Do YOU consider any PBC fighter to be top 10 p4p?

I don't have any PBC fighters in my top 10 P4P...most of em have not proved themselves in a fashion meriting inclusion. Swift is the only guy I'd even give consideration to, but the past 2 years have not been kind to him. Thurman gets no consideration. If PBC had any sense, they would be positioning DANNY SWIFT GARCIA as their star, he easily has accomplished more than the rest of em. As far as any PBC fights that would help push their guys into P4P consideration, I don't give it much thought....Papa Al is holding his best fights close to the vest until that real ad/sponsor money starts rolling in.

sooo i had you till your second BIASED paragrapgh... danny G? same guy who got whooped by herrera and peterson and won "gift" decisions then picked cherry picks inbetween... no way garcia deserves ****, also lara a guy who fights on thursday nights and wilder who has 1 ranked opponent on his resume FOH If Danny Garcia is not top 10, how can Canelo be? Hear me out... Supposedly Danny really lost to Herrera and Peterson right?? Supposedly Canelo really lost to Lara, and some might say Trout. They really are two in the same. So if those 2 gift decisions stop Garcia from being top 10, why not Canelo?

Garcia is not in my top 10 but he's really the only PBC fighter that comes to mind that could be there. He's only 27 though so he'll probably be back on it if he stops ****in around with these Malignaggis and Guerreros.

There is no clear 1 and the rest can be biased and just thrown in there to benefit a network or promoter. Its an imaginary list

I think you mean Canelo😄 I'm no homer. Lara could have been given the nod depending on how you score. As could have Trout (and the open scoring ****ing ruined that fight). I gave him both fights, but its not like I don't see the argument.

Holy sh*t, dude. Is it possible for you to scroll through a thread and look pass any criticism of GGG however minor without replying? Looooool. It's a full time job dude.

sooo i had you till your second BIASED paragrapgh... danny G? same guy who got whooped by herrera and peterson and won "gift" decisions then picked cherry picks inbetween... no way garcia deserves ****, also lara a guy who fights on thursday nights and wilder who has 1 ranked opponent on his resume FOH I'm not saying everyone I mentioned should be on there but if your fair and objective and hold them to the same standard a couple could be included Danny should, he cleaned out his div that was filled with legit names it's not how you win but if . he beat Lamont who gave up the first 7 rounds , Herrera I thought he won but even if you didn't and feel he got a gift it's no different then Canelo who got a gift against Lara and he's on there

Holy sh*t, dude. Is it possible for you to scroll through a thread and look pass any criticism of GGG however minor without replying? I can let you know my vacation schedule if you wanna get in some potshots at GGG unopposed

The lists are a joke and so biased it's hard to take seriously. I mean Manny is rated #3 but has won 3 of his last 6 fights. Loma who I'm a fan of has 6 fights 4 against no hopers and is 50% against respectable names but he's on most of the lists. Crawford has 1 legit name ( Gamboa ) on his resume who was clearly to small for that fight. Big fan of Rigo but he hasn't faced a legit name in 2-3 years and really that was his only top level name on his resume. For PBC Danny G should be on all the lists and I think a case can be made for Stevenson, Degeale, Lara, LSC, Wilder , winner of Porter / Thurman , and Frampton can be in the discussion he gets past Quigg. If you base it on the same criteria that Espn & Ring use but it won't happen because Rings owned by Oscar who's suing Haymon and Dan Raceal and co are TR / HBo lackeys sooo i had you till your second BIASED paragrapgh... danny G? same guy who got whooped by herrera and peterson and won "gift" decisions then picked cherry picks inbetween... no way garcia deserves ****, also lara a guy who fights on thursday nights and wilder who has 1 ranked opponent on his resume FOH

The lists are a joke and so biased it's hard to take seriously. I mean Manny is rated #3 but has won 3 of his last 6 fights. Loma who I'm a fan of has 6 fights 4 against no hopers and is 50% against respectable names but he's on most of the lists. Crawford has 1 legit name ( Gamboa ) on his resume who was clearly to small for that fight. Big fan of Rigo but he hasn't faced a legit name in 2-3 years and really that was his only top level name on his resume. For PBC Danny G should be on all the lists and I think a case can be made for Stevenson, Degeale, Lara, LSC, Wilder , winner of Porter / Thurman , and Frampton can be in the discussion he gets past Quigg. If you base it on the same criteria that Espn & Ring use but it won't happen because Rings owned by Oscar who's suing Haymon and Dan Raceal and co are TR / HBo lackeys

also pbc has errol spence and i know he hasnt fought anyone but i can tell by his technique hes gonna be the future.

