Top 5 P4P Now?

[Kev]

Ward has never beat a P4P fighter though. The offical record has John beating one - even if most think it was a robbery. But this is about provable scientific reasoning not opinion, right?

Beating a P4P star has to be a big boost to your own P4P credentials, right?

According to my scientific ranking system Ward is higher than John based on the 'what have you done for me lately' criteria.

Ward dominated Mikkel Kessler,a fighter held in universal respect and also impressively outclassed Edison Miranda and Allan Green and beat Sakio Bika last time out.

Chris John battled to a draw with Rocky Juarez, a fighter who was 3-3 in his last before facing John and has gone 0-3 since.

He has fought only 3 times since 2008, winning twice with all three fights going to decision.

Ward meanwhile has fought 6 times in the same period, winning every fight and against a higher quality of opposition.

John's disputed win over Juan Manuel Marquez was 5 years ago and since he has hardly been significant.

Ward rates higer according to the now patented Baggin's Scale (B.S).

[Violent Demise]

Who do you have

Here's my top 5

Pacman
PBF
Martinez
Donaire
Marquez

Pacquiao
Martinez
Marquez
Donaire
Lopez

Mayweather is inactive. Active he takes his regular spot at number 1 and everybody else drops one

[TitoFan]

MY personal top 5 p4p does not include Floyd Mayweather.

(collective sigh of disbelief from Mayweather fans)

I just don't think that having fought the overrated Hatton, undersized JMM, and over-the-hill Mosley in about 3 1/2 frigging years is action enough to warrant a top 5 p4p ranking for the Pretty Boy. (Even RJJ himself was calling him inactive during last night's telecast.... and he LIKES Floyd).

That being said, let the insults rain, and the booing begin........

If you are removing him from the ratings altogether on the grounds that he is inactive/retired then it's a fair position to hold, although for myself I still have him at two as he's not not publicly retired.

If you're saying you have him further down your list however and just don't think his current opposition is worthy of a top 5 placement then that is the most retarded thing I've heard on Saddo's this week at least, certainly since Seanie's plan to get doctor's to lead the protests for better fight matchups

Then it's the former.


No, seriously... it's both. But Seanie's plan is STILL way more retarded. C'mon... you're still carrying Pretty Boy's torch even though he's done little in the last 3+ years to deserve it? Seriously? I mean... p4p should be based on recent accomplishments and on that basis alone. Are you honestly going to defend PBF's record in the last 3+ years as worthy of p4p? How long are you Floyd fans going to carry his jock... er... torch? C'mon!! The guy's dangling you fans on a string and playing you like yo-yo's. Look at his recent resume again:

Hatton - Enough said about that.
JMM - A true ATG... just not at the weight he fought Floyd. He was in WAY over his head.
Mosley - The guy aged before our very eyes.

What else has he done? Well.... besides dancing with the stars and wrestling Big Show. He's beaten up women and security guards... but those don't count for p4p ratings. What has he done? He ain't done JACK. All he does is run at the mouth, and... frankly... some of us are damn tired of it.

P4P? Not for this boxing fan.

you don't have to like the guy but don't ignore the fact that he's a 5 division champ (and none were at catch weights), he holds wins over Corrales, Castillo, DLH, Gatti, Judah and other good fighters at the lower weights such as Jesus Chavez, Carlos Hernandez, Genaro Hernandez

like i said in another thread you could say the same thing for Pacquiao that you've already said for Floyd

he's fought guys either past their primes or at weights where it's been to his advantage

DLH (completely shot and weight drained)

Hatton (on the slide and had looked like shit in his fights after Mayweather beat him)

Cotto (the general opinion was he lost a step after the Margarito fight and was at a catchweight)

Clottey (had already lost to Cotto prior to fighting Pacquiao)

Margarito (had only had two fights in nearly 2 years away, and he had gotten KO'd and won a UD against a journeyman and he looked like shit in that fight, giving the sense that without plaster he's crap, oh yea and it was another catchweight)

and now Mosley (if he aged front of your very eyes against Floyd, why the hell is Pacquiao recycling yet another one of Mayweather's opponents? oh and he wanted drug tests)

i mean there really is no difference between the two

Mayweather now taking on Paul Williams would be the equivalent of Pacquiao having taken on Margarito, which after what Martinez did to him well i really wouldn't say it means much

