Golovkin declared Top 24 P4P of last 25 years

[DreamerUSA]

P4P is about the most skilled fighter. Accomplishments/Resume should be the #1 factor when determining P4P. A guy looking great against C-level fighter shouldn't get ranked above a guy looking good against A-B level fighters. How can you pick GGG to beat all of those guys when you've never seen him against elite competition but you've seen them beat elite competition?

Imo you're mixing up what an ATG list is versus what a p4p list is. I'm not saying a fighters opponents don't matter, but the comparison should be used as a basis for the matchup between two fighters, not as a measure of accomplishment when it comes to a p4p list. As for how I can pick him. I can see what the guy does in the ring and in my view, he is special. The way he disposes of B & C level fighters and the fact the guy has arguably not lost a round in years.He certainly has a lot to prove as far as being an ATG or even a HoFer, but as far as a p4p list goes, I'm not upset he is in a top 25 list.

An example of how I view the lists differently would be a fighter like Mike McCallum. On an ATG list he may break the top 100, maybe, but on my p4p list I could easily see him in the top 20 just because I think his style is a tough matchup for just about anyone that has ever laced them up. I would also rank Roy Jones and Toney much higher on a p4p list than I would an ATG list.

[therealpugilist]

I'm a bit late to the party here, but oh well. While I certainly agree that GGG belongs nowhere near a top 25 list, if we are talking accomplishments. A p4p list is'nt all about accomplishments. If this were a list of the best fighters of the last 25 years, I would be laughing right along with most of the other folks in this thread. Larry would of been spot on with the list he posted, if we were talking straight up accomplishments, outside of Vargas, who I'll certainly give credit for the Winky win, but the Quartey win is a joke. Anyone actually paying attention then knows that Ike was a shadow of his former self at that point. Anyways. A p4p list is more about fantasy matchups if guys could be made the same size. Larry's list gets a lot more interesting at that point. Outside of Roy, Toney, B-Hop, Floyd and Sweet Pea, I would pick GGG to beat all those guys, prime versus prime. The guy who said GGG was better at middleweight than Roy, Toney and B-Hop needs the taste smacked out of his mouth. Thats my two cents.

you cant be p4p or an all time great without wins over elite fighters.

Golovkin isnt even the best middleweight of the last 25 years

How will people know how good you are p4p or all time if your opponents are as bad as his are on an elite level?

they go hand in hand.....have you ever seen a fighter considered the man or top 5 for years p4p and not be considered an ATG or one of the best of their era?


Golovkin hasnt even proved he is the best of today.....has 0 wins over the current top 5 middleweights.

we dont even know what he can do...fighting wade's and monros wont cut it

[therealpugilist]

Imo you're mixing up what an ATG list is versus what a p4p list is. I'm not saying a fighters opponents don't matter, but the comparison should be used as a basis for the matchup between two fighters, not as a measure of accomplishment when it comes to a p4p list. As for how I can pick him. I can see what the guy does in the ring and in my view, he is special. The way he disposes of B & C level fighters and the fact the guy has arguably not lost a round in years.He certainly has a lot to prove as far as being an ATG or even a HoFer, but as far as a p4p list goes, I'm not upset he is in a top 25 list.

An example of how I view the lists differently would be a fighter like Mike McCallum. On an ATG list he may break the top 100, maybe, but on my p4p list I could easily see him in the top 20 just because I think his style is a tough matchup for just about anyone that has ever laced them up. I would also rank Roy Jones and Toney much higher on a p4p list than I would an ATG list.

I see what you're saying but if McCallum didnt fight the toney's, kalambays, and fight from 154-175 we wouldnt know.....he proved it....GGG hasnt and doesnt belong on a top ten p4p list for today and doesnt belong on one with 25 last years.....we havent seen him fight an elite puncher, or pure boxer, an elite swarmer...none of that...its all speculation and shouldve couldve with this guy ggg

[OnePunch]

I'm confuse about the p4p list. The way I see I would rank it would be who's a better boxer regardless of weight. Why is everyone throwing resume in it?

because they think somehow that makes them appear smart. Even though P4P has NOTHING to do with "resume", they imediately revert to chirping "but but but resume doe" because they can just look at Boxrec and not have to actually be able to analyze talent......

[OnePunch]

GGG is literally the only fighter in history who gets credit for fights that didnt happen...he gets no credit...deal with it

The man sells out arenas on both coasts against unknown opposition, has the full support of HBO, and gets more and more popular every day. Id say YOU are the one who needs to "deal with it".....

[DreamerUSA]

I see what you're saying but if McCallum didnt fight the toney's, kalambays, and fight from 154-175 we wouldnt know.....he proved it....GGG hasnt and doesnt belong on a top ten p4p list for today and doesnt belong on one with 25 last years.....we havent seen him fight an elite puncher, or pure boxer, an elite swarmer...none of that...its all speculation and shouldve couldve with this guy ggg

Of course its speculation. That is kind of the point of fantasy matchups, no? I don't see the point of overall resumes on a p4p list when the triangle theory rarely pans out in boxing. Just because a fighter was able to beat x, y and z. Does'nt mean he will beat A, B and C. Just seems pointless to me to have a ATG/Best and a p4p list if you are going to judge them in the same fashion.

As for his matchups. The only type of boxer I see giving him real problems is a fantastic inside fighter.

[SilverMiles]

Boone drops or beats every prospect You not a real fighter unless you've fought Boone.

Curtis Stevens easily outpointed Boone when they fought 10 to 0 so your statement isn't entirely true.

[Real King Kong]

Who really cares...pfp is highly subjective. Sure the guy looks impressive, and may end up justifying the rating...but when it comes to pfp, i lean toward fighters who have faced the best competition while still looking impressive. Ggg has yet to do it. Idiots calling it racist tho...

[about.thousands]

Curtis Stevens easily outpointed Boone when they fought 10 to 0 so your statement isn't entirely true.

Didn't you just say you're wasting your time talking to me?

[SilverMiles]

because they think somehow that makes them appear smart. Even though P4P has NOTHING to do with "resume", they imediately revert to chirping "but but but resume doe" because they can just look at Boxrec and not have to actually be able to analyze talent......

The whole resume thing is an entirely unfair arguement because a lot of people tend to way underrate certain fighters to fit their agenda.

They also tend to ignore where that fighter was at in their career when they lost. Ike Quartey hadn't won a fight in 3 years when he faced Vargas.

A lot of people bring up Toney who has good wins at MW but also had 1 or 2 dubious decisions against fighters who on the same level of Stevens and Macklin. And he beat a lot of guys who were simply worn out. Not taking anything away from Toney but you have to be fair in your arguement.