Comments Thread For: A New Number One: BoxingScene Pound-for-Pound Update

[theface07]

Number 1 should be GGG no doubt about it, I wouldn't complain with Rungvisai taking 1# though because he prove it back to back beating the 1# rated P4P guy unlike Crawford who has fought nobody good at all and has yet to prove himself as an elite fighter so far he is simply a good fighter in a weak division nobody can deny this.

Why is a retired fighter in Ward on your list?

[theface07]

to answer ALL of those questions.....

P4P has nothing to do with resume'

this happens every single month, without fail

Funny thing to say for someone who has criticized Golovkin incessantly and repeatedly on unrelated threads for his lack of top level opponents.
Resume has a lot to do with P4P. Otherwise, you could fight nobody, remain undefeated and be considered P4P a la Adonis Stevenson.
Obviously you have to beat the quality fighters on your resume but if you fight nobodies to remain undefeated you don't deserve to be on the top of a P4P list either.

[aboutfkntime]

Funny thing to say for someone who has criticized Golovkin incessantly and repeatedly on unrelated threads for his lack of top level opponents.
Resume has a lot to do with P4P. Otherwise, you could fight nobody, remain undefeated and be considered P4P a la Adonis Stevenson.
Obviously you have to beat the quality fighters on your resume but if you fight nobodies to remain undefeated you don't deserve to be on the top of a P4P list either.

no, it does not

otherwise Pac would be P4P king, and Golovkin would not be ranked

it simply adds a proven factor that most observers need in order to rationalize their decision

smart observers do not need a roadmap

P4P is based around the latin phrase ceteris paribus..... it is mostly a fan thing born of bar-room discussions involving fighters who would never meet because of weight disparity

you are referring to a current ATG list, P4P is just opinion

P4P is based around the question, who would win if all things were equal..... which is based around ability/skills, style, and form..... the guys with the most accomplished resume will often stand out, but that is not essential

current ATG is based around who has accomplished the most, to date..... which is based around resume'

let me provide an example..... Danny Garcia has a better resume than Terrence Crawford..... but, if they fight.....?

another example.....
Q. the day that Floyd Mayweather was ranked #1 P4P.... what had changed from 12 months earlier?

A. nothing, he was the exact same fighter..... the smart guys knew, and the other guys needed to wait for their roadmap

it's a slippery slope..... you either, know your shht..... or, you are a fanboy who threw your favorite fighter in there

I had Lomachenko ranked highly well over a year ago

smart observers knew that Spence would be a nightmare for Brook/Thurman

etc

both of those fighters did not have good resume's when they were first noticed by knowledgeable observers..... same with the likes of Golovkin/etc.....

P4P is just opinion, many P4P fighters lost to guys who were not ranked

P4P is horribly over-rated

[Kuyukut]

where's freakin' hand of stone paulie malaggnagi?

[j.razor]

You still mad Danny lost ... LMMFAO!

Not really, I just jump on the Bull**** & lil g getting the nod on Jacobs was B.S.

[j.razor]

this happens every single time Cliff updates his P4P list

I do agree that the criteria should be advertized

in short, P4P has nothing to do with resume

Crawford is a better fighter than Thurman, and would beat him if all things were equal..... he would also beat him head-to-head

I would agree but I just don't know how Bud will do at 147 yet. Guess only time will tell.