This is all well and good, El Terrible. But you neglect to mention one very important difference. Whereas Floyd fought his recent opposition at very little risk (face it... Hatton? and JMM was WOEFULLY undersized), Manny may have fought the same guys... BUT... for Manny, it was a huge risk. Sure, it's Monday-morning quarterbacking to say now that De La Hoya was weight-drained and shot. But before the fight... it was a huge risk. Remember... DLH was looking for an undersized scalp to add to his mantle and ride off into the sunset. Thank God it backfired on him (HAHAHAHAHAHA)! Remember that Pacquaio is coming from many divisions south of 147. And taking on Margarito?!? Say what you will... but that was ALSO a huge risk. And to be sure... Pac took some major body shots from Margacheato.

When you look at these fights AFTER the fact, it's easy to compare Manny's opponents with Floyd's. But it's not a fair nor accurate comparison. You have to look at when the fights were made in the first place. Sure... there's probably a lot of people who now claim to have known that Pac was going to walk through the opponents he did ..... but in all reality, the majority of people were betting AGAINST Pac (myself included). Whereas I absolutely KNEW that Mayweather was going to beat the stuffing out both Hatton and JMM. No mystery there.

I personally prefer the fighters who fight anyone and everyone, regardless of risk... and legacies and unbeaten records be damned. That's why I dislike Floyd now, and why I disliked DLH even more toward the end of his career. Because neither of them fit that mold. They were both calculating, conniving, "image-first" type of fighters. Of course, this is strictly my opinion.

[Pavlik]

MY personal top 5 p4p does not include Floyd Mayweather.

(collective sigh of disbelief from Mayweather fans)

I just don't think that having fought the overrated Hatton, undersized JMM, and over-the-hill Mosley in about 3 1/2 frigging years is action enough to warrant a top 5 p4p ranking for the Pretty Boy. (Even RJJ himself was calling him inactive during last night's telecast.... and he LIKES Floyd).

That being said, let the insults rain, and the booing begin........

If you are removing him from the ratings altogether on the grounds that he is inactive/retired then it's a fair position to hold, although for myself I still have him at two as he's not not publicly retired.

If you're saying you have him further down your list however and just don't think his current opposition is worthy of a top 5 placement then that is the most retarded thing I've heard on Saddo's this week at least, certainly since Seanie's plan to get doctor's to lead the protests for better fight matchups

Then it's the former.


No, seriously... it's both. But Seanie's plan is STILL way more retarded. C'mon... you're still carrying Pretty Boy's torch even though he's done little in the last 3+ years to deserve it? Seriously? I mean... p4p should be based on recent accomplishments and on that basis alone. Are you honestly going to defend PBF's record in the last 3+ years as worthy of p4p? How long are you Floyd fans going to carry his jock... er... torch? C'mon!! The guy's dangling you fans on a string and playing you like yo-yo's. Look at his recent resume again:

Hatton - Enough said about that.
JMM - A true ATG... just not at the weight he fought Floyd. He was in WAY over his head.
Mosley - The guy aged before our very eyes.

What else has he done? Well.... besides dancing with the stars and wrestling Big Show. He's beaten up women and security guards... but those don't count for p4p ratings. What has he done? He ain't done JACK. All he does is run at the mouth, and... frankly... some of us are damn tired of it.

P4P? Not for this boxing fan.

you don't have to like the guy but don't ignore the fact that he's a 5 division champ (and none were at catch weights), he holds wins over Corrales, Castillo, DLH, Gatti, Judah and other good fighters at the lower weights such as Jesus Chavez, Carlos Hernandez, Genaro Hernandez

like i said in another thread you could say the same thing for Pacquiao that you've already said for Floyd

he's fought guys either past their primes or at weights where it's been to his advantage

DLH (completely shot and weight drained)

Hatton (on the slide and had looked like shit in his fights after Mayweather beat him)

Cotto (the general opinion was he lost a step after the Margarito fight and was at a catchweight)

Clottey (had already lost to Cotto prior to fighting Pacquiao)

Margarito (had only had two fights in nearly 2 years away, and he had gotten KO'd and won a UD against a journeyman and he looked like shit in that fight, giving the sense that without plaster he's crap, oh yea and it was another catchweight)

and now Mosley (if he aged front of your very eyes against Floyd, why the hell is Pacquiao recycling yet another one of Mayweather's opponents? oh and he wanted drug tests)

i mean there really is no difference between the two

Mayweather now taking on Paul Williams would be the equivalent of Pacquiao having taken on Margarito, which after what Martinez did to him well i really wouldn't say it means much

