Tweet
Ok, so its a new year, a new dawn etc so I want everyone who wants to, to post their top 10 p4p lists on here and we can thus keep a record of how people are ranking fighters and how those rankings change through the course of the year (so obviously post updated lists when changes are reuqired or you feel are necessary).
This is not necessarily a thread to discuss the validity of each list but rather how thesel ists are put together and what you hold to be your criteria. And ofc a record of how it will change over the course of the year (if at all)
Mine is as thus:
1. Sergey Kovalev
2. Roman Gonzalez
3. Gennady Golovkin
4. Saul Alvarez
5. Vasyl Lomachenko
6. Terence Crawford
7. Manny Pacquiao
8. Naoya Inoue
9. Shinsuke Yamanaka
10. Juan Francisco Estrada
Edit:
Forgot to add in my criteria although I've spoken about it elsewhere and on here in other posts too but I thought I'd collect it all in one place.
- Skill set. This is about as objective as it gets. How good is the fighter I am seeing in front of my eyes, regardless of hype, accomplishments and what poeple write. How good does he seem to me. This is dividied into sub divisions of offence, defence and all round ability. A guy with exceptional offence but lacking in other departments would not rank as high as a guy with very good offence of his own but also defence and the ablity to apply a wide range of game plans. One trick ponies do not rank high in this category.
- Resume. This is simple really. The higher the quality of opposition faced and how regularly this level of opposition has been faced. It's important that a fighter not only win but win good. The better the quality of the performance, the higher the rank. This is within a time frame of 2-3 years, or hopefully 3-5 fights. However, inactivity of a year or no world class win in a year or more means the person gets dropped from my list. E.g. Tim Bradley. It was a little uner a year ago that he lost to Pacquiao and he hs not fought since .Skill wise and resume wise he is one of the best out there. But he does not make the list due to him not having shown that for almost a year.
- Accomplishments. Again, pretty simple: world champions fought, beat, championships won. But, as with anything, the quality of the world champion is looked at. For example, Pacquiao beat Bradley for what I believe was his 3rd world title at 147, that rates higher than him beating Vargas for yet another world title.
- Wins/Losses. Who has the p4p entrant lost to, if anyone. And how did they lose and how have they bounced back from that. If a fighter has never lost, they will normally rank higher yet if a fighter has lost to a higher calibre of opponent than the undefeated fighter has faced, it equals itself out.
- Transferrence of skill. This is the most mythical of all the criteria and the essence of a p4p list. How well do I feel a fighter will be able to transfer their skills across weight divisions? The best way to rate highly here is to show us. Frampton unified his own division and then jumped up a division and beat top dog there but he also then lost the rematch. The winner of that trilogy (LSC himself has been able to beat top guys across division) will likely step in at number 10 in the p4p list with Estrada falling out. Of course, this might be a disadvantage for heavyweights or single division, dominant champs but thats where the fantasy element comes in. Example, if AJ beats Wlad, he will come into the p4p list, because he would have beaten an atg and if his performanc is very good, it is difficult to imagine many fighters, regardless of weight, causing him much trouble.
This is not necessarily a thread to discuss the validity of each list but rather how thesel ists are put together and what you hold to be your criteria. And ofc a record of how it will change over the course of the year (if at all)
Mine is as thus:
1. Sergey Kovalev
2. Roman Gonzalez
3. Gennady Golovkin
4. Saul Alvarez
5. Vasyl Lomachenko
6. Terence Crawford
7. Manny Pacquiao
8. Naoya Inoue
9. Shinsuke Yamanaka
10. Juan Francisco Estrada
Edit:
Forgot to add in my criteria although I've spoken about it elsewhere and on here in other posts too but I thought I'd collect it all in one place.
- Skill set. This is about as objective as it gets. How good is the fighter I am seeing in front of my eyes, regardless of hype, accomplishments and what poeple write. How good does he seem to me. This is dividied into sub divisions of offence, defence and all round ability. A guy with exceptional offence but lacking in other departments would not rank as high as a guy with very good offence of his own but also defence and the ablity to apply a wide range of game plans. One trick ponies do not rank high in this category.
- Resume. This is simple really. The higher the quality of opposition faced and how regularly this level of opposition has been faced. It's important that a fighter not only win but win good. The better the quality of the performance, the higher the rank. This is within a time frame of 2-3 years, or hopefully 3-5 fights. However, inactivity of a year or no world class win in a year or more means the person gets dropped from my list. E.g. Tim Bradley. It was a little uner a year ago that he lost to Pacquiao and he hs not fought since .Skill wise and resume wise he is one of the best out there. But he does not make the list due to him not having shown that for almost a year.
- Accomplishments. Again, pretty simple: world champions fought, beat, championships won. But, as with anything, the quality of the world champion is looked at. For example, Pacquiao beat Bradley for what I believe was his 3rd world title at 147, that rates higher than him beating Vargas for yet another world title.
- Wins/Losses. Who has the p4p entrant lost to, if anyone. And how did they lose and how have they bounced back from that. If a fighter has never lost, they will normally rank higher yet if a fighter has lost to a higher calibre of opponent than the undefeated fighter has faced, it equals itself out.
- Transferrence of skill. This is the most mythical of all the criteria and the essence of a p4p list. How well do I feel a fighter will be able to transfer their skills across weight divisions? The best way to rate highly here is to show us. Frampton unified his own division and then jumped up a division and beat top dog there but he also then lost the rematch. The winner of that trilogy (LSC himself has been able to beat top guys across division) will likely step in at number 10 in the p4p list with Estrada falling out. Of course, this might be a disadvantage for heavyweights or single division, dominant champs but thats where the fantasy element comes in. Example, if AJ beats Wlad, he will come into the p4p list, because he would have beaten an atg and if his performanc is very good, it is difficult to imagine many fighters, regardless of weight, causing him much trouble.
Comment