Are P4P rankings complete works of fiction?

[JohnCIV6]

This was my whole problem with the basis of the current system because if you scaled them down or up in size they would be totally different fighters and not have the attributes that made them successful in the first place. For ex. what if you scale all of the best up to HW? Now think about Paul Williams at HW, he doesn't have the advantages that made him successful in the first place being much taller/longer than his opponents so how good would he be if we did this for him vs other top fighters?

Yes, good example. You explained it very good. It would complete change what type of fighters they are, and why they are so good.. That's why I believe you need to look at a few things, like stength of division, strength of opponents, oppents you beat in a higher weight class, titles in multiple weight classes, the fashion you have beaten your oppents, and how you compare to all time greats. That's just how I would base it.

Based on the things I listed, someone like a klitchsko brother wouldn't rank very high, but if we were back in the Era of Ali, he would probably be number 1. Simply because the strength of his division then, how he beat them, and who he beat.

BTW, I'll give you some green k tomorrow, im all out for 24 hours. Very good posts, making me use my brain, lol.

[Syf]

P4P rankings are ratings which in chronological order list who would be the best fighter in the world if all of the best fighters from every weight class could be scaled down to the same size all while retaining the attributes which made them successful fighters. These rankings have nearly nothing to do with wins and everything to do with skills and perceived ability. Fighters with great skill and ability tend to win alot as crazy as that is.
When one great or at least good fighter gets a win over a high caliber fighter he is often ranked in the p4p top 10 or re ranked because his perceived skill has to be re-evaluated against the perceived skill and ability of other top fighters.
Since the p4p rankings are based entirely off of perceived skill/ability and an imaginary tourney where every fighter is scaled down to the same size, isn't it all just subject to the subjective imagination of a few select ppl? I mean the best fighters in the world can't be scaled down and if they could they would be totally different fighters and would not have the attributes which made them successful, but this is what p4p rankings are based on when you deconstruct the basis behind it. So should p4p rankings not be discussed or given thought with any degree of seriousness because they are complete works of fiction not based in reality?

To me its more like a favorite currently active fighters list. Thats how i treat it anyway.

[istmeno]

it is only used as gospel by mayweather fans

[Syf]

it is only used as gospel by mayweather fans

on the contrary..I like mayweather a bit more than pac, but have pac above mayweather on my p4p...:

1 Pac
2 Mayweather
3 JMM
4 Mosley
5 Cotto
6 Pwill
7 bhop
8. AA
9 Dawson
10 Vit Klitschko

so i guess its not just who your favorite fighter is...hmm weird.

[DLT]

P4P rankings are ratings which in chronological order list who would be the best fighter in the world if all of the best fighters from every weight class could be scaled down to the same size all while retaining the attributes which made them successful fighters. These rankings have nearly nothing to do with wins and everything to do with skills and perceived ability. Fighters with great skill and ability tend to win alot as crazy as that is.
When one great or at least good fighter gets a win over a high caliber fighter he is often ranked in the p4p top 10 or re ranked because his perceived skill has to be re-evaluated against the perceived skill and ability of other top fighters.
Since the p4p rankings are based entirely off of perceived skill/ability and an imaginary tourney where every fighter is scaled down to the same size, isn't it all just subject to the subjective imagination of a few select ppl? I mean the best fighters in the world can't be scaled down and if they could they would be totally different fighters and would not have the attributes which made them successful, but this is what p4p rankings are based on when you deconstruct the basis behind it. So should p4p rankings not be discussed or given thought with any degree of seriousness because they are complete works of fiction not based in reality?

