Who’s better p4p. Pavlik or Kessler? And why does Pavlik get a freebee?

[Dan...]

Just for fun I'll repeat myself.

Kessler is better than Pavlik P4P by quite a margin. He is much faster and is a much better technical boxer than Pavlik. In many ways he shows Pavlik how an orthodox boxing style should be executed.

Haha, you really don't rate Pavlik.

[Addition]

Compare Pavlik's best win to Kessler's and you see that Pavlik's is definitely the better of the two, hence why I have Pavlik over Kessler.

[BattlingNelson]

Nice points skills-wise. I don't know if I'll agree with you that Kessler should be higher p4p as Pavlik did beat the highly regarded Taylor.

But I will say that IF Pavlik is ranked in the top 10 Kessler shouldn't be far behind. Some posters put Pavlik as high as no. 5 and I do think that it's because they dont know better. They've watched Pavlik regularly on HBO and have only watched Kessler against Calzaghe and/or Andrade. I sense a serious yank-bias.

And now they've seen Edison Miranda, who they regarded very high, being wallopped by the Abrahammer and suddenly Arthur Abraham enters the top 10!

And I might add that this could only mean that the yanks still thinks that Miranda is a worldclass fighter.

[abadger]

Haha, you really don't rate Pavlik.

I admit it, I don't. He's good at what he does but what he does doesn't look that good to me. I also think that he has benefitted from facing, in Miranda and Taylor two opponents who both suited him stylistically (on fight night at least) and who have even more over inflated reputations than he does. I rate Taylor as being pretty poor and as for Miranda....

I am a heretic.

[Dan...]

I admit it, I don't. He's good at what he does but what he does doesn't look that good to me. I also think that he has benefitted from facing, in Miranda and Taylor two opponents who both suited him stylistically (on fight night at least) and who have even more over inflated reputations than he does. I rate Taylor as being pretty poor and as for Miranda....

I am a heretic.

Taylor as being pretty poor? That is a little harsh for mine. Anyone with back to back wins over B-Hop deserves a little more credit than that I think.

It is tough to say how good Pavlik is at the moment. I think he needs to be in against more elite competition before he can be properly judged but, as it currently stands, I can't see how is resume isn't better than Kessler's.

[abadger]

Compare Pavlik's best win to Kessler's and you see that Pavlik's is definitely the better of the two, hence why I have Pavlik over Kessler.

On paper Pavlik's wins over Jermain Taylor are better than any Kessler win, but not THAT much better. Mundine, Beyer, and Andrade weren't exactly bums for Kessler, well maybe Beyer was a bit of one. Anyhow, Kessler has beaten more world champs than Pavlik and defended his belt more times, and the strength of Pavliks resume really rests exclusively on Taylor, who I don't think is that good at all, I mean, what top class SMW is Taylor going to beat in future? I realise Taylor beat Hopkins twice and that is very impressive, but he hasn't looked very good since then so I have to say I suspect those were wins over a guy who was too old for MW and that they flatter Taylor somewhat.

[abadger]

Taylor as being pretty poor? That is a little harsh for mine. Anyone with back to back wins over B-Hop deserves a little more credit than that I think.

It is tough to say how good Pavlik is at the moment. I think he needs to be in against more elite competition before he can be properly judged but, as it currently stands, I can't see how is resume isn't better than Kessler's.

I mentioned Taylors wins over B-Hop in my other post, but yes i agree does seem harsh to describe the guy who ended Hopkins MW reign as poor. However, my honest feeling about that is that Hopkins simply did not have a MW workrate any more, and that Taylor beat him almost by default. I think this is a pretty reasonable assessment too, its not as though Taylor really did anything teriffic in there is it?

Taylor's problem for me is that he has this terrible tendency to gas/ lose concentration and also that he really doesn't have a major weapon in his game that sets him apart and really truly troubles his opponent. He's a guy who does a lot of things well, but nothing incredibly. The best part of his game is his jab, but that alone can't win him too many fights.

