I go with Boxrecs. P4P is utterly meaningless anyway since there's no sensible way of calibrating the divisions' relative strengths. The only way of having any meaningful P4P ranking is a points system.
That said, Boxrec is rubbish too, becoming pointless garbage (in their P4P reckoning at least) in representing the lower divisions where there's frequently fewer fighters who stay at one weight for less time and are subject to more competitive matchmaking, essentially invalidating their P4P scores all the way upto 135/140.
Furthermore the whole concept of P4P is never clearly laid out - in general it's ultimately resume based, since most of the guys involved are unlikely to ever fight and how the **** else do you compare how well a Gonzalez or Rigo or would match with a Wlad given the huge differences in technique and style demanded by the weight differentials?
But if one starts to go off resume, given that many top fighters only fight once or twice a year, and that sometimes bad styles matchups or just 'off days' occur, how can you tell how well a fighter stacks up right now in an imaginary 'H2H' contest.
If you're asking 'who's the best P4P fighter right now' what's the relevance of bringing in resume victories from 3, 4 , 5 or 10 years ago when we all know fighters can age overnight (or equally take losses then go on to greater things)? OTOH how else can we compare fighters of vastly different weights that necessarily demand vastly different styles without P4P essentially becoming a resume competition?
The best right now in the sport are probably Gonzalez, Golovkin, and Rigondeaux but, rightly or wrongly, I tend to give the benefit of the doubt to the longer running champs.
good to see floyd was deservedly no longer #1, lol, after a shady robbery and a a shady second rigged looking fight, lol, this makes it easier for reasonable human beings to easily put floyd off that 1 spot that i felt he still didnt deserve, lol
Comment