Has there ever been a P4P entrant who has fought the worst opposition for 4 years?

[soul_survivor]

Ward's opposition has been terrible since the Super Six. We can't keep using the skills he showed in 2011 to justify his ranking now.

If the Kovalev fight doesn't happen for ANY reason this fall he needs to come off the list.

Ward should already be off the list.

The standard should not be fighting 1 world class opponent in 4 years.

Exactly...

Oh ok, so p4p is worthless, which means only divisional rankings and titles count. Ward has neither.

[- Ram Raid -]

I haven't been actively looking into this one but I was in another thread discussing Shane Mosley and what I was talking about has some relevance to this thread.

He was on The Ring magazine's annual pound-for-pound ratings for four years from 2000 until 2003. That period was bookended by wins over De La Hoya which seems to be the main reason he made the list because in 2000 he topped the rankings with wins over Oscar and Antonio Diaz. But . . .

. . . In 2001 he was again ranked P4P #1 after wins over Shannon Taylor and Adrian Stone. The following year he managed to stay in the top ten with two losses to Vernon Forrest. . .

. . . In 2003 he climbed up to #3 with a no contest against Raul Marquez and another decision over the Golden Boy (for which he'd taken EPO and steroids, but that's a side issue).

So Mosley was still a P4P ranked fighter, with a run of Diaz (W) - Taylor (W) - Stone (W) - Forrest (L) - Forrest (L) - Marquez (NC) from 2000 until 2003.

With those being annual lists I don't know whether there was a period between Marquez and De La Hoya where he would have fell from the active rankings but still that's a pretty poor run.

Maybe even worse than Ward's?

[soul_survivor]

I haven't been actively looking into this one but I was in another thread discussing Shane Mosley and what I was talking about has some relevance to this thread.

He was on The Ring magazine's annual pound-for-pound ratings for four years from 2000 until 2003. That period was bookended by wins over De La Hoya which seems to be the main reason he made the list because in 2000 he topped the rankings with wins over Oscar and Antonio Diaz. But . . .

. . . In 2001 he was again ranked P4P #1 after wins over Shannon Taylor and Adrian Stone. The following year he managed to stay in the top ten with two losses to Vernon Forrest. . .

. . . In 2003 he climbed up to #3 with a no contest against Raul Marquez and another decision over the Golden Boy (for which he'd taken EPO and steroids, but that's a side issue).

So Mosley was still a P4P ranked fighter, with a run of Diaz (W) - Taylor (W) - Stone (W) - Forrest (L) - Forrest (L) - Marquez (NC) from 2000 until 2003.

With those being annual lists I don't know whether there was a period between Marquez and De La Hoya where he would have fell from the active rankings but still that's a pretty poor run.

Maybe even worse than Ward's?

How is beating Oscar twice worse than Ward?

Heck, I only asked if there was a fighter who had faced worse opposition than Ward...there wasn't even an implication of a win. I tried to make it as easy as possible. Mosley having faced those opponents, even with a couple losses, if better than what Ward faced.

Has Ward even faced a fighter post Dawson with a world class win? I think the most we can stretch for is Barrera beating Murat and ... nothing.

That's a good bit of research though. I reckon Mosley should have fallen off the p4p list having lost convincingly to Forest twice.

[- Ram Raid -]

How is beating Oscar twice worse than Ward?

Heck, I only asked if there was a fighter who had faced worse opposition than Ward...there wasn't even an implication of a win. I tried to make it as easy as possible. Mosley having faced those opponents, even with a couple losses, if better than what Ward faced.

Has Ward even faced a fighter post Dawson with a world class win? I think the most we can stretch for is Barrera beating Murat and ... nothing.

That's a good bit of research though. I reckon Mosley should have fallen off the p4p list having lost convincingly to Forest twice.

You seem to be under the misguided impression that I'm an Andre Ward fan running to his defence in an effort to undermine your stated position which, trolling or not, you clearly consider is a lofty one. It isn't of course, you've just hinged it on a question, the answer to which your taking as validating your stated belief that Andre Ward shouldn't be considered a pound-for-pound fighter. It's fallacious, as quite a few posters have pointed out.

