P4P lists: what is your criteria?

[Toney616]

P4P means the pound for pound best fighter. As in the best talent in the ring per pound.

So it means who pound for pound fights the best. Like if you took Sugar Ray's ability and put it in any weight class it would be the best because he is regarded the best pound for pound of all time by most experts.

Sorry if I'm being patronising there but its weird to find someone on BS that doesn't understand the concept but I just found a 14 year old in NSB so I guess you're young.

Where would you rank someone like Jones, who never fought a big puncher?

[DET. IRONSIDE]

Where would you rank someone like Jones, who never fought a big puncher?

After the BHop fight? Probably in the top 40 and finally below Bhop.

[Toney616]

After the BHop fight? Probably in the top 40 and finally below Bhop.

It depends on your criteria, Bhop wins in terms of longevity, but Jones leads in better opposition. Which do you value more?

I'm told that most fans ignore fighters careers when they are considered shot, whats your view on that?

[DET. IRONSIDE]

It depends on your criteria, Bhop wins in terms of longevity, but Jones leads in better opposition. Which do you value more?

I'm told that most fans ignore fighters careers when they are considered shot, whats your view on that?

Well thats what affects their ranking. The longer they fight and the better the opposition they beat the better fighter.

But Jones vs Bhop is a whole other debate. I mean Jones went so far up but he ducked people by going up in weight too. Nigel Benn was screaming that he never got to fight Roy Jones before he retired and that would have been a fight. Then theres Eubank.

[Toney616]

Well thats what affects their ranking. The longer they fight and the better the opposition they beat the better fighter.

I would consider Jones to be prime from around Toney to Harmon. Post prime from Harmon to Tarver 3. Basically shot after that.
I would basically ignore all of his losses after that (and wins, lol)

I would consider Hopkins to be prime maybe around the second segundo fight to around the Joppy fight. Past prime from Joppy to now. Very over the hill, but far from shot. So I would still count his wins and losses as valid. Not sure what his win over Pavlik means.

But Jones vs Bhop is a whole other debate. I mean Jones went so far up but he ducked people by going up in weight too. Nigel Benn was screaming that he never got to fight Roy Jones before he retired and that would have been a fight. Then theres Eubank.

The time was never quite right for Jones-Eubank. Eubank had lost his belt to Collins by the time Jones moved up, he would fail to regain it in 95 as well. He did offer Jones a fight in 96 (Chris was heavily in debt to the tax man) and Jones said you are now no good to me after losing to Collins twice.
Jones had a valid point but he still should of fought him considering the guys he was happy to defend his belt against like Thornton (the punching postman).

Not sure what happened with Benn, I read that it was due to Benn being tied to Showtime with Jones being tied to HBO. Although as I said before Jones has never fought a big puncher in any of the divisions he fought in. Which brings me back to your p4p definition how would you rank a guy whose chin has never really been tested?

Hopkins is the same as well, the biggest puncher he faced was 1d Pavlik and ww Tito. He also ducked guys like: Toney, Jones(2002) and Calzaghe(2003), the legendary Danny Green and Dawson

[DET. IRONSIDE]

Jones has never fought a big puncher in any of the divisions he fought in. Which brings me back to your p4p definition how would you rank a guy whose chin has never really been tested?

Hopkins is the same as well, the biggest puncher he faced was 1d Pavlik and ww Tito. He also ducked guys like: Toney, Jones(2002) and Calzaghe(2003), the legendary Danny Green and Dawson

It all comes back to quality of opposition based after all that. Its why
Holyfield beats Tyson for me. Also BHop and Jones beat Tyson and Tyson, for all the quality he showed in his prime, doesn't make the top 40 because he never had the mental toughness to play the game. His ego consumed his talent, wasted it.

BHop and Jones built their talent up and they are still going but it'll always be a close argument about which of them is the better fighter. I always liked BHop's style better, so I'm biased but I'd always rate him in the same way that I'd always rate Hagler over Leonard.

[Toney616]

It all comes back to quality of opposition based after all that. Its why
Holyfield beats Tyson for me.

Based on quality of opposition I can agree with that

Also BHop and Jones beat Tyson and Tyson,

A case can be made for Jones, but who did Hopkins ever beat for him to be ranked higher on the p4p list?

for all the quality he showed in his prime, doesn't make the top 40 because he never had the mental toughness to play the game. His ego consumed his talent, wasted it.

Also his lack of maturity as a person and as a fighter

BHop and Jones built their talent up and they are still going but it'll always be a close argument about which of them is the better fighter. I always liked BHop's style better, so I'm biased but I'd always rate him in the same way that I'd always rate Hagler over Leonard.

Bhops top 3 wins:
Tarver
Pavlik
Tito

Jones top 3 wins:
Toney
Hopkins
R.Johnson

[DET. IRONSIDE]

A case can be made for Jones, but who did Hopkins ever beat for him to be ranked higher on the p4p list?

Jones

Remember they are ROUGHLY the same age but BHop is older and STILL winning.

[r.burgundy]

for me,its
1)opposition
2)skills

and thats it

[r.burgundy]

Based on quality of opposition I can agree with that

A case can be made for Jones, but who did Hopkins ever beat for him to be ranked higher on the p4p list?

Also his lack of maturity as a person and as a fighter

Bhops top 3 wins:
Tarver
Pavlik
Tito

Jones top 3 wins:
Toney
Hopkins
R.Johnson

reggie johnson better than ruiz or hill?