Out of all the talent in all the divisions (and there are a ****load of good fighters out there) how many recognizable names are are being matched against each other? There are a ****ton of great fights out there that could be made and they are not. It's maybe worse than I've ever seen it. It ain't just PBC, although they are maybe the worst of the lot. Sadly i see these competitive matches more common in the weight divisions hardly anyone cares for. Vargas vs Miura, Francisco Rodriguez jr vs Donnie Nietes, Leo Santa Cruz vs Abner Mares, Yamanaka vs Moreno, and more. Also we have Quigg vs Frampton next year and a few more interesting matches awaiting in the horizon. the closes is Danny Garcia probably 15 followed by adonis around 19 20th I agree, Garcia is the closest the PBC has to a legitimate PFP fighter right now... Even if his performances have either been lackluster or he has faced subpar opposition since his most significant win some time back.

Garcia is a fraud and Hymen's strategy for building up stars only makes them look like money grubbing lames out for the cake walk fights. Sure Garcia swelled up Matts' eye with the "phantom punch" but he ran like hell from a rematch because he knew "magic" wasn't going to happen twice. Dude got his ass beat in the Peterson fight and outboxed to the hilt in the Harrera bout. God Salka doe....yeah, that was AMAZING!! garcia a fraud? put down the pipe son.. jesus christ, jsfd is that you? lol

Most likely because they are not being matched up in tough fights that truly determine their worth on the scale of a PFP ranking. They may have a few competitive fights sprinkled here and there, but none really among their top talents and most recognizable names. Out of all the talent in all the divisions (and there are a ****load of good fighters out there) how many recognizable names are are being matched against each other? There are a ****ton of great fights out there that could be made and they are not. It's maybe worse than I've ever seen it. It ain't just PBC, although they are maybe the worst of the lot.

Resume is only part of the equation. Vargas being better than Viloria is debatable. I lean towards Viloria. I was concerned for Gonzales against Viloria. Not so much for Bradley against Vargas. Debatable? :lol1: Vargas at no point in his career will or has he been remotely close to what Viloria is as a fighter. Regardless of how minor of a threat he posed to Gonzalez, Viloria posses the experience and skill that Vargas can only dream of. Also, aside from the homie Tua and Mak, I doubt many actually believed my boy Viloria posed much of a threat to Gonzalez. In fact, neither Viloria nor Vargas posed much of a threat to either fighter. Aside from a possible and rather common robbery scenario in the Vargas fight, and the possibility of a puncher's chance in the Viloria fight, we all pretty much predicted the outcome of the fights from the get go.

Im simply saying that he should have dominated all of them. Especially since Thurman was revered for his "one time" power. Both Guerrero and Collazo are past their best days, yet both gave Thurman hell in spots. Am I saying Thurman will never be a PFP? Not at all. However, as of now, from what he has showed us... I'm not so sure he deserves a slot just yet. thurman is barely 10 of my top 10 but he deserves it i seen him fight his way up, i really do think haymon is holding him back but trust me hes a good fighter if you hit him hard he will comeback harder.

you acting like those guys are push overs.. and thurman won 9 rounds in each of those fights... Im simply saying that he should have dominated all of them. Especially since Thurman was revered for his "one time" power. Both Guerrero and Collazo are past their best days, yet both gave Thurman hell in spots. Am I saying Thurman will never be a PFP? Not at all. However, as of now, from what he has showed us... I'm not so sure he deserves a slot just yet.

If resume doesn't matter why are you trying to justify his position over Bradley by using Roman's resume? And yes the Vargas that Bradley beat is better than a 35 year old past prime Viloria in the twilight of his career. Resume is only part of the equation. Vargas being better than Viloria is debatable. I lean towards Viloria. I was concerned for Gonzales against Viloria. Not so much for Bradley against Vargas.

He's dominating a weight class though. These other guys aren't even clear cut #1 in their division, much less dominant Holy sh*t, dude. Is it possible for you to scroll through a thread and look pass any criticism of GGG however minor without replying?

The same Thurman whom didn't impress against Bundu, allowed a wasted Guerrero to resurge in the fight and nearly folded against a past it Collazo? Yeah, no. If disagreeing with you makes me a hater in your eyes...sign me up, I would gladly accept such a label before placing Thurman anywhere near my PFP list :) you acting like those guys are push overs.. and thurman won 9 rounds in each of those fights...