Wladimir Klitschko was a top 5 P4P fighter BEFORE his loss to Fury

I never had Wlad anywhere near that distinction p4p. I question whether he should ever have been p4p at all.

no, he was stumbling around and hugging overmatched nobodies in one of the worst division in the history of the sport. the guy had been sliding for literally years. fury jerked around the ring like an epileptic, landed 3 punches per round instead of 1, and was awarded the meaningless HW championship of the world.

He was rated #2 by the ring at the time of Mayweather-Pacquiao, but some people forget that he slipped several positions after the Jennings fight. (to somewhere between 5-10, can't remember). Other lists did the same. I guess some thought he was slipping even before Fury. But I thought pushing him down several spots after the Jennings fight was too harsh. A worse decision then removing him from the list for losing to Fury.

I never had him top 10, he was a product of size and a weak division. Agree on the weak division, disagree on the size. I had him around 7 or 8 pfp if I recall He is bigger than most of his opponents, but that's part of "talent". He's very coordinated for a big man, fast and good punch technique. He used his length well. I wont talk about his 1-2, clinch technique, but yeah, its cheating. BUT, he lacked a resume. Not his fault, he didn't duck anybody, but you can only be ranked as high as your resume takes you. Yeah, he dominated HW for years (after his setbacks. But, what was his best win? Haye? Peter? That's not top pfp. That will get you around 7 or 8.

how could you not have him in your top 10? Because P4P is about 'if everyone was the same size, who is best?' - Klitschko was a product of size. The HW division being abysmal helped too. Talent wise, he's nowhere near a top 10 talent.

I never had him top 10, he was a product of size and a weak division. how could you not have him in your top 10?

http://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/13710143/roman-gonzalez-takes-top-spot Fanboys will be fanboys. Yawn. ESPN didn't have him as #1, just Dan Rafael. Dan argued that Wlad should be top but was eventually talked down by fellow ESPN writer Brian Campbell. Now go away, casual.

I never had him top 10, he was a product of size and a weak division.

Fat Dan had him p4p #1. Of course when Fury schooled him he automatically became a shot bum. Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android http://www.espn.com/boxing/story/_/id/13710143/roman-gonzalez-takes-top-spot Fanboys will be fanboys.

Fat Dan had him p4p #1. Of course when Fury schooled him he automatically became a shot bum. Posted from Boxingscene.com App for Android

Pound for pound is just personal opinion so there really are no wrong picks. I like the heavyweights but not more than the lighter classes. A good case could be made for Wlad being top 5 before he lost to Fury. He was the real heavyweight champ for years and fought and defeated the best challengers usually by one sided KO.

I think there were plenty of people who had him hovering around #5 of the P4P lists. He earned it by consistent dominance for a really long time, unifying and cleaning out his division, and by being technically excellent. But he got beaten by Fury, he looked like crap, he has obviously lost that fantastic athleticism he once enjoyed. He is old, and I wouldn't personally rank him in the top 20 anymore.