Why they have Crawford P4P?

[chrisJS]

Crawford is a great fighter. Not sure what the hostility is? He’s #2 p4p but he’s in Loma’s class.

[boliodogs]

Everybody has their own list and pfp and resume are completely different. pfp is how good you think a boxer is right now for his weight. It's about what you think he can do. His potential. Resume is what a boxer has already done. Crawford also has an excellent resume as far as that goes. He is undefeated and a three weight champion and a very rare 4 belt champ at 140. You can arrange your own list anyway you want and put him anywhere on the list you want. Many have Crawford number 1 pfp because they think he deserves it.

[Ca$ual Fan]

So far, none of them are standout to be a recognized p4p# 1. Crawford is not unanimously recognized in that place, so is Loma nor Canelo.

[boliodogs]

I just dont get it. I mean f#ck the eye test. Resume speaks for themselves. I am no fan of Canelo, but how is he not considered
P4P #1 right now? Wether you had him losing the GGG fight or not he has 2 wins over him and he has the best resume beside Pacquiao.


Crawford is for sure top 5 but why is he #1?

I have both GGG and Canelo higher than Crawford on my list but don't argue with those who have Crawford number 1. I thought GGG beat Canelo twice in close great fights. Where in the hell do you get the wrong idea that Canelo has two wins over GGG???? The first Canelo-GGG fight was officially a DRAW not a Canelo win. Get your facts right.

[pasawayako]

if this was 90s, 2000s crawford will still considered a prospect

[Madison Boxing]

Because hes American

[satiev1]

I just dont get it. I mean f#ck the eye test. Resume speaks for themselves. I am no fan of Canelo, but how is he not considered
P4P #1 right now? Wether you had him losing the GGG fight or not he has 2 wins over him and he has the best resume beside Pacquiao.


Crawford is for sure top 5 but why is he #1?

Guys goes 12 rds with benavidez a guy with one leg lmao. That's not a p4p number 1 showing.

[MONGOOSE66]

I really like Crawford. That said. I dont think he belongs in the welterweight division. Still damn good though.

[Redd Foxx]

I just dont get it. I mean f#ck the eye test.

That's your problem. You don't understand what P4P rankings are. They aren't based on resume alone. That's why a lot of people entirely disregard them. They can't be qualified. Much of it is eye test.

[El Gitano]

Here is the thing. When making a P4P list, I don't feel any obligation to accept decisions that were incompetent or corrupt.

Canelo had two incredibly close fights with GGG, and most had him losing the first.

So unless you think GGG was P4P #1, then it is hard to see how going 1-1 against GGG is enough to make Canelo the top dog.

Canelo has also benefited from other decisions which probably should have gone against him.

That's why a lot of people don't have him on top of their P4P lists. P4P comes down to who you think would win in the hypothetical scenario that weight become irrelevant. There is nothing within that which suggests that anyone has to accept corrupt or incompetent decisions.

Canelo had two close fights with GGG, who was considered a monster, even if he barely lost both fights on the books, it would have been close losses. A close loss vs GGG is probably better then Crawford's best win vs Postol. Crawford hasn't fought anyone in GGGs level, so because Crawford hasn't had a career defining fight, we reward him with #1 p4p while fighters that test themselves against the best best best, get punished for fighting and losing close fights.

Not saying Canelo should be higher than Crawford, but it's hard it's a standard I don't like.