P4P Rankings

[IronDanHamza]

i rank accomplishments and ability when ranking fighters historically. i place the emphasis on accomplishments. the context is the rest of the gloved history of the sport, from john L sullivan to today.


when i rank fighters p4p in a contemporary context, i rate their ability and accomplishments. a stronger emphasis is placed on ability.


i'm not asking, "which active fighter has the best resume?"

i am asking, "which active fighter is best?"


right now, i think it's pretty obvious that guillermo rigondeaux is the planet's best fighter. his resume isn't all that deep, but his relatively recent victory over donaire [a top p4p fighter himself at the time,] and the freaking hellish skills he's displayed lately, have him at the top for me.

next, i have andre ward. ward's the guy i'd favor against everybody not named guillermo, if all fighters were the same size. his recent resume isn't tremendous, but he's a very accomplished fighter if you go to 2012 and backwards. when he gets in the ring, and actually get to see him fight, you feel like you're watching a great boxer at his peak. injuries and promotional issues have unfortunately kept him sidelined for good portions of a three year stretch. he fought once in '12, once in '13, and will be hard pressed to even get a fight in '14.

ward has evidently been in arbitration with goossen for several months. to put it simply, that means that an impartial middleman was brought in to help settle the dispute.

as of very recently, perhaps even today, ward is reported to actually be suing his promotor, and alleging that goossen has been violating the ali act.

i can't speak on it much further than that, but i will say that ward is to blame in part for his being sidelined. he signed a very long contract with joe goossen.

I don't see that as being obvious in regards to Rigondeaux.

To me, he looks quite limited. Or should I say from what I've seen so far.

[soul_survivor]

i rank accomplishments and ability when ranking fighters historically. i place the emphasis on accomplishments. the context is the rest of the gloved history of the sport, from john L sullivan to today.


when i rank fighters p4p in a contemporary context, i rate their ability and accomplishments. a stronger emphasis is placed on ability.


i'm not asking, "which active fighter has the best resume?"

i am asking, "which active fighter is best?"


right now, i think it's pretty obvious that guillermo rigondeaux is the planet's best fighter. his resume isn't all that deep, but his relatively recent victory over donaire [a top p4p fighter himself at the time,] and the freaking hellish skills he's displayed lately, have him at the top for me.

next, i have andre ward. ward's the guy i'd favor against everybody not named guillermo, if all fighters were the same size. his recent resume isn't tremendous, but he's a very accomplished fighter if you go to 2012 and backwards. when he gets in the ring, and actually get to see him fight, you feel like you're watching a great boxer at his peak. injuries and promotional issues have unfortunately kept him sidelined for good portions of a three year stretch. he fought once in '12, once in '13, and will be hard pressed to even get a fight in '14.

ward has evidently been in arbitration with goossen for several months. to put it simply, that means that an impartial middleman was brought in to help settle the dispute.

as of very recently, perhaps even today, ward is reported to actually be suing his promotor, and alleging that goossen has been violating the ali act.

i can't speak on it much further than that, but i will say that ward is to blame in part for his being sidelined. he signed a very long contract with joe goossen.

But isn't it also important that resume be taken into account when assessing ability? A very good or great fighter would walk through average opponents or opponents lacking in world class abilities, i.e. Rodriguez. How often has Ward proven how good he is against the very best? Twice maybe? Is that enough to rank him at 2? Rigo has only done it once, enough to rank him at one?

Shouldn't Wlad, Pac, Floyd, etc be ranked higher? Since they've proven their skillset at a higher level on more occasions?

I want to understand your thinking better, as I'm re-evaluating how I make P4P lists.

[ShoulderRoll]

Shouldn't Wlad, Pac, Floyd, etc be ranked higher? Since they've proven their skillset at a higher level on more occasions?

How many times has Wlad proven himself against elite foes? Heavyweight has been a bad division for a while now, I'd say that Andre Ward has easily fought better opposition.

[New England]

I don't see that as being obvious in regards to Rigondeaux.

To me, he looks quite limited. Or should I say from what I've seen so far.

ali was limited, too. so is floyd mayweather.


it's not a measurement of the most rounded fighter, but the best.

[New England]

But isn't it also important that resume be taken into account when assessing ability? A very good or great fighter would walk through average opponents or opponents lacking in world class abilities, i.e. Rodriguez. How often has Ward proven how good he is against the very best? Twice maybe? Is that enough to rank him at 2? Rigo has only done it once, enough to rank him at one?

Shouldn't Wlad, Pac, Floyd, etc be ranked higher? Since they've proven their skillset at a higher level on more occasions?