This is all well and good, El Terrible. But you neglect to mention one very important difference. Whereas Floyd fought his recent opposition at very little risk (face it... Hatton? and JMM was WOEFULLY undersized), Manny may have fought the same guys... BUT... for Manny, it was a huge risk. Sure, it's Monday-morning quarterbacking to say now that De La Hoya was weight-drained and shot. But before the fight... it was a huge risk. Remember... DLH was looking for an undersized scalp to add to his mantle and ride off into the sunset. Thank God it backfired on him (HAHAHAHAHAHA)! Remember that Pacquaio is coming from many divisions south of 147. And taking on Margarito?!? Say what you will... but that was ALSO a huge risk. And to be sure... Pac took some major body shots from Margacheato.

When you look at these fights AFTER the fact, it's easy to compare Manny's opponents with Floyd's. But it's not a fair nor accurate comparison. You have to look at when the fights were made in the first place. Sure... there's probably a lot of people who now claim to have known that Pac was going to walk through the opponents he did ..... but in all reality, the majority of people were betting AGAINST Pac (myself included). Whereas I absolutely KNEW that Mayweather was going to beat the stuffing out both Hatton and JMM. No mystery there.

I personally prefer the fighters who fight anyone and everyone, regardless of risk... and legacies and unbeaten records be damned. That's why I dislike Floyd now, and why I disliked DLH even more toward the end of his career. Because neither of them fit that mold. They were both calculating, conniving, "image-first" type of fighters. Of course, this is strictly my opinion.

thank you

[CFH]

Hey jerks, when the posts you're quoting get so long that there is only one letter per line, maybe you should stop including the entire post-history in your quote. It makes the thread unreadable.

[CFH]

..... let's not get carried away.

getting carried away is putting donaire at no. 2. imo he deserve to move at least a position up the p4p ranking.

Even I won't argue against a number 4 ranking now. He's fought the two fighters regarded as the best opposition out there at that time and totally smashed them. I don't think anybody else has done that lately. Martinez hasn't, Bradley, Marquez, Lopez, Ward etc.

Only Pacquaio has been toppling top guys as impressively.

How could Martinez recent opposition have been better? He completely outclassed the top fighters in two divisions.

His opposition has been steller but he hasn't destroyed them the way Donaire has. He lost the first fight with Williams, fought to a draw with Kermit Cintron (yes I know it was bullshit).

Meanwhile Donaire has wrecked his opposition, completely sparking them like Martinez did in the Williams rematch.

I think Martinez is 1-1-1 in his last three fights?

Oh he did beat Pavlik too. But again it was a competive fight until down the stretch and it went to the cards. Not a demolition like Donaire did tonight and against Vic.

No love for Maritnez?? Why are you trying SO hard to discredit what the man has done? Don't even act like you know he was going to spark Williams in the rematch. I called that and nobody was with me. He didn't just WIN against Cintron he knocked him out with a PUNCH to the FACE. Cintron could only continue, bc he was give ample time to recover from that punch. (Yes the one he complained about being a headbutt)

Martinez stole the title from Pavlik in a guts performance. He got off the convas to lacerate Pavliks face and take his belts.

Donaire on the other had went life and death with a guy who was 13-3-1 in Rafael Conception. This does NOT matter anymore, but I am just saying everyone has blemishes on their record.

1 Pacquiao
2 Martinez
3 W Klitschko
4 Marquez (he just keeps winning, why boot him?)
5 Donaire

Honorable mention: Andre Ward

Concepcion was 4.5 lbs overweight at the weigh-in. And Donaire won by UD.

He also sucks.

[bzkfn]

Hey jerks, when the posts you're quoting get so long that there is only one letter per line, maybe you should stop including the entire post-history in your quote. It makes the thread unreadable.

He says after doing the exact same thing in his very next post!

Fucking hypocritical mods think they can do what they like. I say we overthrow 'em! Who's with me?

[Fenster]

Calderon was a two weight champion. That adds roughly 500 more fighters to the 311.

That means he was the king of 800 boxers. Which is the equivalent of topping the super-middleweight division.

