P4P is a DEEPLY silly concept...

[jack_the_rippuh]

Well maybe we should ask who has the most effective style?

[BrooklynBomber]

P4P was there to hype up fighters, that is all.

Just another marketing tool.

[PROD]

Making a detailed list of the top 10 in order is indeed silly. I have no problem with listing the top 3 or getting 10 guys together and saying "These guys are the best". It's when people get all serious and quasi-scientific about it that makes the whole notion a little ridiculous or comical. Like arguing the merits of why #6 is above #8....

I haven't made a P4P list since I was in high school, but I'm sure I could rattle off 8 to 10 names with 3 or so having a definite place.

[kayjay]

It's pretty ****** and so are most of the people who take it seriously.

Diego Fuego thinks it's 'real', but this cat couldn't even understand the joke I made about him last week, so he what he says needs to be take with a grain of salt

[BROOKLYN CESAR]

... seriously, it's a nice bit of fun, but the way some jokers on here take it so seriously, as if it's something earnt in the ring (when most of the top P4P fighters haven't even fought each other, and certainly not in the concept of the rankings, eg. Winky can put on weight but he's not the same size as Taylor or Hopkins).

Discussion of a hypothetical, abstract concept is all well and good, but it seems like one out of every five threads on here is about it nowadays, to the detriment of the sport.

Someone had it right on here the other day - they had their £for£ list (or $for$), for the most value for money boxers. That's all that really counts.

It's utterly ****ing ridiculous to be praising boxers for being "P4P greats", when really the whole thing doesn't mean ANYTHING, is a realistically unquantifiable notion and has very little relation to what actually happens in a boxing ring.


If you're reading this, and thinking that P4P IS important, and that I'm wrong, then you're a gay. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. Diego****o, don't bother to reply, you bore me.

I agree with you about the p4p thing but Everyone has their own opinnion on things which doesnt mean yours is wrong and it dont mean theyre wrong either!!! people may have different views on a subject this dont make them gay like you would say!!!

[DLT]

I love the P4P thing and I think people make it way too harder then its supposed to be. P4P is simple. If 2 guys were the same weight then who would win the fight? I think it means alot. Whats wrong with that? Its definatly nothing to ***** about. This is probally some Hatton fan who thinks its bogus because his man isnt rated #1 but if he was then they would be talking about how legit the P4P thing was.

If P4P doesnt mean anything then neither do any of the boxing rankings because they havent settled it in the ring either. If thats the case then Hatton isnt the 140 pound champ because he hasnt beaten Paulie yet. You can say that he beat Tszyu but who's to say that Tszyu was better then Paulie at that stage of his career? If Castillo was the #1 guy and Hatton beat him then Hatton would be rated #1 but that really wouldnt make sense because anyone could see that Castillo clearly wasnt the best fighter in the division. Its all relative

[werewolf]

... seriously, it's a nice bit of fun, but the way some jokers on here take it so seriously, as if it's something earnt in the ring (when most of the top P4P fighters haven't even fought each other, and certainly not in the concept of the rankings, eg. Winky can put on weight but he's not the same size as Taylor or Hopkins).

Discussion of a hypothetical, abstract concept is all well and good, but it seems like one out of every five threads on here is about it nowadays, to the detriment of the sport.

Someone had it right on here the other day - they had their £for£ list (or $for$), for the most value for money boxers. That's all that really counts.

It's utterly ****ing ridiculous to be praising boxers for being "P4P greats", when really the whole thing doesn't mean ANYTHING, is a realistically unquantifiable notion and has very little relation to what actually happens in a boxing ring.


If you're reading this, and thinking that P4P IS important, and that I'm wrong, then you're a gay. Sorry, but that's just the way it is. Diego****o, don't bother to reply, you bore me.

Great post! My thoughts exactly! I think the whole pound for pound gimmick started as some sort of space-filler in the useless Ring magazine.




ww

[fluent2332]

i don't think its a silly concept, i just think some people take it too far.

its like comparing NBA players like Shaq and Kobe when one is a center and the other is a guard. i don't take P4P to literally mean "if everyone was at the same weight who would win". i think thats ******ed and makes absolutely no sense. i don't compare shaq and kobe by saying "well if they played the same position who would be better?". thats just dumb. but i say at this point in their careers kobe is the better player then shaq. why? because his current resume of 32PPG is better while shaq is declining with age

you should use p4p as an abstract guide of the best overall current boxers. **** the word P4P, just start calling it your top 10 boxers in the game today. who has accomplished the most by fighting the best opposition, who is the most dominant in their weight division, who looked the best the longest, etc. it should be no more and no less

I love the P4P thing and I think people make it way too harder then its supposed to be. P4P is simple. If 2 guys were the same weight then who would win the fight? I think it means alot. Whats wrong with that? Its definatly nothing to ***** about. This is probally some Hatton fan who thinks its bogus because his man isnt rated #1 but if he was then they would be talking about how legit the P4P thing was.

LOL, typical Fat Yank strawman argument. Where did I even MENTION Hatton? Oh wait, I'm from England so I MUST be a Hatton fan, right?

Considering the guy's latest win will probably put him back in the top five there's nothing to "*****" about.

And *******s also misunderstand the "simple" concept. It's not as simple as "if two fighters were the same weight....", they have to be balanced against each other. For a long time Pacquaio was below Barrera, despite beating him. Seriously, if you're gonna discuss something, discuss it WITH me, not AT me, and don't put words in my mouth. What a ****.

If P4P doesnt mean anything then neither do any of the boxing rankings because they havent settled it in the ring either. If thats the case then Hatton isnt the 140 pound champ because he hasnt beaten Paulie yet. You can say that he beat Tszyu but who's to say that Tszyu was better then Paulie at that stage of his career? If Castillo was the #1 guy and Hatton beat him then Hatton would be rated #1 but that really wouldnt make sense because anyone could see that Castillo clearly wasnt the best fighter in the division. Its all relative

No, they have to work their way UP the rankings. Paulie has to be No.1 by beating people above him in those rankings. That much is simple, SURELY??? Otherwise every undefeated prospect would be No.1 Jesus.

people may have different views on a subject this dont make them gay like you would say!!!

No, it does. I read it in New Scientist.