Comments Thread For: Lomachenko: I'm P4P #1 - Crawford is Second, Canelo is Third

[Sustanon]

wow! slot1 & 2 are from Top Rank. It seems they are all oriented by uncle Bob!

[Verus]

Top three P4P, take your pick:

Canelo, Crawford, Lomachenko; or Canelo, Lomachenko, Crawford; or

Crawford, Lomchenko, Canelo, Lomachenko; or Crawford, Canelo Lomachenko; or

Lomachenko, Canelo, Crawford; or Lomachenko, Crawford Canelo.

or None of the above, or Some of the Above,

or This whole P4P thing is a bit silly

[ShoulderRoll]

Crawford unified all the belts in a division. Something Lomachenko has yet to do.

They are both feasting on mediocre opposition at the moment, though.

Canelo has actually challenged himself. He has a much better resume than either of them.

[Ritz Kola]

P4P should always be listed by which fighter has the best:
Record (W-L-D-KO)
Resume (Names- who?)
Accolades/Accomplishments (bias things Foty or Fotd don’t count)
Performances (doesn’t mean what excited you- it means ease or difficulty against opponents)

It’s as unbiased as it gets and ends all arguments.

1. Crawford. Only thing here vulnerable for him is his resume, if anything. An argument can be made it’s at least a solid one.

2. Canelo. Personally I find his recent actions disgusting. Doesn’t change that his resume is impeccable amongst his peers. You might argue the time at which he fought said names but that can also be applied to manny pac. Nobody would dare do that though. Canelo’s glaring weak point here is performance, he never dominates his elite opponents.

3. Inoue. Will probably win a title in his 4th division. No losses. A KO monster. Easily dispatches opposition. His only vulnerability here is the same as Bud and Loma- resume. The “who’d they fight?” Issue. That doesn’t take away from them factually having beaten world champs though.

4. Loma. He’ll have the same performance issues as Canelo does amongst the top 5...to an extent. It could be argued that he doesn’t struggle (performance) as bad as Canelo struggles. It could also be argued Canelo hasn’t been dropped and fights a better resume. The two have a single loss individually but one lost to arguably the #1 fighter in History, the other lost to a journeyman with a poor track record.

5. Wilder. A resume that isn't the best? Yeah. He’s a HW. His record is astounding, Inoue is looking like a mini-Wilder with his stoppages. His outright reign in the HW division garners him a spot on this list.

[angkag]

Great...another p4p thread. Bet this has already turned into an argument about resumes lol. Every time...

Along with the dumbass comments about 'got an L on his record....therefore...'. Based on that logic, Ali wasn't any good either.

[Cadet Bonespurs]

P4P should always be listed by which fighter has the best:
Record (W-L-D-KO)
Resume (Names- who?)
Accolades/Accomplishments (bias things Foty or Fotd don’t count)
Performances (doesn’t mean what excited you- it means ease or difficulty against opponents)

It’s as unbiased as it gets and ends all arguments.

1. Crawford. Only thing here vulnerable for him is his resume, if anything. An argument can be made it’s at least a solid one.

2. Canelo. Personally I find his recent actions disgusting. Doesn’t change that his resume is impeccable amongst his peers. You might argue the time at which he fought said names but that can also be applied to manny pac. Nobody would dare do that though. Canelo’s glaring weak point here is performance, he never dominates his elite opponents.

3. Inoue. Will probably win a title in his 4th division. No losses. A KO monster. Easily dispatches opposition. His only vulnerability here is the same as Bud and Loma- resume. The “who’d they fight?” Issue. That doesn’t take away from them factually having beaten world champs though.

4. Loma. He’ll have the same performance issues as Canelo does amongst the top 5...to an extent. It could be argued that he doesn’t struggle (performance) as bad as Canelo struggles. It could also be argued Canelo hasn’t been dropped and fights a better resume. The two have a single loss individually but one lost to arguably the #1 fighter in History, the other lost to a journeyman with a poor track record.

5. Wilder. A resume that isn't the best? Yeah. He’s a HW. His record is astounding, Inoue is looking like a mini-Wilder with his stoppages. His outright reign in the HW division garners him a spot on this list.

There is no heavyweight that belongs near the top 5 or top 10. Not even PED injecting and coke sniffing Tyson Fury.

Just stop it.

[alexnation]

lol @ all the casuals putting Spence in top 3. The guy hasn't done shyt in his career yet

[archiemoore1]

Loma has stated previously that he felt crawford was #1, not himself. Now all of a sudden, he wants to sniff his own balls

[Gary Coleman]

Imagine if Bud actually fought real competition. Folks would foolishly be calling him the greatest of all time.

How is he above Spence or Canelo when his resume lacks quality opposition? Is it because he can switch stances?

[Verus]

In his second pro fight for a world title in a split decision.

Regardless it is a moronic justification, guy can't be on a P4P list as he lost his second pro fight, please. No one is forcing him to rate Loma, just don't try and justify it with logic like that.

I guess all the great sportswriters, boxers, including Ali, and historians are wrong to claim Sugar Ray Robinson as the best P4P boxer of all time were wrong. Robinson had 19 losses among his 101 bouts. Muhammed Ali had 5 losses so he should not be on any P4P list.