So if you think Ward is P4P worthy based on his exploits at 168 then mathematically so is Calderon. Fact.

thats the very same logic that could argue sergio martinez for p4p #1 isnt it??

Is it? How do you mean?

I don't think so though considering Pac has won in about a million different weight classes.

so conceivably a heavyweight could never make the p4p list if its all about the amount of potential fighters you could fight what with them being restricted solely to other heavyweights

Heavyweights shouldn't be considered P4P anyway (unless they are absolute phenoms like prime Tyson who never had a size advantage).

P4P is about mythical match-ups with the size and weight leveled.

If Wlad fought Pac he would kill him - literally. However, in a mythical P4P setting would that still be the case? If your answer is no then Pac is clearly the superior fighter. Simple.

Manny vs Wlad is an impossible matchup to speculate on as either reducing Wlad in size or giving Manny size changes who they are as fighters. its like saying what is stronger p4p an ant or an elephant? Certainly as a percentage of its bodyweight an any can lift hundreds of times than an elephant, but it is not physically possible for an ant to be substantially bigger than it is due to the limitations of its exoskeleton and atmospheric and gravitional pressures. An ant the size of an elephant would collapse under its own weight.

Likewise Manny as a heavyweight no longer has the speed and Wlad at welter no longer has the height, reach and size. You can argue that Wlad is good because he is big. But this is false, there are many other big guys out there but they routinely get beaten by smaller heavyweights. Big on its own is no more an advantage on its own as being fast. Skill and ability to make use of your assets is what is important and both Manny and Wlad are superb at utilising theirs.

Exactly. That is why P4P is FANTASY. There is no strict scientific method to prove you are right. There is no right or wrong.

P4P started a million years ago because the "experts" and writers recognised Sugar Ray Robinson as the worlds best practitioner of boxing, however, he would never be the KING of boxing because that mantle was held by the heavyweight champ Joe Louis, and a fight between the two would be an obvious mismatch because of the size discrepancy.

The same today with Pac-Wlad. Pac is the best fighter in the world but Wlad would kill him. It's just fun.

(before anyone says - I know P4P dates back to before Robinson )

I don't think that is a complete description of p4p as practiced today. When I (and I guess most others) try and rate people on a p4p scale I am comparing comparative acomplishments and resumes rather than imagining how they might get on against each other in a fictional matchup.

Rather than thing how Manny might do against Carl Froch I consider their achievements, their ability and their performances and determine who I think is the better fighter in terms of concrete, statistically measurable criteria.

It's perfectly possible to adhere to a set of marking criteria to come up with a fair and balanced p4p system. Yes disagreements will arise, that's part of the fun, but it is not random, or the just the whim of every person.

If you don't believe that it is possible to come up with a criteria for consistently and fairly rating fighter's acomplishments across the weight classes then how do you hope for a fair and consistent scoring system within a fight?

Judging fights is every bit as subjective but it's far from random. Just because there is no exact science to scoring doesn't mean we aren't capable of consistently judging fights with a high degree of accuracy, and indeed we get angry with judges when they make an incompetent decision. Why do we criticise them if it's just subjective and fantasy? They should be able to score how they like right?

What kind of example is that?

Scoring fights is basically a simple exercise. The fighter that lands the best punches and controls the action wins. This is the exact same for every boxing match irrelevant of the weight category. What is fantasy about it (you've lost me)?

How does that simple concept compare with an attempt to offically rate fighters from differing weight classes, who not only can't meet but have no common formlines to combine them? That is impossible.

Using your example of Calderon - you have just rubbished the records of his opponents but that still doesn't mean ability wise they are inferior boxers to fighters from any other weightclass. It doesn't prove the heavyweights, supermiddles, lightweights etc are a better crop does it? The strength of each division is constantly changing.

It still comes down to - unless two fighters actually fight you can't determine for definte who is the better, and it's utterly impossible to determine the better when they are seperated by huge size differences.

Name the strict rules to compile a definitive P4P list?

No it's not. Calderon is a different weight category to Kid Thunder but I have a fair idea who is better.

As for criteria. There are not too hard to apply. A comparison of resume's is the starting point. Recent form. A visual assessment of their strengths and weaknesses based on actually watching them. An assessment of the competitiveness of the weight classes in which they fight.

It's not really difficult.

OK.

Using your simple criteria who rates higher P4P - Pavlik or Abraham?

