Quote Originally Posted by ElTerribleMorales 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?
difference is that Guzman has never looked like he was gonna lose, where Froch was getting schooled for the first 9 rounds against Taylor, and flat out got a home town decision against Dirrell, another fight were he was horribly outboxed, same way you had Haye beating Valuev you should have had Dirrell beating Froch, it was the same fight only difference was in weight class
Right.. but Froch has a better record than Guzman, right? He has beat a "star." He is unbeaten.

So judging P4P by resumes Froch would beat Guzman?

What idiot what back Froch to beat Guzman in a P4P fight?