Now the only reason I engaged with your thread question as if it was one that you actually wanted answering rather than a moment of petulance aimed at Andre Ward and his fanbase is because somewhere in the back of my mind I had you pegged as a half decent poster and that you were better than this. I'm now questioning that based on your overall tone but especially the above opening question, which is outright childish.

You've not got the nous to realise when someone is attempting to steer the conversation in a less immature direction for the benefit of you digging yourself out the hole you've created. Now either I don't spend enough time on here and I've made an erroneous snap judgement that you're a decent poster based on an unrepresentative number of posts or you spend so much time on here that it's dragged you down and you've descended into argumentative childishness.

I genuinely hope its the latter. It'd be understanable, this place can get to us all from time to time.

[soul_survivor]

You seem to be under the misguided impression that I'm an Andre Ward fan running to his defence in an effort to undermine your stated position which, trolling or not, you clearly consider is a lofty one. It isn't of course, you've just hinged it on a question, the answer to which your taking as validating your stated belief that Andre Ward shouldn't be considered a pound-for-pound fighter. It's fallacious, as quite a few posters have pointed out.

Now the only reason I engaged with your thread question as if it was one that you actually wanted answering rather than a moment of petulance aimed at Andre Ward and his fanbase is because somewhere in the back of my mind I had you pegged as a half decent poster and that you were better than this. I'm now questioning that based on your overall tone but especially the above opening question, which is outright childish.

You've not got the nous to realise when someone is attempting to steer the conversation in a less immature direction for the benefit of you digging yourself out the hole you've created. Now either I don't spend enough time on here and I've made an erroneous snap judgement that you're a decent poster based on an unrepresentative number of posts or you spend so much time on here that it's dragged you down and you've descended into argumentative childishness.

I genuinely hope its the latter. It'd be understanable, this place can get to us all from time to time.

LOL calm down man, I didn't actually think you were a blinded Ward fan but I'm starting to now but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

But as I have pointed out several times already, no one has been able to answer my question, which is a pretty simple one. There isn't any need, fan or otherwise, for anyone to get worked up over this.

Like I said, you did a good job of actually going back and bringing up Mosley, who I feel was unfairly on the p4p list for too long, as was say, Rigo in modern times and most definitely Ward.

My thread doesn't have an agenda because it doesn't need one. It was a simple question which sadly attracted a lot of crazy fans who tried equating fighting Paul Smith with actually fighting world level opponents such as Daniel Geale or Martin Murray. I dealt with them and they've now gone away.

So it obviously leads to the conclusion that there hasn't been anyone with this level of opposition who has stayed on a p4p list for so long. Obviously Rigo may be brought up but I've never seen him ranked no. 1.

Thus point proven.

Having said that, if Ward does beat Kovalev and I feel the Ward of 2011-2012 would do, then he would lsot right back into the top 10.

The real issue I've raised here and i''ve actually raised it several times on this forum, is just how bad p4p lists are these days. I can understand when they're bad due to journalists and publications having vested interests but when fans start calling someone p4p no. 1 and he hasn't fought a world level opponent in almost half a decade and they don't have any vested (Read financial interest) then you know **** has gone bad.

[- Ram Raid -]

LOL calm down man, I didn't actually think you were a blinded Ward fan but I'm starting to now but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt.

But as I have pointed out several times already, no one has been able to answer my question, which is a pretty simple one. There isn't any need, fan or otherwise, for anyone to get worked up over this.

Like I said, you did a good job of actually going back and bringing up Mosley, who I feel was unfairly on the p4p list for too long, as was say, Rigo in modern times and most definitely Ward.

My thread doesn't have an agenda because it doesn't need one. It was a simple question which sadly attracted a lot of crazy fans who tried equating fighting Paul Smith with actually fighting world level opponents such as Daniel Geale or Martin Murray. I dealt with them and they've now gone away.