Not that you're asking me. It's a close call, but, I take Pavlik. Abraham's best win was against Taylor after Froch and Pavlik knocked him out. Pavlik's best win was against Taylor, but he was the first person to beat Taylor. He was also the first person to KO Miranda. Pavlik has only lost to perenial p4p boxer, Bernard Hopkins, at 170, and p4p boxer, Sergio Martinez.

Good points.

But, whatever the circumstances of their opponents at the time, both have their best wins over the same guys. They both have operated around the same opponents. Neither has been knocked out. Both are big punchers. Pavlik has never fought Froch or Dirrell and Abraham has never fought Hopkins or Martinez. So it's impossible to definitively know how each would compare against their conqueror's. However, all are respected world-class fighters.

These guys are pretty similar. It's hard to rate one above the other. Yet they are dealing in the same pool of fighters.

Now compare who is better between - Chris John and Andre Ward?

You're actually demonstrating my point here. You deliberately picked these two as you know they have similar records. How do you know this? Because you are judging them and comparing according to the sort of criteria you are claiming doesn't exist.

All this example shows is that ranking fighters is not a fantasy. On the contrary you automatically asuumed us to be unanimous in agreeing with you that it would be hard to pick between these two fighters.

I agree, it is a close call. And we are all unanimous in agreeing that because are were all consciously or unconsiously using the same criteria to judge them.

Have a good day.

Hold up.. no, no, no.

I'm not claiming your criteria doesn't exist. However, It ONLY works for individual weight classes. And yet, as the AA-Pavlik example shows, it still leaves questions about who exactly is the superior fighter. It is not definitive.

Therefore, how do you possibly think you can definitively assess fighters from various divisions in this way? It is ridiculous.

You'll never be able to prove Froch is better than Donaire (for example) because they are so far apart in weight that they are basically operating in different sports. They will never fight. They will never have a single common opponent. There is no strict criteria that could possibly establish who is truly better. It would still be a GUESS. Which is no different to rating them by imagining them as the same size.

Simple as that.

[Kev]

I agree in as much as determining who would win in a fictional matchup between the two, that would be down to opinion.

That isn't the only way to approach the p4p rankings though.

As I said at the start of the thread, I approach the p4p rankings in terms of acomplishments, resume's, form, performances etc and rank who I think are the top 10 performing boxers right now.

On that scale, given that Donaire is unbeaten, and has brutally knocked out his two biggest rivals in his weight class, clearly he deserves to be higher p4p than Carl Froch, who lost only two fights ago, and who won a controversial victory over Andre Dirrell the previous time out.

Would you disagree that you are unable to claim whether one of these fighters has acomplished more, or has a better resume within their respective weight class, because I disagree.

For what it's worth, prior to the Montiel victory Donaire imo was below Carl Froch in terms of acomplishments, because of his relatively poor competition for the past 3 years.

Ultimately I'm not rating according to who I think is best in a ficitional matchup, I'm asking the question 'Whose acomplishments are greater?', and looking carefully at recent form as well.

That's why, in my p4p rankings, they are not necessarily who I think are the 10 best fighters in the world right now, but rather the 10 best achievers, with the 10 best resumes in boxing right now.

[erics44]

Calderon was a two weight champion. That adds roughly 500 more fighters to the 311.

That means he was the king of 800 boxers. Which is the equivalent of topping the super-middleweight division.

So if you think Ward is P4P worthy based on his exploits at 168 then mathematically so is Calderon. Fact.

thats the very same logic that could argue sergio martinez for p4p #1 isnt it??

Is it? How do you mean?

I don't think so though considering Pac has won in about a million different weight classes.

so conceivably a heavyweight could never make the p4p list if its all about the amount of potential fighters you could fight what with them being restricted solely to other heavyweights

Heavyweights shouldn't be considered P4P anyway (unless they are absolute phenoms like prime Tyson who never had a size advantage).

P4P is about mythical match-ups with the size and weight leveled.

If Wlad fought Pac he would kill him - literally. However, in a mythical P4P setting would that still be the case? If your answer is no then Pac is clearly the superior fighter. Simple.

