PFP is a coherent concept

[Nous]

There seems to be some confusing regarding how to under PFP and whether it makes sense as a concept. This confusion is, well, confusing because there is an intuitive and coherent understanding of the concept:

PFP is about comparing fighters across two dimensions: First, the level of the competition in the top of a weight class and how much better they are than that competition. Second, how the level of competition in weight classes approximate to them, and how well they could fare against that competition.

For example, Sean Strickland should not rank very highly on the PFP list. Because while the top level of competition in his weightclass is decent, he is not that much better than the rest of the division. And the top of he would not fare well against the top 5 in the weight class above him, while he simultaneously would not have a walk in the park with the top 5 in the division below him.

With this understanding in mind we can understand why Volkanovski should be higher on the PFP list than Islam, even though he lost to Islam. Because while the top of featherweight and lightweight are equally strong, and the distance between Volk and Islam and the rest of their compared division is equally big, Volkanvoski perform better in the "level of competition in weight classes approximate to them, and how well they could fare against that competition". Volkanovski would not walk through the champion in the weight classes below him, while we have already seen this to not be the case for Islam. Similarly, Volkanovski is, likely, more competitive against the top 5 in the weight class above him (we have already seen him be competitive against the champion), then Islam is.

 

[Nous]

Clarification on above:

Notice that PFP is a meaningful concept in that it allows for another type of comparison than comparing which fighter is the greatest. Because it can be the case that fighter A ranks higher than fighter B on the PFP list, while fighter B ranks higher than A on the "greatness" list. Because you can rank high on the PFP list while either not being a champion, or being a champion who has only defended once or twice, but can't rank high on the "greatness" list when that is the case.

 

[TempleoftheDog]

I don’t waste my time with P4P. It’s even more ridiculous than any talk of a male GOAT.

Basically both are just popularity contests. One used by the org to prop up a certain narrative. The other used by the fans with zero basis in fact. There’s no clear cut measuring tape. And none of them actually fought eachother.. EVER.

 

[AmericanMMA]

PFP>P4P

 

[Paolo Delutis]

PFP to me...or what it actually means is not a comparison of records or greatness..

Its how would so and so fighter stack up , if weight/size was even solely basing it off their fighting skills...

So a DJ vs Jones at LHW prime for prime...means..


A LHW framed DJ with all his skills intact vs Jon Jones at Prime LHW skillset... .who wins

Its about skill comparison regardless of size ...therefore the name...

Pound for Pound .. meaning all things equal size wise .. who wins based on skill

So a 185 prime GSP likely takes a Decision from 185 Anderson Silva....with Anderson Silva have his best chance at victory in rounds 2&3..GSP would take round 1 as Anderson always starts slow to download/read his opponents matrix coding..and then Anderson would likely attack well in rounds 2&3..maybe finishing George but if he doesnt ..GSP's wrestling will show up in rounds 4&5 ..givng GSP rounds 1,4,5 to beat Silva by unanimous decision.

This is a accurate and Coherent PFP/P4P assessment

 

[Senzo Tanaka]

They are trying to be too sport. I don't think combat sports works as a traditional sport unless you had a weekly format. If you are a PPV business or put on shows monthly, you need to just make fights that make sense and can make the most money/ratings.

 

[cade187]

White belt here to educate everyone on PFP (P4P?).

 

[Neck&Neck]

PFL PFP P4P

 

[Clark Rogers]

I hate Pay For Play games myself.

 

[Ozze]

First you need to get everyone onboard on what is the definition of P4P (is it yours, is who would win if both were the same size, is it his achievments versus the achievments of others?), than you can try to have a discussion about who is better than who.

 

[ultra321]

White belt here to educate everyone on PFP (P4P?).

probably one of the old timers who doesn't want the shame on their real account...

 

[humdizzle]

 

[kingghidrah]

I agree, and that's why I've created a brand new metric, GOAT4P (GOAT for Pound, or G4P for short)

You take a fighter's all-time performance and divide by weight (in pounds)—store this number for later!—then multiply by the fighter's GOAT factor. Then you take the derivative of that result which gives you the GGOATOAT (Greatest GOAT Of All Time) score which is integrated into the previous performance/weight ratio, giving you the GOAT4P (G4P) metric.