So it obviously leads to the conclusion that there hasn't been anyone with this level of opposition who has stayed on a p4p list for so long. Obviously Rigo may be brought up but I've never seen him ranked no. 1.

Thus point proven.

Having said that, if Ward does beat Kovalev and I feel the Ward of 2011-2012 would do, then he would lsot right back into the top 10.

The real issue I've raised here and i''ve actually raised it several times on this forum, is just how bad p4p lists are these days. I can understand when they're bad due to journalists and publications having vested interests but when fans start calling someone p4p no. 1 and he hasn't fought a world level opponent in almost half a decade and they don't have any vested (Read financial interest) then you know **** has gone bad.

So as not to be misconstrued, other than spouting into my ear whilst I'm trying to watch it, the days of me getting riled by someone's opinion on boxing have long gone.

So now that you've settled yourself down I'd say that if your point is that no pound-for-pound fighter has fought such poor opposition over a four year period and remained on the list, then in the absence of any other cases being presented we can mark the point as being proven - provisionally.

If your point is that that then proves Ward shouldn't be on the pound-for-pound list then I'd question that assertion. You've merely presented the case for your opinion - which is valid and coherent. It isn't one that I ultimately agree with (I feel the circumstances warrant him remaining) but nor do I think your opinion is wrong in any definite sense. Most of the list compilers disagree with the both of us. Me for keeping him on and you for keeping him off until he beats a world class opponent. Ultimately pound-for-pound lists can only ever be conjecture. Something to bounce back and forth.

I certainly take your point on biased uncritical support by boxers fanbases. It's something I've never fully understood.

[soul_survivor]

So as not to be misconstrued, other than spouting into my ear whilst I'm trying to watch it, the days of me getting riled by someone's opinion on boxing have long gone.

So now that you've settled yourself down I'd say that if your point is that no pound-for-pound fighter has fought such poor opposition over a four year period and remained on the list, then in the absence of any other cases being presented we can mark the point as being proven - provisionally.

If your point is that that then proves Ward shouldn't be on the pound-for-pound list then I'd question that assertion. You've merely presented the case for your opinion - which is valid and coherent. It isn't one that I ultimately agree with (I feel the circumstances warrant him remaining) but nor do I think your opinion is wrong in any definite sense. Most of the list compilers disagree with the both of us. Me for keeping him on and you for keeping him off until he beats a world class opponent. Ultimately pound-for-pound lists can only ever be conjecture. Something to bounce back and forth.

I certainly take your point on biased uncritical support by boxers fanbases. It's something I've never fully understood.

This is the crux of the argument. What would be the basis f keeping someone like Ward (or Rigo in the past) on the p4p list? I guess this could be another thread but I'm too lazy to start one.

[HeroBando]

This is the crux of the argument. What would be the basis f keeping someone like Ward (or Rigo in the past) on the p4p list? I guess this could be another thread but I'm too lazy to start one.

It's more or less the betting lines, Ward is 50/50 with p4p Kovalev, though Imo hed have to come much improved vs his recent form to justify that. Problem is, many of the guys use that criteria very selectively, usually it's all about the resume with emphasis on recent work

[soul_survivor]

It's more or less the betting lines, Ward is 50/50 with p4p Kovalev, though Imo hed have to come much improved vs his recent form to justify that. Problem is, many of the guys use that criteria very selectively, usually it's all about the resume with emphasis on recent work

If Ward can replicate his form of 2011-12, I have him beating Kovalev. Not because he is some exceptional talent but because he knows how to negate his opponents. Pretty much a young Hopkins.

[HeroBando]

If Ward can replicate his form of 2011-12, I have him beating Kovalev. Not because he is some exceptional talent but because he knows how to negate his opponents. Pretty much a young Hopkins.

Hed have a chance on that form for sure but Kovalev is bigger and better than anything he's seen at 168. Would be nice to see him improve on his Barrera performance against someone more legit but no luck