P4P lists: what is your criteria?

[Toney616]

These lists get mentioned a lot these days. I was hoping that posters here would tell me what criteria they use to put together their lists?

[DET. IRONSIDE]

Biggest undefeated string (Sugar Ray is I think 90 or something), title defences/number of fights and quality of opponent (I guess you can call that resume as all the fights don't have to be quality as long as theres enough quality fights that are padded out by only two or three keep busies), ability to get back up from a knock down or just not being knocked down (chin) and for the lower weight divisions how well a fighter has moved weights up and down.

[NChristo]

Everything, skills / talent, quality of resume, longevity, how dominant they were / title defenses, consistency, how much size (if any) they gave up in fights etc etc

Biggest undefeated string (Sugar Ray is I think 90 or something)

Jimmy Wilde went longest undefeated with 103.

[Toney616]

Biggest undefeated string (Sugar Ray is I think 90 or something), title defences/number of fights and quality of opponent (I guess you can call that resume as all the fights don't have to be quality as long as theres enough quality fights that are padded out by only two or three keep busies), ability to get back up from a knock down or just not being knocked down (chin) and for the lower weight divisions how well a fighter has moved weights up and down.

How would you grade the above criteria? Which ones are the most important?
1. Quality of opposition
2. No of title defenses(I'm not sure how to grade this)
3. Ability to move up
etc, etc

[Toney616]

Everything, skills / talent, quality of resume, longevity, how dominant they were / title defenses, consistency, how much size (if any) they gave up in fights etc etc

But how do you put it all together to you give them points for each criteria, then add it all up? Toney doesn't have many title defenses, but he has a better quality of opposition than Hopkins for example. Who would you place higher on your list?

[DET. IRONSIDE]

How would you grade the above criteria? Which ones are the most important?
1. Quality of opposition
2. No of title defenses(I'm not sure how to grade this)
3. Ability to move up
etc, etc

I'd say its got to be a combination of the biggest string of undefeateds balanced with the quality of opposition is the first thing statswise.

Then theres the ability to come back from a loss that would factor in second.

Ability to shift weights that would come in third but its like each one can outweigh the other, like a matrix.

Then theres longevity.

But after all that the final card has to be the style of the boxer. Its what puts the finish on top of all his stats. The way they fight gives you that complete boxer and if you haven't seen that, even in a highlight clip, you can't make a judgement.

[Toney616]

I'd say its got to be a combination of the biggest string of undefeateds balanced with the quality of opposition is the first thing statswise.

Then theres the ability to come back from a loss that would factor in second.

Ability to shift weights that would come in third but its like each one can outweigh the other, like a matrix.

Then theres longevity.

But after all that the final card has to be the style of the boxer. Its what puts the finish on top of all his stats. The way they fight gives you that complete boxer and if you haven't seen that, even in a highlight clip, you can't make a judgement.

James Toney MW resume:
Opposition:
Nunn class A
R.Johnson class A
McCallum class A
Accomplishments:
6 defenses
Consistency:
Undefeated at mw
Intangibles:
Very high, always fought to win
Style
Elite fighter/defensive minded counter puncher, solid chin, high ring IQ/could fight at all ranges

Would you then give points for each criteria, then add the points up?
for example say I do the following:
10 points for each class A win: 3*10=30 points
2 points for each title defense: 6*2= 12 points
Intangibles: 10 points (10 points is the max points for this category)
Consistency: 8 points (was drained in the Tiberi fight)(10 points is the max points for this category)
Style: 10 points
Total: 60 points

[DET. IRONSIDE]

I don't use a points system but that looks pretty good. I just go by my judgement and more on what I like P4P can outweigh my P4P Top Ten.

Things like style puts Hagler ahead of Leonard in my book.

[Toney616]

I don't use a points system but that looks pretty good.

Thanks. Im just playing around hopefully I will find a system Im happy with

I just go by my judgement and more on what I like P4P can outweigh my P4P Top Ten.

ok

Things like style puts Hagler ahead of Leonard in my book.

When people say p4p do they mean which fighter has the best chance against other fighters OR who has the best resume, because they are not one and the same thing?

[DET. IRONSIDE]

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 still wrote some great articles on boxing history and politics.