 

[laleggenda27]

P4P: MM > Francis
Reality: Francis flatlines MM with the first punch he lands.

I prefer to live in reality. P4P is just a marketing tool created in boxing to promote smaller fighters. I enjoy watching the smaller guys fight, but using hypotheticals and mental gymnastics to create a reality where they could actually beat the larger fighter is absurd. And unnecessary.

 

[Nous]

PFP>P4P

Glad I found someone else who agrees that PFP sounds/looks/tastes better than P4P

 

[sdpdude9]

The problem with p4p and goat talks is they are entirely subjective. They are essentially personal lists based on personal criteria and feelings, often with personal biases as well.. And despite this being overall kind of silly, it continues to dominate mma discussions and is argued passionately pretty much daily. And most of these discussions just turn into fighter bashing. I think the mma community would be better off ditching these concepts. Instead focus on what we can actually watch play out, the here and now, and not worry ourselves with hypotheticals and made up personal rankings.

 

[Nous]

PFP to me...or what it actually means is not a comparison of records or greatness..

Its how would so and so fighter stack up , if weight/size was even solely basing it off their fighting skills...

So a DJ vs Jones at LHW prime for prime...means..


A LHW framed DJ with all his skills intact vs Jon Jones at Prime LHW skillset... .who wins

Its about skill comparison regardless of size ...therefore the name...

Pound for Pound .. meaning all things equal size wise .. who wins based on skill

So a 185 prime GSP likely takes a Decision from 185 Anderson Silva....with Anderson Silva have his best chance at victory in rounds 2&3..GSP would take round 1 as Anderson always starts slow to download/read his opponents matrix coding..and then Anderson would likely attack well in rounds 2&3..maybe finishing George but if he doesnt ..GSP's wrestling will show up in rounds 4&5 ..givng GSP rounds 1,4,5 to beat Silva by unanimous decision.

This is a accurate and Coherent PFP/P4P assessment

I know this is what some people think it means. But a basic contemplation reveals such an understanding to be wanting in terms of substance. Because you can't equalise in size and carry over the skills, and anyone with a basic understanding of anatomy and physics knows this. Lower weight classes can employe a different skill set because they're able to move faster. However, they are only able to move fast in virtue of having the physical attributes which puts them ina lower weightless. Hence there is no way to do skill transfer while trait equalising physical attributes across weight divisions. It is, in the literal sense of the word, physically impossible.

 

[Nous]

First you need to get everyone onboard on what is the definition of P4P (is it yours, is who would win if both were the same size, is it his achievments versus the achievments of others?), than you can try to have a discussion about who is better than who.

I offered the most plausible analysis of how to understand PFP. I have already noted why the achievements understanding does not make sense as belonging to PFP and better falls under a "greatness" comparison. For an explanation as to why the "both were same size" understanding of PFP does not make sense, see my response to Paolo Delutis above.

 

[Nous]

I agree, and that's why I've created a brand new metric, GOAT4P (GOAT for Pound, or G4P for short)

You take a fighter's all-time performance and divide by weight (in pounds)—store this number for later!—then multiply by the fighter's GOAT factor. Then you take the derivative of that result which gives you the GGOATOAT (Greatest GOAT Of All Time) score which is integrated into the previous performance/weight ratio, giving you the GOAT4P (G4P) metric.

This was a fun post, I give you a 7/10 rating

 

[Nous]

The problem with p4p and goat talks is they are entirely subjective. They are essentially personal lists based on personal criteria and feelings, often with personal biases as well.. And despite this being overall kind of silly, it continues to dominate mma discussions and is argued passionately pretty much daily. And most of these discussions just turn into fighter bashing. I think the mma community would be better off ditching these concepts. Instead focus on what we can actually watch play out, the here and now, and not worry ourselves with hypotheticals and made up personal rankings.

I think the understanding of PFP I offered in not entirely subjective.

Although I generally agree that all things considered it might be best to dispatch of PFP talk and GOAT talk. Alas that is not the world we live in.