What number one p4p should be.

**MANGLER** · 06-23-2009, 10:33 AM

P4P is based on who would win the most if everybody was the same size. I don't mind Pac as #1 atm, but cats make too big a deal of p4p imo.

**aether** · 06-23-2009, 10:33 AM

Originally posted by TredKiller

it should not be measured by wins an resume, it should be measured by skill and style,

i was looking at p4p #1's list in the past years, at one point they had JCC, now i LOVE chavez fights, he's one of the most entertaining boxers in history, but skillwish, he isnt that great, he's just great at the one thing he does, come forward.

some were saying if froch gets some more wins, he can be in the top 10, i dont think that would be right, he's a one dimensinal fighter, id put taylor ahead of him p4p, becuz taylor has more SKILLS.

im not saying that Pac shouldent be p4p, but p4p shouldent be made becuse of resume and wins, it should be judged on SKILLS,

****, B-hop has far more skills then manny, b-hop can fight in every style, but watever, i hope you guys understand my thread

and again this is my oppion, we can debate, thats why theres a forum,
i dont want any "**** off loser" in my thread, it only an oppinion.

i think it should be based on both...

anyone can look skillful against a bum. a win against a great fighter is a better gauge on how good a fighter really is.

it should be based more on resume/wins IMO....

**aether** · 06-23-2009, 10:35 AM

Originally posted by mangler

P4P is based on who would win the most if everybody was the same size. I don't mind Pac as #1 atm, but cats make to big a deal of p4p imo.

yeah they do. it is like this thing they use to market fighters....... not saying that's bad.

**Ch@mpBox@PR** · 06-23-2009, 10:39 AM

Originally posted by TredKiller

it should not be measured by wins an resume, it should be measured by skill and style,

i was looking at p4p #1's list in the past years, at one point they had JCC, now i LOVE chavez fights, he's one of the most entertaining boxers in history, but skillwish, he isnt that great, he's just great at the one thing he does, come forward.

some were saying if froch gets some more wins, he can be in the top 10, i dont think that would be right, he's a one dimensinal fighter, id put taylor ahead of him p4p, becuz taylor has more SKILLS.

im not saying that Pac shouldent be p4p, but p4p shouldent be made becuse of resume and wins, it should be judged on SKILLS,

****, B-hop has far more skills then manny, b-hop can fight in every style, but watever, i hope you guys understand my thread

and again this is my oppion, we can debate, thats why theres a forum,
i dont want any "**** off loser" in my thread, it only an oppinion.

You were wrong in the first sentence of your post.

It should be by resume and victories. You can have the style or the Skills, but if you havent prove them, then they are worthless!!!!!!

**DrewWoodside** · 06-23-2009, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by mangler

P4P is based on who would win the most if everybody was the same size. I don't mind Pac as #1 atm, but cats make to big a deal of p4p imo.

I agree with this. If everyone was the same size who would win the most fights. I believe this is the reason the Klitschkos don't make the P4P list. B/c Wlad's ability to dominate stems a lot from his being significantly larger than his competition.

**TredKiller** · 06-23-2009, 10:44 AM

Originally posted by mangler

P4P is based on who would win the most if everybody was the same size. I don't mind Pac as #1 atm, but cats make to big a deal of p4p imo.

wow bro, thats the best summary ive heard,
i must be getting confused, its jus that everyone
on this forum has a diffrent explanation as to what it is,
but yours seems to be the best.

**PittyPat** · 06-23-2009, 10:55 AM

I do it by weight classes. If one guy beats everyone in one division, he shouldn't be #1 no matter how good he is. If another guy beats everyone (or a handful of really good opponents) in loads of divisions, he should be #1.

Hence, Pac is easily #1 in my view and Wlad isn't anywhere close. Yeah, it's an alternative way of looking at it, but then p4p doesn't really matter to me anyway.

**nelsoncm** · 06-23-2009, 11:05 AM

If I follow your logic, Paulie Malignaggi should be somewhere in the P4P list.

Or probably Charlie Zelenoff could be # 10.

**TredKiller** · 06-23-2009, 11:06 AM

i already said ive been proven wrong,
feel free to hijack my thread.

What number one p4p should be.