Quote Originally Posted by Bilbo View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Fenster View Post
Quote Originally Posted by Bilbo View Post

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?
Well actually it would you guys who might llabel Dirrell a possible 'star' not me. I go on acomplishments and Dirrell hasn't acomplished a whole lot so that win doesn't catapualt Froch into the p4p for me.

But I generally agree with that premise though. Froch has wins over Taylor, Pascal (now a lightheavyweight champ) and Dirrell. Furthermore he's competing in the Super Six and is committed to fighting the best. He's won all his fights and if he beats Kessler then absolutely he deserves consideration for p4p status whether I think there are other fighters who could beat him or not.

Now back to your 'mythical' poor fighter in a weak division who gets overlooked hypothesis?

How many of these fighters actually exist? Can you name us some?

The fighters who operate in weak divisions, take no risks and choose to say in their safe waters rather than move up and try and make a name, why do they deserve p4p status exactly?

Did Chris John really deserve to be hailed as a great following his 'win' over Marquez when he followed it up with nothing, and refused to leave Indonesia? Now he's finally gone stateside and struggled to barely get past Rocky Jurez, I'd say the lack of hype surrounding him was entirely justified?

What about Calderon? A very talented guy in the tiniest division, he finally earned his respect, and a top 10 p4p spot with the Ring by MOVING UP, taking a risk and beating the champ.

That Guzman is not in the top 10 p4p is entirely his own doing. He has a history of pulling out of the big fights and should in no way be rewarded with a p4p spot for costing Nate Campbell half a million dollars by refusing to fight him with less than 24 hours notice. I think Guzman is a great fighter but seriously fuck him, Carl Froch deserves to be places ahead of him, not because of his skills, but because he actually fights his fights, takes on the best and gets the wins.

Your hypothetical defence for mythical hard done by fighters is just a straw man argument.
couldn't get much weaker than 106 and Calderon managed to get on most people's p4p lists when he was dominating the division, so Fensters theory can go out the window