Comments Thread For: Heading into a Hectic Fall: BScene Pound-for-Pound Update

[Hype job]

this is exactly what I am talking about.....

FACT: Rigo is CLEARLY a better fighter than Thurman

Cliff Rold can see that, but you cannot

have a think about that for a sec

if you disagree, explain to me how Thurman is a better fighter than Rigo?

according to ceteris paribus, if all things (weight) were equal..... Rigo embarrases Thurman

Rigo is old shoes. He hasn't done shyt since Donaire. Not worthy of top 10 p4p.

[aboutfkntime]

how do we know hes that good when hes not been in with a live body in 4 years? And that was the narrowest of wins against donaire. Thurmans beat porter and garcia in the last couple of years, whos rigo beat in that time? You cant live off one nights good work forever. Walters did a far better job on donaire than rigo did too, maybe we should throw him on there too cause you all seem to rate beating donaire so highly.

you guys said all that same dumb shht about Ward

Rold ranks him, because he knows that nothing has changed

this is an opportunity for you guys to listen and learn, not prove your ignorance

if you think that Thurman is better than Rigo you are fkn nuts

[aboutfkntime]

its a balance of resume and skills. you cant assess skills fully if they arent in with quality opposition, how is that so hard to understand? Youre one of the biggest ggg critics and now youre ****ing the drum that its all about the eye test and you can put people on the list before theyve beaten a world level fighter? make your mind up man. you'd have probs thrown broner in p4p top 5 after he beat demarco.

P4P is based on..... who would win if all things were equal..... and that assessment is based on style/skills/form, not on what a fighter did yesterday

resume should be considered, because it adds that proven factor, but not as a primary indicator

I just gave you 2 examples of that, you silly cvnt

Golovkin hasn't done shht, he has a p1ss-poor resume

if P4P is based on resume, then Golovkin is out

Golovkin is ranked because of his style/skills/form..... yep, the eye test

and the best active resume is Pacquiao, but he just got beaten by Horn..... so that theory goes out the window doesn't it.

use some common-sense

as I said, this is a prime opportunity for you casuals to learn

but you will not be doing that today, will you

[1hourRun]

P4P is based on..... who would win if all things were equal..... and that assessment is based on style/skills/form, not on what a fighter did yesterday

resume should be considered, because it adds that proven factor, but not as a primary indicator

I just gave you 2 examples of that, you silly cvnt

Golovkin hasn't done shht, he has a p1ss-poor resume

if P4P is based on resume, then Golovkin is out

Golovkin is ranked because of his style/skills/form..... yep, the eye test

and the best active resume is Pacquiao, but he just got beaten by Horn..... so that theory goes out the window doesn't it.

use some common-sense

as I said, this is a prime opportunity for you casuals to learn

but you will not be doing that today, will you

I believe you are trivializing experience, that does factor in the present : A boxer improves with time and experience especially being in with quality opposition ; how are bums going to push you to your full potential? I don't think anyone will argue that but also weigh in how the level of opposition shapes that man you must consider those events against quality opponents or even better elite boxers gives him an advantage if all things are equal to a hype-job that is looking good against journeymen or gatekeeps or even worse bums.

But in regards to GGG I agree with you on that.

[aboutfkntime]

I believe you are trivializing experience, that does factor in the present : A boxer improves with time and experience especially being in with quality opposition ; how are bums going to push you to your full potential? I don't think anyone will argue that but also weigh in how the level of opposition shapes that man you must consider those events against quality opponents or even better elite boxers gives him an advantage if all things are equal to a hype-job that is looking good against journeymen or gatekeeps or even worse bums.

But in regards to GGG I agree with you on that.

I agree with your premise

I said something similar in my original post

definitely not trivializing experience

Pac has the best resume, and is more experienced than anyone

how come we can use some common-sense with him, but not with others?

resume should be factored in, but not at the expense of anything else..... because fights are not won on paper, they are won in the ring.....

just because someone has not done something yet, does not mean they cannot.....

I had Loma high on my P4P list a loooong time ago

back when he was " inexperienced "

I guess I just got lucky

Loma will mature/develop, sure..... and he will rise on my list

If you agree with me regarding Golovkin, then you get my point

same with Crawford really

[aboutfkntime]

back when 2013..... when Golovkin was largely unknown, and had done nothing..... and Sergio Martinez was the middleweight kingpin.....

..... what made you all sooooo sure that Golovkin could beat him?

Martinez had that paper, and that cred..... Golovkin had nothing

so..... why ?

come on, I am sure you get my point

[1hourRun]

I agree with your premise

I said something similar in my original post

definitely not trivializing experience

Pac has the best resume, and is more experienced than anyone

how come we can use some common-sense with him, but not with others?

resume should be factored in, but not at the expense of anything else..... because fights are not won on paper, they are won in the ring.....

just because someone has not done something yet, does not mean they cannot.....

I had Loma high on my P4P list a loooong time ago

back when he was " inexperienced "

I guess I just got lucky

Loma will mature/develop, sure..... and he will rise on my list

If you agree with me regarding Golovkin, then you get my point

same with Crawford really

Well I don't know who ''we'' is, that comment is a little confusing in that you assume there is a general consensus as far as where Pac stands on most peoples P4P -- if he even is in it. lol. Also Kovalev just completely dropped off the current NSB rankings but he was top three last time I checked? so how is resume and the ''eye test'' being used in that decision? you said Cliff seen Rigo pass it but not even resume could save the 'Krusher' hehehehe! this whole thing stinks.

[ShoulderRoll]

It's a very solid list.

Kovalev doesn't deserve to get dropped out of the top 10 completely, though. And Keith Thurman probably belongs in ahead of Yamanaka.

[aboutfkntime]

Well I don't know who ''we'' is, that comment is a little confusing in that you assume there is a general consensus as far as where Pac stands on most peoples P4P -- if he even is in it. lol. Also Kovalev just completely dropped off the current NSB rankings but he was top three last time I checked? so how is resume and the ''eye test'' being used in that decision? you said Cliff seen Rigo pass it but not even resume could save the 'Krusher' hehehehe! this whole thing stinks.

good point about Krusher

he's still on my list, because my list is not just based on resume

Pac has the best resume, and the most experience..... but is no longer a top P4P fighter..... resume/experience is not relevant, because other issues such as age/slippage are more predominant factors..... but that also works the other way, which is why I said that fights are not won on paper

Spence's slim resume and inexperience did not help Kell Brook

the guys who think that Golovkin is a P4P fighter because he passes the eye-test..... but need Lomachenko to "prove himself"..... will pat themselves on the back when Loma does, and may adjust their lists accordingly..... but in truth they needed someone to draw them a fkn roadmap..... and when they updated their P4P list, they were just correcting their earlier mistakes

[just the facts]

how do we know hes that good when hes not been in with a live body in 4 years? And that was the narrowest of wins against donaire. Thurmans beat porter and garcia in the last couple of years, whos rigo beat in that time? You cant live off one nights good work forever. Walters did a far better job on donaire than rigo did too, maybe we should throw him on there too cause you all seem to rate beating donaire so highly.

Just to set the record straight and **** up your idiot agenda, Rigo/Donaire was not a close fight. But Thurman/Porter and Thurman/Garcia both were. I find it hilarious that you constantly criticize Rigo for only having one quality win (Donaire #6 p4p) but I'm certain you have g string at #1 with one quality win (Jacobs, on no ones p4p list).