I want to understand your thinking better, as I'm re-evaluating how I make P4P lists.

in part, a list is dependent on the history of your list. guys get knocked off, and others move up in their place. if i'm not mistaken, i explained that i take into account the ability and the resume of the fighter, putting emphasis on the ability. that doesn't mean we don't consider the resume when we rank a fighter p4p, only that we're not simply ranking the resume. the guy with the best resume isn't always the best fighter. ability > resume in a contemporary p4p list. when you rank a fighter historically, you go the other way [resume > ability.]


here's my list from 1-5:

rigondeaux
ward
mayweather
pacquiao
wladimir.


pacquiao is an aging great. his legs aren't what they were. neither is his chin. he was knocked down a good deal on my list when he was stopped by marquez. after beating bradley again, a very good fighter, he went back up.

wladimir is one of the more dominant fighters in the sport, but his style still makes him appear vulnerable. he clinches the second a guy gets close enough to hit with combinations, in spite of the fact that he has a huge right hand and an underrated left hook. why doesn't he let his hands go? he protects a garbage chin. he also fights in one of the worst HW divisions of all time.


mayweather was my #1 for years, prior to the maidana fight. IIRC, i didn't bump him into #1 until the third marquez - pacquiao fight, which i thought marquez clearly won. some people are still comfortable calling him the best p4p fighter after struggling with maidana, but i won't. maidana is not elite. he was completely schooled by devon alexander. he lost to amir khan.

[ShoulderRoll]

Maidana has improved a ton since hooking up with Robert Garcia though. They have taught him him to channel his aggressiveness a lot better with better combos and punch placement.

[New England]

Maidana has improved a ton since hooking up with Robert Garcia though. They have taught him him to channel his aggressiveness a lot better with better combos and punch placement.

i can agree with that, but i'd still pick alexander to box his doors off if they fought in november.

prime floyd would box his doors off, too.

[IronDanHamza]

ali was limited, too. so is floyd mayweather.


it's not a measurement of the most rounded fighter, but the best.

Floyd not well rounded? You really think so?

Seems pretty damn well rounded, I would say.

I agree but me personally being one dimensional comes into that.

Rigondeaux is very good but he's not shown me he's better than the likes of Mayweather, even today's version, atleast not yet.

He looked awesome against Donaire, but Donaire's a counter puncher himself. Much like Floyd, that's the perfect style for him.

I'd like to see him fight a top level aggressive fighter who has the ability to get inside with power, someone like Kiko Martinez for example. To see how he handles that. Because so far I've yet to see any inside game what so ever from Rigondeaux.

[New England]

Floyd not well rounded? You really think so?

Seems pretty damn well rounded, I would say.

I agree but me personally being one dimensional comes into that.

Rigondeaux is very good but he's not shown me he's better than the likes of Mayweather, even today's version, atleast not yet.

He looked awesome against Donaire, but Donaire's a counter puncher himself. Much like Floyd, that's the perfect style for him.

I'd like to see him fight a top level aggressive fighter who has the ability to get inside with power, someone like Kiko Martinez for example. To see how he handles that. Because so far I've yet to see any inside game what so ever from Rigondeaux.

he's not a finisher, only has decnent power. he's a sharp puncher, but he doesn't knock guys out. that's because he can't. i think his chin is good - very good, and he has the skills and speed. he has a great engine, and rarely, if ever, looks to even be breathing hard. he's got much more going for him than his boxing ability and style, but i don't consider him to be a truly complete fighter because of his lack of offensive and finishing potency.

ray leonard would box your doors off, knock your teeth out, take your best shot, call your girlfriend a b#Tch, and dance out of the way.

the most complete fighters could break you down and stop you. i'm not saying that you need one punch power to be a great fighter, but i think it detracts from a fighters completeness when he's not a threat to get a stoppage.


what's floyd going to do if he's behind on the cards? his last legit stoppage was against ricky hatton. is floyd going to have the skills to walk a durable man down, invest in the body, and create a stoppage from behind? we haven't seen him need it, granted, but i have my doubts about his ability to finish compared to many of the well rounded greats.

[IronDanHamza]

he's not a finisher, only has decnent power. he's a sharp puncher, but he doesn't knock guys out. that's because he can't. i think his chin is good - very good, and he has the skills and speed. he has a great engine, and rarely, if ever, looks to even be breathing hard. he's got much more going for him than his boxing ability and style, but i don't consider him to be a truly complete fighter because of his lack of offensive and finishing potency.

ray leonard would box your doors off, knock your teeth out, take your best shot, call your girlfriend a b#Tch, and dance out of the way.

the most complete fighters could break you down and stop you. i'm not saying that you need one punch power to be a great fighter, but i think it detracts from a fighters completeness when he's not a threat to get a stoppage.


what's floyd going to do if he's behind on the cards? his last legit stoppage was against ricky hatton. is floyd going to have the skills to walk a durable man down, invest in the body, and create a stoppage from behind? we haven't seen him need it, granted, but i have my doubts about his ability to finish compared to many of the well rounded greats.

He was down on the cards in the Chavez fight on 2 of the judges cards and needed to KO to win and he got it. That baffles me that he was down on the cards but apparently he was.

He may pull it out if he needed to, he's not needed to in many years. Much like Whitaker-Hurtado in that situation it could happen.

Floyd doesn't have KO power but I still think he's very much a complete fighter. Much like Whitaker for example, both lack KO power but both can do it all, fight outside, fight inside, fight off the back foot, fight off the front first, get off first, get off second. Definitely a complete fighter by my book.

Rigondeaux I've got seen do many of those things.