An analogy I thought of recently goes something like this. Byron Mitchell won his world title by beating an aging Frankie Liles and doubtless was regarded as a pretty good young champ with the boxing world at his feet. A while later he lost his title to Ottke (fairly or not I don't know) and then got KOd in two by Calzaghe. His career was effectively over and now America's former SMW champion is all but forgotten. What is to say that thsi won't be the way it goes for Taylor? In eight years or so he might very well be written off as a bum. As I've said before, what top SMW is he actually going to beat?

[Addition]

On paper Pavlik's wins over Jermain Taylor are better than any Kessler win, but not THAT much better. Mundine, Beyer, and Andrade weren't exactly bums for Kessler, well maybe Beyer was a bit of one. Anyhow, Kessler has beaten more world champs than Pavlik and defended his belt more times, and the strength of Pavliks resume really rests exclusively on Taylor, who I don't think is that good at all, I mean, what top class SMW is Taylor going to beat in future? I realise Taylor beat Hopkins twice and that is very impressive, but he hasn't looked very good since then so I have to say I suspect those were wins over a guy who was too old for MW and that they flatter Taylor somewhat.

I didn't imply there was a huge difference between Pavlik's and Kessler's win but I feel Pavlik's wins are better than Kessler's.

[Dynamite Kid]

On paper Pavlik's wins over Jermain Taylor are better than any Kessler win, but not THAT much better. Mundine, Beyer, and Andrade weren't exactly bums for Kessler, well maybe Beyer was a bit of one. Anyhow, Kessler has beaten more world champs than Pavlik and defended his belt more times, and the strength of Pavliks resume really rests exclusively on Taylor, who I don't think is that good at all, I mean, what top class SMW is Taylor going to beat in future? I realise Taylor beat Hopkins twice and that is very impressive, but he hasn't looked very good since then so I have to say I suspect those were wins over a guy who was too old for MW and that they flatter Taylor somewhat.

Beyer is probably less of a bum than Andrade that guy is useless at least Beyer held the World Title

that is true his wins over Hopkins do flatter Taylor but think about it if Hopkins was to old then and that was in 2005 what does that say about his credentials in 2008 against Calzaghe a fight that was very close ?

[Dan...]

I mentioned Taylors wins over B-Hop in my other post, but yes i agree does seem harsh to describe the guy who ended Hopkins MW reign as poor. However, my honest feeling about that is that Hopkins simply did not have a MW workrate any more, and that Taylor beat him almost by default. I think this is a pretty reasonable assessment too, its not as though Taylor really did anything teriffic in there is it?

Taylor's problem for me is that he has this terrible tendency to gas/ lose concentration and also that he really doesn't have a major weapon in his game that sets him apart and really truly troubles his opponent. He's a guy who does a lot of things well, but nothing incredibly. The best part of his game is his jab, but that alone can't win him too many fights.

An analogy I thought of recently goes something like this. Byron Mitchell won his world title by beating an aging Frankie Liles and doubtless was regarded as a pretty good young champ with the boxing world at his feet. A while later he lost his title to Ottke (fairly or not I don't know) and then got KOd in two by Calzaghe. His career was effectively over and now America's former SMW champion is all but forgotten. What is to say that thsi won't be the way it goes for Taylor? In eight years or so he might very well be written off as a bum. As I've said before, what top SMW is he actually going to beat?

You need to stop rating fighters on what you think is likely to happen in the future I think. I don't think you can say "well, sure the Taylor wins make Pavlik's resume look better than Kessler's but over the next few years Taylor will be exposed as a bum and therefore Kessler should be rated higher", which is effectively what I think you are saying.

The bottom line is this, whatever way you spin it, the Taylor wins for Pavlik are far and away better than Mikkel's best win which is most likely Anthony Mundine. In a few years Kessler may well be a top 5 p4p fighter and above Pavlik, it wouldn't surprise me. But, at this stage, to have Kessler over Pavlik in the p4p ratings is, IMO, showing considerable bias and not very credible.