I totally disagree with this. I think bashing P4P has become the cool thing to do now. What is so hard about scaling a fighter down? How can you lose attributes? Your attributes are your attributes. The only hard thing is dealing with HW's but everything else is as easy as cake to me. I also think people take the size thing too seriously. Alot of people think comparing Dawson to Hatton means making them the same exact size to the T but it doesnt. You still make Dawson his size for LHW and Hatton his size for Jr. WW. Meaning if they were to be compared then Dawson would still be taller because he's a tall guy for LHW while Hatton is still a little short for JR. WW Then they keep the same attributes and you say who would win. I dont understand what's so hard about this. People put too much into it. Its simple to me. Ofcourse every fight isnt going to be black & white because youre dealing with the best fighters in the world but its nothing to me to compare Hopkins to a FW. I can easily picture him at FW being a little taller than most and having that scrappy bully style while being a good boxer. I dont see many FW's beating that and its not that hard for me to think about it

[tocayito1]

just the fact that bhop mosley and fmj are in the top five shows that the p4p rankings are fiction

[istmeno]

i meant mayweather fans, not boxing fans who like mayweather, there is a difference.

at the end of the day, p4p lists are purely one mans opinion, and mean absolutely nothing

[Spray_resistant]

I totally disagree with this. I think bashing P4P has become the cool thing to do now. What is so hard about scaling a fighter down? How can you lose attributes? Your attributes are your attributes. The only hard thing is dealing with HW's but everything else is as easy as cake to me. I also think people take the size thing too seriously. Alot of people think comparing Dawson to Hatton means making them the same exact size to the T but it doesnt. You still make Dawson his size for LHW and Hatton his size for Jr. WW. Meaning if they were to be compared then Dawson would still be taller because he's a tall guy for LHW while Hatton is still a little short for JR. WW Then they keep the same attributes and you say who would win. I dont understand what's so hard about this. People put too much into it. Its simple to me. Ofcourse every fight isnt going to be black & white because youre dealing with the best fighters in the world but its nothing to me to compare Hopkins to a FW. I can easily picture him at FW being a little taller than most and having that scrappy bully style while being a good boxer. I dont see many FW's beating that and its not that hard for me to think about it

You can't do that because you are turning them into totally different fighters. They are who they are because of the physical attributes they have not in ppls minds but in reality. Even if it could be broken down to some science based on something other than imagination, its still not real and I can't take any argument seriously about why someone is better than someone else because of their ranking in the p4p or because of their ranking they should be favored to beat fighter A or B.......p4p's basis depends on the imaginations of biased humans and I can't have serious talks nearly devoid of fact and compiled mostly of imaginary tourney results.

[bojangles1987]

It is purely hypothetical, though fun. No one should use P4P rankings as an argument for a guy much bigger fighting someone much smaller. People do seem to use p4p rankings nowadays to justify guys fighting that simply don't match up weight wise. Pac-Cotto might end up being another one of those, we'll see.

[DLT]

You can't do that because you are turning them into totally different fighters. They are who they are because of the physical attributes they have not in ppls minds but in reality. Even if it could be broken down to some science based on something other than imagination, its still not real and I can't take any argument seriously about why someone is better than someone else because of their ranking in the p4p or because of their ranking they should be favored to beat fighter A or B.......p4p's basis depends on the imaginations of biased humans and I can't have serious talks nearly devoid of fact and compiled mostly of imaginary tourney results.

Again, I totally disagree. They will still have all those same phyiscal attributes and advantages in a P4P sense. Its still the same guy. Thats what people dont understand. Its like people keep thinking that you have to strip the guy down. You dont. Its still the same guy.

Now, if you want to say that its still not real then you can say that but thats a totally different argument. My response to that is that everything is hypothetical if you look at it that way. You cant just single out P4P. You can say the same thing about a Clottey vs Mosley fight. They are the same exact weight but have never fought so its all hypothetical. You can say that about any 2 guys in history who have never fought eachother. Thats all hypothetical too. Thats my point.

People are trying to single P4P out and saying that it doesnt mean anything or doesnt make sense because its all hypothetical and all opinion based but my point is that everything is hypothetical & opinioned based if the 2 guys have never fought eachother, even if they are the same exact size. You feel me? I just dont see whats so hard about it and I dont see why people act like it means nothing. To me its very legit, atleast everything besides HW. I mean, its nothing for me to picture a guy like Sweet Pea fighting at SMW against a guy like Froch. Froch would be taller & stronger but Sweet Pea is the superior boxer & far more skilled. He would win that fight at SMW or at LW.