What is you're top 5 current pound 4 pound list

[Madison Boxing]

Crawford's resume towers above Usyk's resume.

Gamboa, Postol, Indongo, Horn?

Usyk got nothing on that. Please don't mention Gassiev or Breidis, lol, those guys have done nothing to be considered good wins.

What the hell have the others done? Gamboa was half.his size. If you're ranking them above breidis or gassi3v then there's an agenda present. Beating shot mattysse isn't impressive and he lost to a novice last fight. Indongo Got blasted out by prograis. Horn won a robbery against a past prime 38 year old. Lots of people picked gassiev it was literally 50/50 with the bookies and usyk won every round.

[Shawnex]

What the hell have the others done? Gamboa was half.his size. If you're ranking them above breidis or gassi3v then there's an agenda present. Beating shot mattysse isn't impressive and he lost to a novice last fight. Indongo Got blasted out by prograis. Horn won a robbery against a past prime 38 year old. Lots of people picked gassiev it was literally 50/50 with the bookies and usyk won every round.

Usyk and Gassiev were 50/50 because both of them were equally unproven. This was more of a Groves-DeGale type of fight, two young unproven fighters testing themselves against each other. I don't know why people suddenly decided:
"Hey, Usyk, Breidis and Gassiev are cool, the winner between them must be something special, even if none of them have proven anything!".

As for the fighters that you just bashed, then you really shouldn't. Horn defeated Pacquiao. Indongo destroyed Troyanovski. Beating Matthysse an okay achievement, it certified Postol as an okay win.

Usyk exposed Gassiev, it wasn't a good win afterall. It was an okay win and Breidis was likewise an okay win. Usyk should regard them as stepping stones to get him ready for the warriors awaiting him at heavyweight (if he got the balls to move up there).

[Madison Boxing]

Usyk and Gassiev were 50/50 because both of them were equally unproven. This was more of a Groves-DeGale type of fight, two young unproven fighters testing themselves against each other. I don't know why people suddenly decided:
"Hey, Usyk, Breidis and Gassiev are cool, the winner between them must be something special, even if none of them have proven anything!".

As for the fighters that you just bashed, then you really shouldn't. Horn defeated Pacquiao. Indongo destroyed Troyanovski. Beating Matthysse an okay achievement, it certified Postol as an okay win.

Usyk exposed Gassiev, it wasn't a good win afterall. It was an okay win and Breidis was likewise an okay win. Usyk should regard them as stepping stones to get him ready for the warriors awaiting him at heavyweight (if he got the balls to move up there).

Come on man I'm not saying they are amazing but don't tell me they are some level below imdongo horn and postol for Christ's sake.

[Shawnex]

Come on man I'm not saying they are amazing but don't tell me they are some level below imdongo horn and postol for Christ's sake.

They are probably around Postol's level, as far as their skills have shown in the ring.

Indongo and Horn are definetely a level above Gassiev and Breidis, with wins over Pacquiao and Troyanovski. I'm not saying Indongo or Horn are great, but to degrade them to the same level as Gassiev and Breidis is just plain offensive...

[DuckAdonis]

Wilder defeated Ortiz, which beats everything Usyk has done.
Spence defeated Brook, which beats everything Usyk has done.
Joshua defeated Klitschko, which beats everything Usyk has done.
Alvarez defeated Kovalev, which beats everything Usyk has done.

People need to get Usyk out of this conversation, it doesn't matter that you're an undisputed champion if the division you're fighting in is loaded with bums. That makes you the undisputed champion among bums, which isn't a very impressive achievement, in my eyes...

As for Lomachenko, his only truly good win is Walters. Russel Jr was an okay win too. But his resume hurts from having so few fights and having lost to a journeyman, so he still got some redemption to go through before I can add him to my list.

Lol Ortiz hasnt done ****...he was never even a champ. Briedis, Gassiev and Glowacki can be considered better wins based on resume.

Brook was coming off a KO loss to Golovkin and jumped 2 weight classes down...and thats Spence only good/elite win...alot of questions surround it.

Alvarez entire p4p ranking is basically based on 1 shot against a Kovalev who we dont know how much he had left. He needs better performances against more elite competition to be ranked there.

Usyk is an undisputed champion...just because you dont pay much attention to the cruiserweight division doesnt mean that he doesnt have a great resume. The belts speak for themselves...just like with Crawfords resume...i'd argue that they are even resume wise.

And Lomachenko has a great resume of Linares, Rigo, Walters and Russel Jr...can you tell me a fighter who has 4 better wins than that ?

You base your p4p rankings on guys that have 1 good win like Spence, Alvarez and Wilder over guys who have consistently delivered and proven themselves multiple times like Usyk and Lomachenko (although you do have Crawford in there) Perhaps you dont like Ukrainians ? Sure Alvarez, Spence and maybe even wilder can be considered top 5 p4p someday...but they have more to prove than guys like Lomachenko, Mikey Garcia and Usyk. Its ridiculous to claim that its too early for Usyk to be ranked that high while you have the likes of Alvarez and Wilder in your top 5 while they have 1 good win...dont you think ?

[Chrismart]

Loma
Crawford
GGG
Usyk
Rungvisai

I'm not sure on the order of the top 4 though to be honest.

[Hatesrats]

1. Crawford
2. Lomachenko
3. Usyk
4. M. Garcia
5. Golovkin

[Thraxox]

1. Usyk
2. Lomachenko
3. Crawford
4. Golovkin
5. Rungvisai

but seriously though. Spence at p4p 3? TH?

[Shawnex]

Lol Ortiz hasnt done ****...he was never even a champ. Briedis, Gassiev and Glowacki can be considered better wins based on resume.

Brook was coming off a KO loss to Golovkin and jumped 2 weight classes down...and thats Spence only good/elite win...alot of questions surround it.

Alvarez entire p4p ranking is basically based on 1 shot against a Kovalev who we dont know how much he had left. He needs better performances against more elite competition to be ranked there.

Usyk is an undisputed champion...just because you dont pay much attention to the cruiserweight division doesnt mean that he doesnt have a great resume. The belts speak for themselves...just like with Crawfords resume...i'd argue that they are even resume wise.

And Lomachenko has a great resume of Linares, Rigo, Walters and Russel Jr...can you tell me a fighter who has 4 better wins than that ?

You base your p4p rankings on guys that have 1 good win like Spence, Alvarez and Wilder over guys who have consistently delivered and proven themselves multiple times like Usyk and Lomachenko (although you do have Crawford in there) Perhaps you dont like Ukrainians ? Sure Alvarez, Spence and maybe even wilder can be considered top 5 p4p someday...but they have more to prove than guys like Lomachenko, Mikey Garcia and Usyk. Its ridiculous to claim that its too early for Usyk to be ranked that high while you have the likes of Alvarez and Wilder in your top 5 while they have 1 good win...dont you think ?

Why do you insist on the cruiserweight division being so damn good? And since when did belts count for more than good wins?

And please keep racism out of this, it's 2018, we should be past that by now.

[chrisJS]

1. Lomachenko
2. Crawford
3. Usyk
4. Golovkin
5. Inoue