The current Boxrec top 10 P4P

[Fr3$h]

Yeah neither one is that bad. Just a few tweaks needed. It's much easier for people to call them crap than post their own lists.

[mikinoki]

Yeah neither one is that bad. Just a few tweaks needed. It's much easier for people to call them crap than post their own lists.

Thats what p4p list are.It is opinion and speculation based.....you know fun

[KillaMane26]

list makes rings look legit....

[VicariousVice]

Rigo not being on that list is crazy.

[Black Barty]

Terrible list, but to be fair, it's stat based, and purely stat based rankings often don't reflect reality in boxing.

[jas]

Because Hopkins win over shumenov was a split decision, he went from number 1 to number 2 at LHW on boxrec. They have a points system....

[shadow-boxer]

No Rigondeaux? despite schooling a top 5 p4p fighter..

Maidana 10th?

This is why I don't pay much attention to these silly lists

According to butt hurt Rigo fans like Chicano, Mental Midget aka Double M, Brush and their ilk, Donaire is an over rated bum. Why should he be in the top ten? Cause he beat a bum?

[Citizen Koba]

I don't hold with p4p lists at all - but if any were to be taken seriously I think I'd lean towards a stat based one due to the inevitable problems in making cross divisional comparisons, usually favouring fighters from the more heavily promoted divisions.

I'm not advocating Boxrecs system (or any other) however, though it's divisional rankings have some use as an handy resource to tell at a glance roughly were an unfamiliar fighter stands. Given the built in limitations of any computerised system, I'm actually surprised that Boxrecs does as well as it does.

As has been pointed out, however P4P rankings are more a bit of fun and a talking and debating point than of any real meaning.

[Dr.Eisenfaust]

I completely disagree with this list. Anyway, I've never given much credit to p4p lists. I believe p4p lists should be personal.