Manny vs Wlad is an impossible matchup to speculate on as either reducing Wlad in size or giving Manny size changes who they are as fighters. its like saying what is stronger p4p an ant or an elephant? Certainly as a percentage of its bodyweight an any can lift hundreds of times than an elephant, but it is not physically possible for an ant to be substantially bigger than it is due to the limitations of its exoskeleton and atmospheric and gravitional pressures. An ant the size of an elephant would collapse under its own weight.

Likewise Manny as a heavyweight no longer has the speed and Wlad at welter no longer has the height, reach and size. You can argue that Wlad is good because he is big. But this is false, there are many other big guys out there but they routinely get beaten by smaller heavyweights. Big on its own is no more an advantage on its own as being fast. Skill and ability to make use of your assets is what is important and both Manny and Wlad are superb at utilising theirs.

Exactly. That is why P4P is FANTASY. There is no strict scientific method to prove you are right. There is no right or wrong.

P4P started a million years ago because the "experts" and writers recognised Sugar Ray Robinson as the worlds best practitioner of boxing, however, he would never be the KING of boxing because that mantle was held by the heavyweight champ Joe Louis, and a fight between the two would be an obvious mismatch because of the size discrepancy.

The same today with Pac-Wlad. Pac is the best fighter in the world but Wlad would kill him. It's just fun.

(before anyone says - I know P4P dates back to before Robinson )

I don't think that is a complete description of p4p as practiced today. When I (and I guess most others) try and rate people on a p4p scale I am comparing comparative acomplishments and resumes rather than imagining how they might get on against each other in a fictional matchup.

Rather than thing how Manny might do against Carl Froch I consider their achievements, their ability and their performances and determine who I think is the better fighter in terms of concrete, statistically measurable criteria.

It's perfectly possible to adhere to a set of marking criteria to come up with a fair and balanced p4p system. Yes disagreements will arise, that's part of the fun, but it is not random, or the just the whim of every person.

If you don't believe that it is possible to come up with a criteria for consistently and fairly rating fighter's acomplishments across the weight classes then how do you hope for a fair and consistent scoring system within a fight?

Judging fights is every bit as subjective but it's far from random. Just because there is no exact science to scoring doesn't mean we aren't capable of consistently judging fights with a high degree of accuracy, and indeed we get angry with judges when they make an incompetent decision. Why do we criticise them if it's just subjective and fantasy? They should be able to score how they like right?

What kind of example is that?

Scoring fights is basically a simple exercise. The fighter that lands the best punches and controls the action wins. This is the exact same for every boxing match irrelevant of the weight category. What is fantasy about it (you've lost me)?

How does that simple concept compare with an attempt to offically rate fighters from differing weight classes, who not only can't meet but have no common formlines to combine them? That is impossible.

Using your example of Calderon - you have just rubbished the records of his opponents but that still doesn't mean ability wise they are inferior boxers to fighters from any other weightclass. It doesn't prove the heavyweights, supermiddles, lightweights etc are a better crop does it? The strength of each division is constantly changing.

It still comes down to - unless two fighters actually fight you can't determine for definte who is the better, and it's utterly impossible to determine the better when they are seperated by huge size differences.

Name the strict rules to compile a definitive P4P list?

No it's not. Calderon is a different weight category to Kid Thunder but I have a fair idea who is better.

As for criteria. There are not too hard to apply. A comparison of resume's is the starting point. Recent form. A visual assessment of their strengths and weaknesses based on actually watching them. An assessment of the competitiveness of the weight classes in which they fight.

It's not really difficult.

OK.

Using your simple criteria who rates higher P4P - Pavlik or Abraham?

Not that you're asking me. It's a close call, but, I take Pavlik. Abraham's best win was against Taylor after Froch and Pavlik knocked him out. Pavlik's best win was against Taylor, but he was the first person to beat Taylor. He was also the first person to KO Miranda. Pavlik has only lost to perenial p4p boxer, Bernard Hopkins, at 170, and p4p boxer, Sergio Martinez.

Good points.

But, whatever the circumstances of their opponents at the time, both have their best wins over the same guys. They both have operated around the same opponents. Neither has been knocked out. Both are big punchers. Pavlik has never fought Froch or Dirrell and Abraham has never fought Hopkins or Martinez. So it's impossible to definitively know how each would compare against their conqueror's. However, all are respected world-class fighters.

These guys are pretty similar. It's hard to rate one above the other. Yet they are dealing in the same pool of fighters.

Now compare who is better between - Chris John and Andre Ward?

