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

[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.

[Conrad]

Forgive my ignorance but how is the actual P4P list compiled? Is it done a la Boxrec and calculated statiscally or is it purely based on opinion?

Either way it's no definitive list and will always be contested , that's down to the hyperthetical nature of it.

The world FIFA football rankings have always baffled me. You look at the current standings and England are a miserable 14th, with the likes of Cameroon and Turkey above us. Not to mention Croatia at 6th who we stuffed 4-1 in Croatia last month. (que sly dig from welsh/scot/irish member reminding me of our failure to qualify for the Euros! )

[Fenster]

Forgive my ignorance but how is the actual P4P list compiled? Is it done a la Boxrec and calculated statiscally or is it purely based on opinion?

Either way it's no definitive list and will always be contested , that's down to the hyperthetical nature of it.

The world FIFA football rankings have always baffled me. You look at the current standings and England are a miserable 14th, with the likes of Cameroon and Turkey above us. Not to mention Croatia at 6th who we stuffed 4-1 in Croatia last month. (que sly dig from welsh/scot/irish member reminding me of our failure to qualify for the Euros! )

The Ring magazine (which most class as the legit list) is done by their opinion in conjunction with certain other boxing journalists from around the world.

[killersheep]

Simple just do some basic analysis of fighters and plug those numbers into this simple equation



I've never been good at or put too much stock in p4p lists, it is just impossible to define, I think criteria for me is someone that shows consistent domination over class opponents over time. I try to stick with actual judges decisions, instead of how I feel a fight went. To do things like say is Calzaghe or JMM more worthy oof a number 2 p4p spot, I can't do it, I might try, but in the end it's all subjective and has no meaning.

[Fenster]

Simple just do some basic analysis of fighters and plug those numbers into this simple equation



I've never been good at or put too much stock in p4p lists, it is just impossible to define, I think criteria for me is someone that shows consistent domination over class opponents over time. I try to stick with actual judges decisions, instead of how I feel a fight went. To do things like say is Calzaghe or JMM more worthy oof a number 2 p4p spot, I can't do it, I might try, but in the end it's all subjective and has no meaning.

That's the thing, if you ask everyone for the their current list, almost everyone will have the same names, just in a slightly different order.

There is no right or wrong.

[killersheep]

Simple just do some basic analysis of fighters and plug those numbers into this simple equation



I've never been good at or put too much stock in p4p lists, it is just impossible to define, I think criteria for me is someone that shows consistent domination over class opponents over time. I try to stick with actual judges decisions, instead of how I feel a fight went. To do things like say is Calzaghe or JMM more worthy oof a number 2 p4p spot, I can't do it, I might try, but in the end it's all subjective and has no meaning.

That's the thing, if you ask everyone for the their current list, almost everyone will have the same names, just in a slightly different order.

There is no right or wrong.

I agree about the top guys in a p4p list, but once you get down to 7,8,9 and 10 on the list, it gets even more blurry.

[DaxxKahn]

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.



Very good assesment except the unbeaten factor does not really need apply,,,,Guys can go unbeaten for long periods of time but not be considered P4P...EG- Chris John.......

Having losses on your record does not disqualify you from P4P it is who you lost to that is important...

If an elite fighter loses to a decent fighter it proves nothing if the elite fighter continues on his ways come the next fights...

Anyone can have an off night or 2 in their careers...fighters like everyone else are entitled to it......It also does not mean the guy who beat them that 1 night is P4P worthy

[Kev]

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.



Very good assesment except the unbeaten factor does not really need apply,,,,Guys can go unbeaten for long periods of time but not be considered P4P...EG- Chris John.......

Having losses on your record does not disqualify you from P4P it is who you lost to that is important...

If an elite fighter loses to a decent fighter it proves nothing if the elite fighter continues on his ways come the next fights...

Anyone can have an off night or 2 in their careers...fighters like everyone else are entitled to it......It also does not mean the guy who beat them that 1 night is P4P worthy

I think you're missing what I'm saying a bit. Not losing IS an important part of a p4p assessment. If it were not Shane Mosely and Oscar De La Hoya would still be near the top of the p4p.

B Hop would be number 1 p4p in the world and Hatton wouldn't have dropped out of the list.

I'm not saying that once a fighter is beaten they cannot be p4p, not at all that is absurd, but of course to be considered a great fighter you have to win fights.

As for Calzaghe the fact that he has reigned for so long, had so many defenses and never lost of course all factor into the equation when assessing his status and position in the p4p rankings.

[DaxxKahn]

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.



Very good assesment except the unbeaten factor does not really need apply,,,,Guys can go unbeaten for long periods of time but not be considered P4P...EG- Chris John.......

Having losses on your record does not disqualify you from P4P it is who you lost to that is important...

If an elite fighter loses to a decent fighter it proves nothing if the elite fighter continues on his ways come the next fights...

Anyone can have an off night or 2 in their careers...fighters like everyone else are entitled to it......It also does not mean the guy who beat them that 1 night is P4P worthy

I think you're missing what I'm saying a bit. Not losing IS an important part of a p4p assessment. If it were not Shane Mosely and Oscar De La Hoya would still be near the top of the p4p.

B Hop would be number 1 p4p in the world and Hatton wouldn't have dropped out of the list.

I'm not saying that once a fighter is beaten they cannot be p4p, not at all that is absurd, but of course to be considered a great fighter you have to win fights.

As for Calzaghe the fact that he has reigned for so long, had so many defenses and never lost of course all factor into the equation when assessing his status and position in the p4p rankings.

I understand you mate...I am pretty much in agreement