how do you rate p4p - is it important?

[JeetKunDoGuy]

This question has been on my mind for a while. Since its a very subjective notion to begin with, it might be helpful to come up with some objective criteria one should include or ignore when thinking of who is p4p. What attributes do you look for when deciding who to include in your top p4p lists?

Also I know some people don't like p4p lists, and some don't think they have any merit at all. If so can you give us your thoughts why not bother with them?

 

[Seano]

Sure it matters,when people do it right. Most people's P4P lists are just a favorite fighters list. When its based on stats its a little more meaningful.

 

[The Can Opener]

The majority of P4P lists are pure shit.

People rank who they like and what they like while ignoring everything else and it's incredibly easy to justify whatever you want because boxing itself is so subjective. People ignore losses they didn't agree with. They discredit wins by claiming this opponent was too young or too old or too big or too small. It's all nonsense.

You get more honesty and accuracy just asking people who their top 10 current favorite fighters are. That way at least they just get to explain why they love those fighters instead of lying and bullshitting their way through illogical piles of shit trying to discredit fighters they know damn well are much better than their own picks.

 

[XThe GreatestX]

Eh. Not really. I mean if you do it by resume than maybe. But very few do. Ring magazine it seems doesnt even

 

[Hagler]

Resume is pretty much the only relevent criteria. Recent fights matter the most.

 

[ironfist05]

yeah it matters because it makes you memorable and because if you're top ten P4P you're probably a very good fighter. It's not the end all be all but if you can go as the #1 P4P for a fe years straight (like Hagler, Mayweather, Whitaker, Chavez, Pac etc...) it means something significant.

 

[stuff jones]

Resume is pretty much the only relevent criteria. Recent fights matter the most.

A resume is composed of other resumes which is composed of other resumes. How do you know when a fighter is actually good?

 

[Hagler]

A resume is composed of other resumes which is composed of other resumes. How do you know when a fighter is actually good?

When he beat fighters with quality or decent resumes. Significant names, belts, etc.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

Sure it matters,when people do it right. Most people's P4P lists are just a favorite fighters list. When its based on stats its a little more meaningful.

If we base it on stats then Lomachenko is the P4P #1 fighter in the world. Hasn't lost a clear round in how many years? Holds the current CompuBox +/- List record, is the second best defender in the sport next to Rigo (who isn't fighting top 10 ranked competition) and Top 3 on offense as well.

I wasn't ready to say he's #1 yet but you're the boss here.

 

[crystallake]

I think just going by weightclasses does a better job. It seems people have different views on the meaning of "p4p". For some its just who was most dominant as a champ, for others its which skills translate the best through weightclasses. And then there are the ones who just pick their favorite fighter. Its very subjective and fictional.

 

[Shoemaker]

Eh. Not really. I mean if you do it by resume than maybe. But very few do. Ring magazine it seems doesnt even

I'm pretty sure Teddy Atlas ranks his based solely on how easy he can make-up analogies for each fighter.

 

[Shoemaker]

If we base it on stats then Lomachenko is the P4P #1 fighter in the world. Hasn't lost a clear round in how many years? Holds the current CompuBox +/- List record, is the second best defender in the sport next to Rigo (who isn't fighting top 10 ranked competition) and Top 3 on offense as well.

I wasn't ready to say he's #1 yet but you're the boss here.

Those are nice stats, but I'm pretty sure Tashain Dong takes the #1 spot based on height alone.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

Those are nice stats, but I'm pretty sure Tashain Dong takes the #1 spot based on height alone.

True. Dong is the legit P4P #1. No problem with that.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

I'm pretty sure Teddy Atlas ranks his based solely on how easy he can make-up analogies for each fighter.

Ocean (Golovkin) vs log (Canelo)

 

[Shoemaker]

Ocean (Golovkin) vs log (Canelo)

Raging Inferno vs. The Fireman

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

Raging Inferno vs. The Fireman

Teddy's fireman motivational speech to Tim was certainly different than what you normally would hear from a trainer in a fighter's corner. What about how long a fighter has been ranked Top 10 P4P? The RING seems to think it's worth listing. Rigo's been on it the longest (220 weeks) followed by Golovkin (143 weeks). I never see it mentioned probably because most don't care about that statistic.

 

[tehmvp]

If we base it on stats then Lomachenko is the P4P #1 fighter in the world. Hasn't lost a clear round in how many years? Holds the current CompuBox +/- List record, is the second best defender in the sport next to Rigo (who isn't fighting top 10 ranked competition) and Top 3 on offense as well.

I wasn't ready to say he's #1 yet but you're the boss here.

You spelled Terrence Crawford wrong.

 

[Kovalev's "Man Bag"]

You spelled Terrence Crawford wrong.

You mean Terence Crawford? He's not the +/- leader or a Top 3 defender. He has some of the other categories on lock though. Terence did win CompuBox's FOTY award last year with Lomachenko as the Runner-Up. Crawford had 3 fights, Loma had 2. Both led in 4 categories each. However, I'm not going by just what they did last year but what they've done over their respective careers, particularly within the last 3-4 years since P4P is what a fighter has done recently. At least it's supposed to be.

 

[mozfonky]

A resume is composed of other resumes which is composed of other resumes. How do you know when a fighter is actually good?

attributes, skills, intangibles and then competition.

 

[mozfonky]

Teddy's fireman motivational speech to Tim was certainly different than what you normally would hear from a trainer in a fighter's corner. What about how long a fighter has been ranked Top 10 P4P? The RING seems to think it's worth listing. Rigo's been on it the longest (220 weeks) followed by Golovkin (143 weeks). I never see it mentioned probably because most don't care about that statistic.

era has to play into it, chavez was number one or two for years and years and i don't think anyone thinks of him like they do robinson, Ali or even mayweather. as for me, i could never see what the fuss was about, now, looking back at his fights, i see a lot more to appreciate, still it's hard to be impressed when a guy is taking bombs from clubfighters who you would think wouldn't even be able to land those kinds of shots. gotta give it to him, he managed to have a long unbeaten streak.