You're actually demonstrating my point here. You deliberately picked these two as you know they have similar records. How do you know this? Because you are judging them and comparing according to the sort of criteria you are claiming doesn't exist.

All this example shows is that ranking fighters is not a fantasy. On the contrary you automatically asuumed us to be unanimous in agreeing with you that it would be hard to pick between these two fighters.

I agree, it is a close call. And we are all unanimous in agreeing that because are were all consciously or unconsiously using the same criteria to judge them.

Have a good day.

Hold up.. no, no, no.

I'm not claiming your criteria doesn't exist. However, It ONLY works for individual weight classes. And yet, as the AA-Pavlik example shows, it still leaves questions about who exactly is the superior fighter. It is not definitive.

Therefore, how do you possibly think you can definitively assess fighters from various divisions in this way? It is ridiculous.

You'll never be able to prove Froch is better than Donaire (for example) because they are so far apart in weight that they are basically operating in different sports. They will never fight. They will never have a single common opponent. There is no strict criteria that could possibly establish who is truly better. It would still be a GUESS. Which is no different to rating them by imagining them as the same size.

Simple as that.

what does CHF stand for?

[Kev]

What?

If you mean CFH , it's Canada's Finest Homosexual.

[erics44]

What?

If you mean CFH , it's Canada's Finest Homosexual.

yes thats what I meant

a homosexual and a virgin eh?

[JonnyFolds]

..... let's not get carried away.

getting carried away is putting donaire at no. 2. imo he deserve to move at least a position up the p4p ranking.

Even I won't argue against a number 4 ranking now. He's fought the two fighters regarded as the best opposition out there at that time and totally smashed them. I don't think anybody else has done that lately. Martinez hasn't, Bradley, Marquez, Lopez, Ward etc.

Only Pacquaio has been toppling top guys as impressively.

How could Martinez recent opposition have been better? He completely outclassed the top fighters in two divisions.

His opposition has been steller but he hasn't destroyed them the way Donaire has. He lost the first fight with Williams, fought to a draw with Kermit Cintron (yes I know it was bullshit).

Meanwhile Donaire has wrecked his opposition, completely sparking them like Martinez did in the Williams rematch.

I think Martinez is 1-1-1 in his last three fights?

Oh he did beat Pavlik too. But again it was a competive fight until down the stretch and it went to the cards. Not a demolition like Donaire did tonight and against Vic.

No love for Maritnez?? Why are you trying SO hard to discredit what the man has done? Don't even act like you know he was going to spark Williams in the rematch. I called that and nobody was with me. He didn't just WIN against Cintron he knocked him out with a PUNCH to the FACE. Cintron could only continue, bc he was give ample time to recover from that punch. (Yes the one he complained about being a headbutt)

Martinez stole the title from Pavlik in a guts performance. He got off the convas to lacerate Pavliks face and take his belts.

Donaire on the other had went life and death with a guy who was 13-3-1 in Rafael Conception. This does NOT matter anymore, but I am just saying everyone has blemishes on their record.

1 Pacquiao
2 Martinez
3 W Klitschko
4 Marquez (he just keeps winning, why boot him?)
5 Donaire

Honorable mention: Andre Ward

Concepcion was 4.5 lbs overweight at the weigh-in. And Donaire won by UD.

Usually when a guy comes in overweight it is not good news for the fatter fighter.

Did you read what I wrote, or are you trying to justify ALL of Donaire's fights blindly? I know he won by UD, but I also saw the fight and he gave him fits. NOT because of 4.5 lbs.
Montiel outweight Donaire by 8 lbs fight night.

[:::PSL:::]

..... let's not get carried away.

getting carried away is putting donaire at no. 2. imo he deserve to move at least a position up the p4p ranking.

Even I won't argue against a number 4 ranking now. He's fought the two fighters regarded as the best opposition out there at that time and totally smashed them. I don't think anybody else has done that lately. Martinez hasn't, Bradley, Marquez, Lopez, Ward etc.

Only Pacquaio has been toppling top guys as impressively.

How could Martinez recent opposition have been better? He completely outclassed the top fighters in two divisions.

His opposition has been steller but he hasn't destroyed them the way Donaire has. He lost the first fight with Williams, fought to a draw with Kermit Cintron (yes I know it was bullshit).

Meanwhile Donaire has wrecked his opposition, completely sparking them like Martinez did in the Williams rematch.

