insults.
You're so pathetically predictable.

Go ahead... buy yourself some monogrammed kneepads for when you're deep-throating Ginger like you've done MargaCheato, the panty-wearing JCC Jr., and all the scumbags you so lustily defend.

I'm just calling you out on your moronic nonsense. You say Alvarez shouldn't be consider cuz he has only one quality win. But some how Golovkin with no quality wins can be considered. You make this to fucking easy. Go ahead defend your stupidity. I dare you. But you won't. You think ignoring it will just make it go away. It don't work that. Stupidity should never be ignored. It needs to be pointed out and laughed at. Now you know why the forum is always laughing at you

Funny how the forum clown feels he can "speak" for the forum.
Grow some balls and speak for yourself.

I'll dumb it down for you.
Golovkin is not a hype job like Alvarez.
It wasn't Golovkin that looked like an overhyped amateur against Floyd.
Golovkin didn't get fed with a silver spoon like Ginger.
Half the boxing world doesn't even know where Golovkin hails from..... whereas Ginger is such a Mexican hype job, even Chavez Sr. said as much.

But you go ahead, keep swallowing.

[Silkeyjoe]

C'mon.... between you and me. You know Canelo has no business in the top 10 p4p list.



Take off your biased hat and put on your knowledgeable boxing hat.... that's right.
Now think about it.

Just trying to be helpful here.

A victory over Austin Trout. You know the guy who had his way with your Miguel Cotto means a lot more than wins over Matthew Macklin and Curtis Stevens combined. It's that simple. If you think otherwise than there really is no hope for you.

One meaningful victory, VD. ONE. There's a conga line of boxers out there with more than just the one meaningful victory who are a hell of a lot more deserving for a spot in the top ten p4p than Canelo.

Canelo is still on the way up, VD. But there's no shortcuts into the elite. That shit's got to be earned over time, and with a hell of a lot more than one meaningful opponent.

Golovkin ain't even got one yet. And you got him up there. You can't even follow your own stupid logic. I'm a big fan of Triple G. But lets be real here. Stevens and Macklin ain't big wins.

Yeah... you're right.
They're nowhere as big as a shot Shane Mosley and an undersized Josesito Lopez.

But hey it's my mistake.
Just goes to show you can't be civil to a proven moron.

I'm gonna make this question as idiot proof as possible for you. You have Golovkin over Alvarez on the list. Which of Golovkin wins is better than Alvarez win over Austin Trout? All you gotta do state a name. That's it. Just a name. Don't even try and a give a reason why you think it's better. You'll only embarrass yourself further with your nonsense. So just state a name. There's no way you can fuck this up. Just give a name

All of them. Trout was robbed