P4P doesn't really make sense, noone can explain this

**badboypeenoy** · 08-28-2008, 08:39 AM

Originally posted by GreatJoe

Right, I'll note a situation, give me the answer.

Mayweather is P4P#1, Antonio Margarito beats Miguel Cotto, then in Cotto's next fight he beats Mayweather who was P4P#1.

So who is P4P #1???, does cotto replace Mayweather even though he lost to margarito, does margarito replace mayweather even though he never fought him.

P4P doesn't really make sense unless there is someone miles ahead of the crowd.

It's a bit like, Williams beat margarito, williams lost to quintana, margarito beat cotto, williams beat quintana. So who's welterweight no1?

The argument still doesn't make Calzaghe P4P number 1.

**Caxcan** · 08-28-2008, 08:46 AM

Well that's the problem with the P4P ranking. When a fighter is ranked the p4p king, people will often give them credit for being the best fighter in their division but that's not always the case.

Mayweather deserved to be the top p4p fighter on the list because he moved up in weight and had success in different divisions, but he hadnt proven himself to be the best welterweight when he retired. The same goes for Pac and the lightweight division.

**j.razor** · 08-28-2008, 08:52 AM

Originally posted by badboypeenoy

The argument still doesn't make Calzaghe P4P number 1.

LOL, so true...2 many people r getting carried away wit da p4p list...

**-----------** · 08-28-2008, 09:01 AM

Originally posted by badboypeenoy

The argument still doesn't make Calzaghe P4P number 1.

But Manny Pacquiao is P4P #1

WHAT'S YOUR POINT?

**Flawless** · 08-28-2008, 09:02 AM

P4P doesn’t make sense when Calzaghe isn’t number one

**-----------** · 08-28-2008, 09:04 AM

Originally posted by Flawless

P4P doesn�t make sense when Calzaghe isn�t number one

Noone should have Calzaghe no1.

Not when Pacquiao's records stands as it is.

P4P doesn't really make sense, noone can explain this