I think Martinez is 1-1-1 in his last three fights?

Oh he did beat Pavlik too. But again it was a competive fight until down the stretch and it went to the cards. Not a demolition like Donaire did tonight and against Vic.

No love for Maritnez?? Why are you trying SO hard to discredit what the man has done? Don't even act like you know he was going to spark Williams in the rematch. I called that and nobody was with me. He didn't just WIN against Cintron he knocked him out with a PUNCH to the FACE. Cintron could only continue, bc he was give ample time to recover from that punch. (Yes the one he complained about being a headbutt)

Martinez stole the title from Pavlik in a guts performance. He got off the convas to lacerate Pavliks face and take his belts.

Donaire on the other had went life and death with a guy who was 13-3-1 in Rafael Conception. This does NOT matter anymore, but I am just saying everyone has blemishes on their record.

1 Pacquiao
2 Martinez
3 W Klitschko
4 Marquez (he just keeps winning, why boot him?)
5 Donaire

Honorable mention: Andre Ward

Concepcion was 4.5 lbs overweight at the weigh-in. And Donaire won by UD.

Usually when a guy comes in overweight it is not good news for the fatter fighter.

Did you read what I wrote, or are you trying to justify ALL of Donaire's fights blindly? I know he won by UD, but I also saw the fight and he gave him fits. NOT because of 4.5 lbs.
Montiel outweight Donaire by 8 lbs fight night.

Even if Montiel outweighed him 8 million lbs, it would still be a fair fight cuz they both abided with the weight contract in that fight.

Donaire struggled to make the weight. Concepcion did not.

When Concepcion was asked to sweat it off after first failed weigh-in attempt, punk ass didn't do shit. He didn't care about the title. He just wanted to destroy Donaire.

[Fenster]

I agree in as much as determining who would win in a fictional matchup between the two, that would be down to opinion.

That isn't the only way to approach the p4p rankings though.

As I said at the start of the thread, I approach the p4p rankings in terms of acomplishments, resume's, form, performances etc and rank who I think are the top 10 performing boxers right now.

On that scale, given that Donaire is unbeaten, and has brutally knocked out his two biggest rivals in his weight class, clearly he deserves to be higher p4p than Carl Froch, who lost only two fights ago, and who won a controversial victory over Andre Dirrell the previous time out.

Would you disagree that you are unable to claim whether one of these fighters has acomplished more, or has a better resume within their respective weight class, because I disagree.

For what it's worth, prior to the Montiel victory Donaire imo was below Carl Froch in terms of acomplishments, because of his relatively poor competition for the past 3 years.

Ultimately I'm not rating according to who I think is best in a ficitional matchup, I'm asking the question 'Whose acomplishments are greater?', and looking carefully at recent form as well.

That's why, in my p4p rankings, they are not necessarily who I think are the 10 best fighters in the world right now, but rather the 10 best achievers, with the 10 best resumes in boxing right now.

I totally disagree with your evalulation of these fighters. Using your method Froch easily ranks above Donaire P4P. Here's why -

Froch's last five opponents compared with Donaires conclusively prove Froch has been operating amongst a far more accomplished pool of fighters.

Pascal - current LH champ.
Taylor - former undisputed middleweight champ (retired).
Dirrell - current top 5 rated supermiddle.
Kessler - former no.1 and current top 5 rated supermiddle.
Abraham - former middleweight champion and current top 10 rated supermiddle.

Froch went 4-1.

Froch's competition shows that not only were they regarded amongst the best of their weight range when he fought them but still maintain that position (barring the retired Taylor of course).

Donaires last 5.

Concepcion - never won a "world" title. No current top 10 ranking.
Vargas - never won a "world" title. No current top 10 ranking.
Marquez - never won a "world" title. No current top 10 ranking.
Sydorenko - former "world" champion. No current top 10 ranking.
Montiel - former "world" champion. Current top 5 rated bantam.

Donaire has faced only two opponents of any note. Sydorenko's claim to being world-class was that he was an alphabet champion. Four of Froch's opponents can claim this. Montiel was potentially a genuine P4P fighter. All five of Froch's opponents are potentially genuine P4P fighters.

Your criteria CLEARLY shows that Froch has by FAR the superior form over Donaire. It's not even close. Froch MUST rate above Donaire in all current P4P rankings. Fact.