Teddy Atlas on why he doesn't have gg top 10 but has Loma #1

Teddy Atlas: Why I left Gennady Golovkin off my pound-for-pound list Gennady 9:19 AM PT Teddy Atlas ESPN Boxing Ringside Analyst Putting together an honest and responsible top 10 pound-for-pound fighters list is not so easy. Of course, such lists are subjective, but even so you must try to use cold and fact-oriented criteria for nomination. And even using strict calculus, in the end you will call on experience and even instinct to make a final analysis. Atlas' top 10 P4P list 1. Vastly Lomachenko 2. Terence Crawford 3. Andre Ward 4. Keith Thurman 5. Sergey Kovalev 6. Roman Gonzalez 7. Guillermo Rigondeaux 8. Canelo Alvarez 9. Manny Pacquiao 10. Errol Spence Jr. Because the process has caused me to leave a very popular -- and many will say "automatic choice" -- off my list, I was asked to explain why. By the reaction of some boxing pundits, you might have thought I insulted their moms when all I did was leave unified middleweight titleholder Gennady Golovkin off my list. I should begin by saying I do not have any bias against GGG. In fact, I love to watch his fights and I believe his style is simple, and his cleverly chosen words to the media have been good for the sport. As a matter of fact, if this was a list of the top 11, he would be on it. But it's not. This list is also not about popularity or even producing exciting fights. It is not about how good you were eight months ago. Your most recent performances influence placement. For me, entry into this club can be temporary. Proof of that is that Golovkin has been on my top 10 list before. But things change. People get better while others regress, so you have to be ready to adjust the ranking. EDITOR'S PICKS P4P rankings: Santa Cruz, Garcia get votes after great performances Leo Santa Cruz and Mikey Garcia produced exciting victories this past weekend, but was that enough to push them into the ESPN pound-for-pound rankings? Not into the Top 10. Trying to figure out who is the best can be as difficult and controversial as judging a fight. It is amazing how three people can watch a fight, yet see three different outcomes when it comes to scoring. Again, aside from the various opinions, trying to grade the best fighters comes down to five elements or categories: 1. Talent: Pure ability 2. Technique: How does he apply his talent? 3. Time and consistency: How long has he performed at this level? 4. Competition: How good is it? 5. Slippage: There's always someone breathing over your shoulder I believe, relatively speaking, Golovkin is as physically strong and tough as anyone on that list. But I also believe there are others with better technique. I also believe he may be slipping. I understand he might have been sick when he looked very ordinary at times against Kell Brook. But sick or not, his technical flaws were evident. Also, his level of competition has been questionable or at least very advantageous for him. My next statement will probably evoke more outrage against me and my judgments. I would pick Golovkin to beat Canelo Alvarez head-to-head right now. But that is different -- GGG may be too big and too strong for Canelo, who is ranked eighth on my list. That doesn't mean that I have to include GGG on a short list that shows who has better abilities collectively and has displayed them against the better opposition. Also, I feel Canelo has shown improvements lately while Golovkin has not. For those detractors who will ask about Errol Spence Jr.'s opponents, I would honestly answer that they may be right. But that is where I must use my experience and even instinct to tell me that Spence will perform at a higher level, as his abilities, technique and mental state project he will. As I said earlier, if I could add honorable mentions, I would ask for two spots and include Golovkin and Mikey Garcia. But this is about the here and now. Although I fully understand the criticism of my top 10 list, I also know that being on a pound-for-pound list is subject to many variables, and hopefully I have been able to explain some of them.