Not understanding ATG P4P...

[-Boxzilla-]

I think Klitschko has better, speed, jab, and power.

But my premises is that resume play too much in deciding P4P.

Look at oscar, he is good, but his resume shows that he is borderline great(resume of who he fought, not just won), but he is not borderline great, he is good, maybe very good, but not top 100 IMO

But, oscar will always get placed in the top 100 because "he fought everbody", "look at those names on his resume"

now ur just everywhere r u talking p4p or atg?!?! r u talkin vitali vs. dlh atg status or just in general?!? peoples p4p/atg is personal and subject to preference, opinion, knowledge etc. etc. its not a science ... everyones lists can look slightly to drastically different . . . but its simple fact resume is a huge factor cause you can only really prove yourself against quality of opposition and whether you won or loss to that opposition.

[Scott9945]

[quote=VirusTI;4807807]Why is so much weight placed on resume when deciding ATG P4P?

I always thought ATG P4P meant, prime vs prime?


No way could Joe Louis or Marciano go with a prime ALI or Lennox.
And it very doubtfull anybody between 160-175 beats RJJ in his prime.[/quote]


If Roy Jones had ever fought someone like Bob Foster or even Michael Spinks at 175, you'd see Roy tested on a whole different level than he was in any of his lightheayweight fights.

[-Boxzilla-]

Frazier is another one...
He is not really ATG heavyweight material. Beat ali once, and lost 2 times to foreman and 2 more times to Ali.
Why he gets so much love, i dont know...

i think youre still having trouble understanding the concept of atg and you have to consider fraziers losses were against other atg`s and the circumstances of those losses . . .

[rorymac]

Why is so much weight placed on resume when deciding ATG P4P?

I always thought ATG P4P meant, prime vs prime?


No way could Joe Louis or Marciano go with a prime ALI or Lennox.
And it very doubtfull anybody between 160-175 beats RJJ in his prime.

Calzaghe beats RJJ in his prime, RJJ was in his prime when they fought.

[VirusTI]

shut up rorymac, dont ruin the thread.

Calz is good, but not Roy good.
Calz is around B-hops/toney level, not roy's

[KJB]

Had Frazier, Foreman, Lewis been available in thier time and won, their place would have been different.

Good point.
If Frazier and Foreman were around for the time of Mike Tyson, we wouldnt all have to hear people talk about Mike Tyson. True story for Marciano as well.

[KJB]

Frazier is another one...
He is not really ATG heavyweight material. Beat ali once, and lost 2 times to foreman and 2 more times to Ali.
Why he gets so much love, i dont know...

Cause he was actually a great fighter. This is what you dont understand about resume.
He has two losses because he fought in an era of great fighters. If Rocky Marciano fought in that era, he would have lost to Frazier, Foreman, Liston and Ali. So does he get rewarded for going undefeated in a less than incredible HW era?

[hammerhiem]

P4P is entire career not Prime for prime. Everyone has their own way of doing it but I do mine based on a number of factors, in order of importance.

1. Resume
2. Accomplishments
3. Skillset
4. Longevity
5. Intangables (popularity, impact on the sport, charisma, era)

Some fighters score highly on some factors and would never make it on my P4P list, Calzaghe for example scores highly on 2, 3, 4 and 5 but beccause his resume is so weak he won't get in my top 100.
Tyson on the other hand has a better resume but scores very poorly on longevity.

I have two fighters in my top 10 ATG that most do not. Holyfield and Locche, both are there because they score really well across the entire set and have one stellar aspect in addition to the great overall score (Holyfield longevity, Locche skillset)

[hammerhiem]

It might not be enough to rank him number 1 based on resume, but I dont really see anyone beating him in the ring in those weight ranges. If SRL can out box and out "speed" Hagler so can jones.

Lets take another example.

Rid**** Bowe
Has wins over Golota and Holyfield and only 1 loss

Wlad Klitschko
Has wins over nobody that is very notalbe, but has 3 loses to nobodies, except Sanders(GOAT)

Bowe has a way better resume, but I doubt anybody here will put money on Bowe if the two every met

Wlad Klitschko scores very low on my method.

1. resume

Poor, one of the worst HW era's in boxing, didn't fight any of the previous era greats like Lewis, Tyson, Holyfield. best names are shockingly bad, losses are worse.

2. Accomplishments

Fairly good IBF/WBO champion, but never regained from fighter he lost to, only 2 of the four main belts in a very weak era.

3. Skillset

Poor, has a great jab and decent right cross but thats your lot. weak chin, boring style, never takes risks, never moves the fight along, rarely if ever changes pace.

4. Longevity

Decent, if he keeps going to his late 30's like he should then he will score well here as most HW's do.

5. Intangables

When you're know as the most boring HW champion of all time it's best to leave this factor alone.

Conclusion= Wlad is not and never will be ATG.

[TheGreatA]

Frazier is another one...
He is not really ATG heavyweight material. Beat ali once, and lost 2 times to foreman and 2 more times to Ali.
Why he gets so much love, i dont know...

Because he ran through the best heavyweight contenders of his day Jimmy Ellis, Oscar Bonavena, Jerry Quarry, George Chuvalo, Eddie Machen, Doug Jones, Buster Mathis, Joe Bugner, unified the heavyweight titles (WBC&WBA) and then decisively beat the linear champion Muhammad Ali in one of the biggest and most hyped up fights of all time.

He gave Ali hell in the third fight as well, which is recognized as perhaps the greatest fight of all time.