Wladimir cracks the POUND FOR POUND Ratings

[generalbulldog]

It's long overdue, Wlad has been the best HW since 2005, all but demolishing his opponents.

The guy may not have a fan friendly style but he is the man at HW.

[Fenster]

It's stupid to rank him P4P. He holds a significant size advantage over virtually everyone he fights.

Just look at Marquez-Mayweather to see what happens when two GREAT fighters meet with an unfair size advantage in effect.

Wlad is a talented big man. He is not an exceptional boxing talent. He would be average without the size advantage.

[El Kabong]

Well #1 Wlad hasn't held a significant "size advantage" over everyone he's fought...he's not been heavier or taller than everyone he's fought, sometimes heavier, sometimes taller, but usually just one or the other.

#2 I don't think he'd be "average" if he was say 6'1 or 6'3 as opposed to 6'5-6'6, the guy has serious skill....he might be more vulnerable to getting hit but he's a great fighter.

#3 Heavyweights shouldn't be entered in P4P rankings for many reasons but mainly because people simply overrate smaller fighters, they treat them differently. Fans assume lighter fighters have more skill and heavier fighters are all about brute strength. Also take a look at those smaller fighters, it's the biggest of them that garner the most wins and respect, not the smallest.

[generalbulldog]

Well #1 Wlad hasn't held a significant "size advantage" over everyone he's fought...he's not been heavier or taller than everyone he's fought, sometimes heavier, sometimes taller, but usually just one or the other.

#2 I don't think he'd be "average" if he was say 6'1 or 6'3 as opposed to 6'5-6'6, the guy has serious skill....he might be more vulnerable to getting hit but he's a great fighter.

#3 Heavyweights shouldn't be entered in P4P rankings for many reasons but mainly because people simply overrate smaller fighters, they treat them differently. Fans assume lighter fighters have more skill and heavier fighters are all about brute strength. Also take a look at those smaller fighters, it's the biggest of them that garner the most wins and respect, not the smallest.

p4p means the best fighters regardless of size, so why should HWs be excluded from the list?

Mike Tyson during the 80s was p4p #1 3 years in a row rated by Ring Magazine. And it was justifiable in my opinion. Ali surely would have been p4p #1 during the 60s before his banishment from the ring.

If the hw fighter has serious skills he should make the list or if he's that good rated #1.

[El Kabong]

I just view the heavyweight champion (regardless of era) as being THE epic accomplishment in boxing....I see the P4P more as "Out of all the weight classes who's the best boxer that's not a heavyweight"....but like I said, that's just my opinion and I've said it in many other threads and if I didn't say it here it would be hypocritical of me

[skel1983]

Donaire at number 4 LMAFAOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!

What a fucking joke!!!

[Nameless]

I don't understand why isn't he rated higher actually, the size helps but any attribute, speed, strength etc are also natural talent that one must exploit, it's like saying "yeah, Floyd Mayweather is excellent but it's mostly just because mother nature did give him dazzling speed". It's the same for the K with the size, you'Re born with it and you learn to use it or not. Wlad did. Why should "blame" and find reasons for his excellent boxing qualities just because he's born naturally bigger? The guy could be a fatty like Arreola or simple unable to use his size effectively but he went by the book and keep himself in good condition. For that reason, I disagree with the "we shouldn't rate him so high, he's just good because of his size" as we could use the same argument virtually with every boxer by pointing one of their natural ability and saying "yeah, he's only good because of X and therefore he's not that worthy to be in the list".