Comments Thread For: Changes in the New Year: BScene Pound-for-Pound Update

[Aztekkas]

Yes! Estrada deserves it , well done BoxingScene.

[HanzGruber]

dont see how bradley isnt there

[Nubia]

4 and 6 are way too high. 4 shouldn't even be on there IMO since he hasn't beat anyone.

Where's Bradley?

[Teetotaler]

Wait so Wlad has one loss and gets taken off the p4p? Seriously? Thats bs. And why is rigo so high? He was inactive for almost a year and has a horrible performance against pacquiao's barber. Him and Ward definitely need to be lower.

[SteveM]

4 and 6 are way too high. 4 shouldn't even be on there IMO since he hasn't beat anyone.

Where's Bradley?

Golovkin should be much lower, maybe even out, Bradley should be in there if you're going along conventional thinking and Crawford should be out as although he looks the part he doesn't have the resume.

Non conventional thinking and more logic means that many more lower weight fighters should be in there.

[ShoulderRoll]

How is the former lineal undisputed HW champion not in the same league as Terence Crawford?

1. He lost his last fight.
2. His skill set is severely lacking compared to the other fighters in this list.

I like this p4p top 10. Tim Bradley should be on it but apart from that it's very solid.

I especially like the addition of James Degale who is quietly building up a nice resume and getting better and better each time out.

[aboutfkntime]

Not at all ! It is P4P afterall, nobody said anything when at one point we had Mayweather, Pac, Bradley and Brook in the top ten.

In my opinion Crawford and De Gale have no business being in the top ten. This is just eye candy pickings based on they look the part. Even Golovkin and Kovalev are too high.

The P4P should be based on best resume in last 2-3 years. Just because you are still an active fighter you can't live of the glory of what you did 5-6 years ago. That rules Ward right out.

By that reckoning Estrada and Gonzalez should be in. Also Nietes and Uchiyama should be in or close.

P4P no 1 should be Inoue (or he should be very close) Not only does he pass all eye candy requirements but his achievement over the last 2-3 years is on a par with anything any other boxer has done - unless anyone knows different?

Then Golovkin wouldn't be ranked at all.

P4P is not based on resume.

Klitschko would never have made the list.

Neither would Pac.

[aboutfkntime]

Wait so Wlad has one loss and gets taken off the p4p? Seriously? Thats bs. And why is rigo so high? He was inactive for almost a year and has a horrible performance against pacquiao's barber. Him and Ward definitely need to be lower.

Because, P4P is NOT based on resume.

Guys, we all had this conversation last month

Rigo is there for a similar reason to Ward.

Because the selector(s) are not casual fans, they are knowledgable insiders who have a genuine feel for the game..... they understand that boxing is not a maths name, and that stats are pretty much irrelevant once the bell rings.

Rigo is there because he is very close to the best fighter on the planet.

P4P is largely based on the latin phrase " ceteris Paribus " (all things being equal), with CONSIDERATION given to accomplishments/resume.

Who would win, if all things were equal (size), in a theoretical matchup.

P4P is waaay over-rated, and should not be taken too seriously.

Dude, Golovkin has beaten nobody, neither has Klitschko, neither has Pac.

Golovkin is there solely based on ceteris paribus, and nothing more.

NOTE: I am NOT a Golovkin fan, but I agree with his ranking, although he is 2 spots too high imho.

[1hourRun]

1. He lost his last fight.
2. His skill set is severely lacking compared to the other fighters in this list.

I like this p4p top 10. Tim Bradley should be on it but apart from that it's very solid.

I especially like the addition of James Degale who is quietly building up a nice resume and getting better and better each time out.

Ive critized Wlads technique or lack thereof I agree with you on that however I get the feeling that if any other name on this list would have had lost just once during the latest revision they still be there and they are not even as accomplished as Klitschko. There should be balance between resume and skill.

[aboutfkntime]

Ive critized Wlads technique or lack thereof I agree with you on that however I get the feeling that if any other name on this list would have had lost just once during the latest revision they still be there and they are not even as accomplished as Klitschko. There should be balance between resume and skill.

Nope, skills/ability, with consideration given to form, thats about it.

You can in theory rank an untested prospect, but experienced boxing guys are unlikely to do that because they understand that there is many a slip 'twixt the cup and the lip.

Resume adds that proven factor, but P4P is still completely theoretical.

Golovkin has beaten NOBODY, but we assume that he could..... right ?

Same with Klitschko, same with Pac.