ESPN Updated P4P List October 20, 2015

[M Bison]

This would be my list
1.wlad
2.chocolatico
3.kovalev
4.pacquiao
5.Golovkin
6.ward
7.rigondeaux
8.cotto
9.undecided
10.undecided

I think Kovalev belongs ahead of Gonzalez, Canelo needs to have a spot in top 10 If Cotto is on there.
Pacquiao might be rated too highly.

[Eff Pandas]

They do...in average to slightly above average fighters...no superstars at all...

The $400,000,000 in lawsuits PBC has aimed at them from Bob (formerly anyway) & Oscar would suggest otherwise. But they work with HBO so I imagine they don't see a problem with what HBO does. Thats a monopoly they can get behind.

[MrRolltide91]

smh........

[Barcham]

Don't care if you like him or not, but if Klitschko is not first on any list now then the list is worthless. Champion for a decade and has beaten nothing but number 1 and number 2 contenders.

You obviously do not know what a P4P list is for or how it works. I suggest you do some research.


As for this list, I automatically put any list that has Ward on it into the trash bin. This list being trash is compounded by having Cotto and Canelo on it as you cannot consider a catchweight fighter in any P4P discussion.

I can forgive a catchweight that is used for the proper reason, two fighters from different divisions meeting in the middle with no title on the line. But when you fight all of your fights at catchweights, your fights cannot be considered for P4P rankings.

So it is really not even worth the time to discuss the merits of the rest of their rankings as the list is garbage right from the start.

[bigjavi973]

This how can you rate Wlad so low and fighters who lost and are inactive in front of him

yup exactly

[TheStranger]

I have to admit the Klitschko defenders have me thinking I rated Gonzalez and Golovkin too high (see my sig) for going along with the consensus. Maybe others are guilty of the same. I think it should be based not only on quality of opposition but dominance against that opposition. I'll admit that Ward is suspect at this point, doing next to nothing recently. I thought Golovkin's trainer was being too harsh until Ward signed to fight a tomato can seemingly confirming the criticism.
I don't think Bradley looks that good. Those welters not named Pac are top 20.
And finally there might be a little Japanese champion that belongs up there but I don't follow them closely enough.

[DeandreXI]

Pacquiao at 3? And that's after a loss against Bradley, a KO of the century frm Marquez and some old school, schooling type of school from Mayweather? lol Yeah, ok...

[smoothsmg]

Lmao....

Roman Gonzalez and GGG 1 and 2...
Pacquiao and Rigo in top 5 still...

Yet Wladimir barely in top 10



I think Cotto Vs Canelo winner could stake a claim to a P4P 1 spot maybe, I mean If you rate Gonzalez or GGG at 1 I mean why not then?
I like both but I'm not gonna say either belong at number 1.

Exactly. Asinine list. Honestly, Klitschko is number one and then I can't see anyone claiming the 2 or 3 spots. Manny is definitely not top 5.

[The Big Dunn]

1. Chocolatito
2. GGG
3. Pacquiao
4. Rigondeaux
5. Ward
6. Kovalev
7. Bradley
8. Klitschko
9. Cotto
10. Canelo

GGG doesn't have a better resume than anyone on the list. How he is #2 is mindboggling.

How is Kov and Wlad at 6 and 8 is downright preposterous. They both deserve to be higher.

Does who you defeat count anymore toward p4p ranking?

[smoothsmg]

You obviously do not know what a P4P list is for or how it works. I suggest you do some research.


As for this list, I automatically put any list that has Ward on it into the trash bin. This list being trash is compounded by having Cotto and Canelo on it as you cannot consider a catchweight fighter in any P4P discussion.

I can forgive a catchweight that is used for the proper reason, two fighters from different divisions meeting in the middle with no title on the line. But when you fight all of your fights at catchweights, your fights cannot be considered for P4P rankings.

So it is really not even worth the time to discuss the merits of the rest of their rankings as the list is garbage right from the start.

How do I obviously not know what a pound for pound list is or how it works? What research do I need to do? Sounds like you are trying to say the list should consist of who is the most exciting fighter. There is no fighter that has done what Klitschko has done. He has beaten nothing but number 1 and number 2 contenders consistently over the past decade. It might not be the style that YOU like, but he has done nothing but win. So i am curious as to what research i need to do in order to know who has been dominating a division for a decade.